So if each gun’s defense value was modified to 1@2… they would be slightly better units than they are now.
If I have 5, 8, 11,… IPC (anything that is 3*x +2) and, if I believe an attack is iminent (ie next round). Then the AA is essencially a unit that killes half a plane and is taken as loss in the first round. So it is strictly better for defence in the next turn, and next turn only.
Possible uses: round 2 in London to stop a sealon (especially since i might have more than 30 IPC).
Round 2-4 in India to prevent india crush.
Moscow round 8, if I am not retreating, and think buying that one will make me barely survive for some wierd reason.
Egypt,since I only will have a minor IC there and might need to maximze defensive power within the limit of buying 3 units.
In total, I will consider buying them probably 1-3 times every game, and buy them once every other game.
Japan and germany might do similar calculations from time to time.
I think you guys need to run the numbers on an INF vs. an AAA.
The AAA is for all practical purposes never better odds than an INF. Like, ever.
Not IPC-adjusted.
1 INF will straight up defend better in all cases except a 1-round battle with 2+ air for it to shoot at.
That last case can occur in 2 situations:
Defender’s capital last stand, overwhelmed - trying to spend every last IPC so enemy doesn’t get it. The minute difference between 1 AAA vs. 1 INF isn’t the player’s problem here.
Defender’s undefended factory, building token resistance. If an attacker is relying on an almost all-air attack with one token land unit to take the territory, in addition to the 1-round limit, 2 inf 1 AAA can be slightly more valuable than 3 INF here. Of course, the more AAA the fewer planes the enemy will need to send to capture so the balance of forces needs to be quite particular.
It’s a broken unit. At the very minimum it should have the ability to continue to roll 1@1 against enemy air as long as there are attacking air forces, even if that means reducing its initial AA roll to 1@1 as well. Either that or it should roll 5@1 instead of 3@1 on the initial strike. It needs something to make it mathematically viable in competitive game situations.
My personal taste on AAA is to be able to roll each round and cost the same as Infantry.
Attack 0
Defense 0, 1 first strike against up to 2 planes which ever the lesser
1 hit value
Move 1 (both CM or NCM)
Cost 3
That way, you may want to preserve it on the next round (over an Infantry) if there is at least 2 attacking planes. When there is only one, it is a gambling between a better Infantry defense roll @2 for 2/6 odds (3 IPCs target worth 1 IPC on avg) and a 1/6 odds of killing a plane (12 IPCs target worth 2 IPCs on avg).
I know Larry started with this suggestion (but keeping cost at 6) during Alpha 2 project.
But he rather simplify thing to give all rolls during the opening round.
Probably, it is an average of a full two rolls defense first round and a single roll on second round because around 50% of AAA are taken as casualty in the opening combat round.
So giving up to 3 rolls was simpler and a bit stronger since the third roll have an impact before planes can have their attack roll.
I think you guys need to run the numbers on an INF vs. an AAA.
The AAA is for all practical purposes never better odds than an INF. Like, ever.
Not IPC-adjusted.
1 INF will straight up defend better in all cases except a 1-round battle with 2+ air for it to shoot at.
That last case can occur in 2 situations:
Defender’s capital last stand, overwhelmed - trying to spend every last IPC so enemy doesn’t get it. The minute difference between 1 AAA vs. 1 INF isn’t the player’s problem here.
Defender’s undefended factory, building token resistance. If an attacker is relying on an almost all-air attack with one token land unit to take the territory, in addition to the 1-round limit, 2 inf 1 AAA can be slightly more valuable than 3 INF here. Of course, the more AAA the fewer planes the enemy will need to send to capture so the balance of forces needs to be quite particular.
It’s a broken unit. At the very minimum it should have the ability to continue to roll 1@1 against enemy air as long as there are attacking air forces, even if that means reducing its initial AA roll to 1@1 as well. Either that or it should roll 5@1 instead of 3@1 on the initial strike. It needs something to make it mathematically viable in competitive game situations.
The calculation you are making here isn’t right. It ignores the first strike of a AAA and also ignores that it is hitting a strong unit attacking at a 3 or a 4 instead of a probable 1 or 2.
Although you raise an interesting point - AAA vs 3 planes kills 0.5 planes on average while 1 inf kills 0.33 inf. But vs 1 plane it only kills 0.166 planes.
Do not forget that AAA have no offensive capacity.
Infantry have a way to reach up to Att @2.
AAA have only defensive and fodder purpose and it is a high cost fodder at 5 IPCs.
I think you guys need to run the numbers on an INF vs. an AAA.
The AAA is for all practical purposes never better odds than an INF. Like, ever.
Not IPC-adjusted.
1 INF will straight up defend better in all cases except a 1-round battle with 2+ air for it to shoot at.
That last case can occur in 2 situations:
Defender’s capital last stand, overwhelmed - trying to spend every last IPC so enemy doesn’t get it. The minute difference between 1 AAA vs. 1 INF isn’t the player’s problem here.
Defender’s undefended factory, building token resistance. If an attacker is relying on an almost all-air attack with one token land unit to take the territory, in addition to the 1-round limit, 2 inf 1 AAA can be slightly more valuable than 3 INF here. Of course, the more AAA the fewer planes the enemy will need to send to capture so the balance of forces needs to be quite particular.
It’s a broken unit. At the very minimum it should have the ability to continue to roll 1@1 against enemy air as long as there are attacking air forces, even if that means reducing its initial AA roll to 1@1 as well. Either that or it should roll 5@1 instead of 3@1 on the initial strike. It needs something to make it mathematically viable in competitive game situations.
The calculation you are making here isn’t right. It ignores the first strike of a AAA and also ignores that it is hitting a strong unit attacking at a 3 or a 4 instead of a probable 1 or 2.
