Technology is a bad strategic investment

So you’re saying I’m lucky for hitting 7 techs with a single die in my first couple of 1940 games?  :-D  (See the playboardgames forums - there’s proof)

I’ve hit 7 out of approximately 10-12 attempts.  Apparently my sacrifices to the dice gods are the kind they like.

I still say you can’t win if you don’t play.  The only sure thing is that you definitely will not get a tech if you never put 5 IPC’s down to get one.

Allweneed, I’m hoping to post J1 tonight (if I didn’t already tell you - I think that I did)

And thanks for the responses, allweneed and Chillos.  I think that you are right, but like I said without sitting down and thinking hard about it for a couple minutes, I wasn’t sure (that expected average time to hit a 6 would be right around the 6th roll)

Finally, I will make the point that tech was never intended to be a “good strategic investment”, so arguing that it’s not is kind of misguided effort.  Tech is there to give you a competitive advantage over your opponent (and for fun).  It’s also the ONLY possible way to instantly power up your units all over the board, and that means buying units are not a good comparison against it (in other words, you’re not comparing apples to apples).

I use research tokens so tech is a good investment.

I’d rather have a guarantee of more units to subsequently roll dice with then hope for tech that really isn’t game breaking.

Just out of curiosity, how many game turns do you anticipate in Global?

Does that have an impact on the investment value of Tech? Meaning, say I bought a tech a round, how many rounds am I prepared to wait for a tech, and how many rounds will remain for me to deploy or take advantage of that tech?

Lets say for arguments purpose, that the game last 12 rounds before a winner is clear or certain. If I buy 1 roll a turn, it is reasonable to think I got it by round 6, and had 6 rounds to use it. How does that compare versus a 10 or 8 round game?

Any thoughts?

So far my games have all been blowouts, and have only lasted maybe 6-9 rounds.  I would think a reasonably close game would go 20+, with maybe 5-10% of games going into the 30’s.  Just guessing.  I had AA50 games go past 22 rounds even with tech, so I would think this is reasonable…

You have a 50/50 chance of obtaining a tech by the 3rd roll, btw.  Chillos and Allweneed, you were really no help with my question.  You’re saying you would expect a tech on average after 6 rolls.  I say you should expect a 1/6 chance of rolling a 6 each time you roll, and you can expect a 50% chance of obtaining one after 3 rolls (and there is some chance you will have 2 or 3 by 3 rolls).

You have 42.1% chances of getting at least one technology by the 3rd roll. (The probability of missing on your 3 first rolls is (5/6)3 = 0.579 or 57.9% so you will have at least one tech 42.1% of the time.)

By the way Gamerman, what was exactly your question?

@San:

You have 42.1% chances of getting at least one technology by the 3rd roll. (The probability of missing on your 3 first rolls is (5/6)3 = 0.579 or 57.9% so you will have at least one tech 42.1% of the time.)

By the way Gamerman, what was exactly your question?

My question was when should one expect to hit their first tech, on average, when rolling 1 die per round.  In other words, at one point does one get to a 50/50 chance of getting a tech?

So as you pointed out, after 3 attempts, on average you would have between 1 and 3 techs 42.1% of the time.  After 6 attempts, you would have between 1 and 6 techs about 2/3 of the time.  (So I don’t know why you and Allweneed are saying you could expect to have a tech on your 6th roll, on average)  After 4 rolls, you have over 50% chance of hitting between 1 and 4 techs.  These stats are all assuming you buy one die at a time.

In fact, I hit 4 straight techs with the Axis in a game I’m playing from round 2 into round 3.  So my point is, you have a 100% of getting zero tech if you never buy a research die and if you never buy a research die you are not projecting the threat of hitting an instant tech to your opponent, who can play less defensively in accordance with the lack of threat.  :-)

@gamerman01:

My question was when should one expect to hit their first tech, on average, when rolling 1 die per round.  In other words, at one point does one get to a 50/50 chance of getting a tech?

In more technical terms, the “average” is the “population mean”. In our case, each “individual” of the population is a single rolling sequence until you get a tech and its value is the number of rolls needed to get it. If you try until you get a tech an infinite or at least an extremely high number of times (let’s say a million times or even more), you will find that the average number of rolls done to get a tech is 6. It’s that simple. Yes, you can get it on your first roll; however, you could need 20 rolls to get it. On average however, you will need 6 rolls i.e. you will get it with your 6th roll.

You have about a 50/50 chance (48.2%) to miss your first 4 rolls so the fifth roll may be the “point” you’re looking for…

@gamerman01:

In fact, I hit 4 straight techs with the Axis in a game I’m playing from round 2 into round 3.  So my point is, you have a 100% of getting zero tech if you never buy a research die and if you never buy a research die you are not projecting the threat of hitting an instant tech to your opponent, who can play less defensively in accordance with the lack of threat.  :-)

I agree with you. However, the effective (average) cost for acquiring techs could be much lower and it would not hurt the game at all. I know Larry doesn’t like techs and it shows more than ever. IMO, the AA50 system is much more interesting (and fun).

@San:

However, the effective (average) cost for acquiring techs could be much lower and it would not hurt the game at all. I know Larry doesn’t like techs and it shows more than ever. IMO, the AA50 system is much more interesting (and fun).

Agreed.  :-) For a more exciting game, play with tokens or reduce the cost of a researcher to 4 or even 3.  Or, keep it at 5 and don’t use tokens, but allow multiple breakthroughs per turn (ala Classic).

Thanks for the intelligent discussion, San Chillos.

