Online game

@squirecam
Its not if you win or lose a fight but how you win or lose a fight.
If germany does its normal france attack and wins with 1 tank left they got diced pretty badly.
But since they still won you dont consider it being diced?

But with dice the problem is that on average you get the right results but if you get an outlier on the wrong point in the game you will lose the game because of that. And there is nothing you can do about it.
Germany attacking moscow with 90% odds and losing, sure russia might have had bad luck before or you might have gotten lucky somewhere else but that 1 battle makes or breaks the game.

I dont like Low Luck because its basically deterministic to the point where you know the outcome of battles. Its 2 much like playing chess. But i dont like the idea of extreme dice as well. Ideally you want to cap the outcome of a attack/defence roll to like 30-50% of the bell curve of most odds. But doing that would require some app to calculate.

Ichabod; I mean G40, my point is that the split income and large scale of Global makes 28$ a smaller amount than ever before–-smaller relative to the Axis (70! 60!)  in this version and smaller than the effective and actual income of UK in other versions (30!)

Cow;  Yes, as many as possible.  If you can fuel that.

FYI Adobe Lightroom will compress the pics but still keep best possible resolution. There are other tools but this one is straightforward to use and the full version is free for 30 days. I’m a creative photographer and use it all the time.

To change picture size - import pics first. Then select pics to change, click Export (bottom left corner) and under File Settings / Limit File Size To, put in the size you want. You can also clean up the white balance and tone to take out that yellow tint.

How a cheaper Navy helps the allies is this. The US comes in after turn 4. With a cheaper navy, namely transports, Japan could be a real threat to Australia, forcing the US to pay attention to it, making it historically accurate.

The US paying some attention to Japan helps the Germans.

Lastly, IMHO, the game is close enough that these changes don’t ruin the game. But seeing your point, to go along with this, you would also have to fix the sub problem which is horrible. The advantage Germany had in the beginning of the war with their subs just doesn’t exist in the game. They need to make the subs more stealthy, like rolling the dice to locate them before attacking them, (destroyers would have a better chance than other units) and greatly expanding the areas they can convoy. Also giving the Germans a wolf pack advantage that the US copies and made use of much later in the war against the Japanese.

This whole incredible aspect of WW2 was somehow left out of the game.  A real shame. That would bring some balance.

The US would usually not care if japan goes directly for north america since the US can drop a large load of units in west US and/or central.  Japan losing the DEI is easily worth the allies losing alaska n western canada.

@Make_It_Round:

I think it is possible, however tedious, to count the number of meaningful choices that players have in any given game, and to guess at one’s enjoyment threshold in terms of these.

It is utterly impossible to count the number of meaningful choices that players have in any given game because each “meaningful choice” is a product of the other “meaningful choices” that were made previously. Furthermore, each “meaningful choice” is then subject to all of the possible dice outcomes, and thus multiplied by all of those possibilities and then multiplied by all of the “meaningful choices” offered by the various non-combat possibilities as they are determined by the dice outcomes. As you can see we get into these massive factorial situations where we are multiplying massive exponentials by even more massive exponentials until what is essentially infinity.

To make a comparison: In chess there are only 20 possible moves to make on the first turn. (16 pawn moves and 4 knight moves) The opponent is faced with the same. So the possible combinations for the opening 2 moves (1 each) in chess is 400. None of which are absolutely stupid. there are 8,902 possible moves by 2 each and by move 7 there are almost eleven MILLION possible positions. That’s without dice, with only 2 players, with a much much much more limited scope for unit movement, no scope for adding units and far far fewer spaces.

Now you asked about the “meaningful choices”. Some work has been done in this regard in chess and it seems that in the average game of about 30 moves (moving a single piece at at time. There are over 4.5 MILLION games outcomes in smart competitive situations. Now, multiply that by the factor of dice, multiple movement of units, game spaces, purchases and the fact that most AA games will see over 100 times that 60 units move factor and you have an utterly infinite combination of outcomes.

Which is part of the reason it is so much more entertaining than chess.

…or maybe just because we get to play with little tanks and planes.

@MaherC:

he dropped whatever on e40/g40, why not drop 5$ at tripleA?

probably because he has not played on tripleA before. anyone that has played with tripleA will realize that it is awesome and would donate.

I think the Italian fleet is there to replicate the attack on Taranto. It is like, why is France there, if only to be killed by the Germans. Or why have a British fleet, if it will be mostly sunk. However, there are two subs in the area that can attempt to sink the carrier and destroyer, but it might fail, and the might leave you with more British ships alive by England, and that is not good.
I am playing the game on Saturday, so I’ll post my opinions afterwards.