@San:

Agreed.  :-) For a more exciting game, play with tokens or reduce the cost of a researcher to 4 or even 3.  Or, keep it at 5 and don’t use tokens, but allow multiple breakthroughs per turn (ala Classic).

Thanks for the intelligent discussion, San Chillos.

Yes, we do play with tokens costing 6 IPC each. Always fun to have to throw a die or two every turn. :-D By the way, you’re welcome.  :wink:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=20405.new

This is a link to the debate game.

I just hit super subs with Japan on J1 for 5 IPC’s, after rolling a 5 (miss) for Germany.  It’s gonna be a loooong game in the Pacific for Allweneed…  :wink:

@allweneedislove:

Super subs – your researchers have found that putting a snorkel on your diesel  U-boats allows you to submerge with the engines running so you can be extra sneaky and you get 1 more attack pip. for 30ipc you could just buy 5 more subs that would get you 10 more attack pips, 5 more defence pips and 5 more units that can soak up hits.

1 more attack pip is a 50% increase in attacking power.  Over the course of our game, I may buy between 5 and 25 subs with Japan.  I will have a much easier time keeping the USA at bay. I also have only 5 remaining chart 2 techs left, so on my next breakthrough I will get jets, improved shipyards, radar, long range air, or heavy bombers, all of which are extremely useful for Japan.  Plus, you never know how much I’m going to spend on research and when and what I’m going to obtain.

I think you have underestimated the power of tech.  :-)

i do realize this is a ‘Global topic’… but still, i just don’t see how in E40 there is room for investing in this, except for the US and maybe Germany… but again, both of those depend heavily on how Sealion-Barbarossa turns out, and whether Italy is spread thin in the Med-Africa - meaning that if they don’t perform well, they need the extra 5xn cash.

in Global, i would add USSR and Japan to the ‘likely’ list…

ps. if i roll multiple dice and get 2+ 6es, do i still only get the one tech? me with no rulebook, haven t seen it referenced, hence the question. thanks!

@Gabike:

i do realize this is a ‘Global topic’… but still, i just don’t see how in E40 there is room for investing in this, except for the US and maybe Germany… but again, both of those depend heavily on how Sealion-Barbarossa turns out, and whether Italy is spread thin in the Med-Africa - meaning that if they don’t perform well, they need the extra 5xn cash.

in Global, i would add USSR and Japan to the ‘likely’ list…

ps. if i roll multiple dice and get 2+ 6es, do i still only get the one tech? me with no rulebook, haven t seen it referenced, hence the question. thanks!

1 power per turn, extra 6’s ignored. No powers in Europe, only Global.

@JamesAleman:

1 power per turn, extra 6’s ignored. No powers in Europe, only Global.

Great point, James.  That’s right, there is no tech in Europe (or Pacific) so don’t worry about that.

@gamerman01:

@JamesAleman:

1 power per turn, extra 6’s ignored. No powers in Europe, only Global.

Great point, James.  That’s right, there is no tech in Europe (or Pacific) so don’t worry about that.

But he may want to have it as a
house rule

@calvinhobbesliker:

@gamerman01:

@JamesAleman:

1 power per turn, extra 6’s ignored. No powers in Europe, only Global.

Great point, James.  That’s right, there is no tech in Europe (or Pacific) so don’t worry about that.

But he may want to have it as a
house rule

I doubt it, because he just said he doesn’t think anyone can afford it.

oh, i figured it was included in E40 too… might have misread sth somewhere…

thank you for the correction!

Ok here’s my 2 cents on techs. I’ll start by saying Spring 1942, is the first edition I played (though I’ve read the rules for some older ones) and my group houseruled in tech tokens. Playing G1940 I like the way techs work now. From threads I’ve read I appear to be in the minority on this. The problem with tokens (IMO) is that it takes a lot less thought. If you spend IPCs a turn on dice with tokens you get every die you rolled last rolled plus the number of dice you bought. There is much less risk there. With no tokens you need to think a lot harder about it. With no tokens you get 1 die per 5IPCs regardless of previously spent IPCs. You need to think “Do I feel lucky with 1 die or do I need more?”.
One great point Gamer brought up is that for each tech you get on a chart, it’s that much better of a chance that you’ll get one of the ones that you really want. Also like he pointed out, pretty much the entire second chart help USA, UK, and Japan a lot. Pretty much the entire first chart does Germany and Russia good. War Bonds is great to hit early game (yes I understand you need to hit a 6 then a 5 in order to get it). That extra 1d6 will help out especially late game. Also R1 Russia hit rockets in 2 games I’ve played. If I’m remembering right, there are 2 German complexes, and 1 Italian complex within 3 spaces of Russian borders. Rockets can be devistating to anybody’s economy having to repair complexes to use them to full capacity.
Unless I missed it, here’s the big point that I’m surprised nobody pointed out. Tech dice are purchased BEFORE units! If you get Rockets, it might be worth the 6 IPC investment to get an AA gun where you were going to buy a tank. If you get Advanced Artillery, you might replace some of the Mech you were going to buy to buy some Artillery to support that stack of Infantry you have. Where you would have 10 @ 2 (plus any other units) on defense, add 5 Artillery and you now have 15 @ 2 (again plus any other units) on offense. That’s a pretty huge swing for 20 IPCs.
As Gamer pointed out Super Subs is great. Taking Subs from having a 33% chace for a successful attack to a 50% chance is great. Factor in also the first strike assuming the defender has no Destroyer is great with a stack of subs. With Improved Shipyards (which especially if aquired early enough for a naval heavy power is always great to save money).
As far as play by fourm goes I’d love to give it a go. I just hate computerized dice. They never seem random enough. Anyway that’s my 2 cents.