Although you raise an interesting point - AAA vs 3 planes kills 0.5 planes on average while 1 inf kills 0.33 inf. But vs 1 plane it only kills 0.166 planes.
The calculation is correct. The battle calculator (omg run hide!) does take first strike into effect and determines the inf is a better play in pretty much any situation you can think of. Fire up Triple A, load up a map, and run some calculations. Only place it doesn’t hold is if the inf is guaranteed to die 1st round. That 3-hit AAA volley is actually just a 1 in 216 scenario (with 2-hit not better than 1 in 30) and doesn’t have as much game impact as an inf’s ability to roll a die every combat round.
Definitely the odds do favor AAA in large battles with big air forces. They essentially kill a 3-attack fighter 1/2 the time, resulting in a 1.5 decrease in the opponents Power. That corresponds to a 0.3 Power/PU. Another defending infantry would kill an enemy infantry 1/3rd of the time, resulting in a 0.333 Power decrease on average, or 0.111 Power/PU.
Yes, the infantry will give you more HP because you buy 1.666 of them for the price of an AAA. However the instant kill nature of the AAA shot means that advantage is effectively only 1.166.
Hence, the marginal benefit of adding one more AAA to a large stack that is guaranteed to be attacked next round is usually bigger than the effect of adding one more infantry. It isn’t quite as simplistic as the above values since we have to look at late game when all of the attacking infantry are dead, but Battlecalc confirms the general benefits of an AAA over an infantry.
@Arthur:
Definitely the odds do favor AAA in large battles with big air forces. They essentially kill a 3-attack fighter 1/2 the time, resulting in a 1.5 decrease in the opponents Power. That corresponds to a 0.3 Power/PU. Another defending infantry would kill an enemy infantry 1/3rd of the time, resulting in a 0.333 Power decrease on average, or 0.111 Power/PU.
Unless all your battles are one round long there’s something rather vital missing, which is the INF number stacks with each round because it can keep attacking and the AAA can’t. At 3 rounds the inf is ahead in straight up terms according to that calculation. If all factors are considered I believe the INF is ahead in round 2.
OMG I started a math riot! :-o
Am I doing something wrong with TripleA battle calculator:
1 bomber vs 1 AAA should have a 5/6 chance of winning with a TUV swing of 5/65-1/612 =2.16
Results of calculation (2000 runs) = 100% chance of attacker winning with a TUV swing of 5. Am I doing something wrong or is the calculator wrong? I tried running larger battles such as a siege of Moscow and the results seem incorrect.
Engine Version: 1.8.0.9 Game: World War II Global 1940 2nd Edition Game Version:3.9
Elk, you also have to remember that destroyed planes are also removed from further rounds of combat, and as they are often your heaviest hitters and taken last as casualties, this can swing battle odds more than an infantry would.
Regardless, in the big battles I’ve calculated buying some AAA vs infantry, the resulting odds for the attacker aren’t usually more than a percentage point or two different. You buy the AAA because you’re hoping for a lucky roll to decimate the attacker.
And once in a while a nice little cluster of AA guns might be just enough to dissuade your opponent from attacking in the first place.
8-)
@Arthur:
Am I doing something wrong with TripleA battle calculator:
1 bomber vs 1 AAA should have a 5/6 chance of winning with a TUV swing of 5/65-1/612 =2.16Results of calculation (2000 runs) = 100% chance of attacker winning with a TUV swing of 5.� Am I doing something wrong or is the calculator wrong?� I tried running larger battles such as a siege of Moscow and the results seem incorrect.
Engine Version: 1.8.0.9 Game: World War II Global 1940 2nd Edition Game Version:3.9
Works for me?
Sometimes the calculator doesn’t load existing units correctly, maybe that is what happened?
The webpage calculator doesn’t allow for the hit taken by the AAA - assumes a classic AA gun.
And once in a while a nice little cluster of AA guns might be just enough to dissuade your opponent from attacking in the first place.
8-)
Yeah, this.
I’d generally never buy an AA gun because there are better ways to spend the money. That doesn’t mean that I think of AA guns as being largely useless, and I might buy a few if I didn’t have any, but I typically think that the number each nation starts out with, is quite sufficient.
But if I have a factory in a remote location, none of my original AA guns is nearby, and an enemy attack with one or more planes is about to happen, then I might buy one, if only for psychological reasons. I’ve noticed that some players can hardly bear the thought of losing one of their precious aircraft to an AA gun, so they may skip or postpone their attack, or try it anyway, but without the planes. If the AA gun scares the enemy plane(s) out of the attack, it’s been worth its money most of the time.
The calculation is correct. The battle calculator (omg run hide!) does take first strike into effect and determines the inf is a better play in pretty much any situation you can think of. Fire up Triple A, load up a map, and run some calculations. Only place it doesn’t hold is if the inf is guaranteed to die 1st round. That 3-hit AAA volley is actually just a 1 in 216 scenario (with 2-hit not better than 1 in 30) and doesn’t have as much game impact as an inf’s ability to roll a die every combat round.
Checking it out in the Triple-A calculator
100 inf + 10 fighters vs 80 inf = 32.xx attackers remaining
100 inf + 10 fighters vs 77 inf + 3 AAA = 28 attackers remaining.
The calculation is correct. The battle calculator (omg run hide!) does take first strike into effect and determines the inf is a better play in pretty much any situation you can think of. Fire up Triple A, load up a map, and run some calculations. Only place it doesn’t hold is if the inf is guaranteed to die 1st round. That 3-hit AAA volley is actually just a 1 in 216 scenario (with 2-hit not better than 1 in 30) and doesn’t have as much game impact as an inf’s ability to roll a die every combat round.
Checking it out in the Triple-A calculator
100 inf + 10 fighters vs 80 inf = 32.xx attackers remaining
100 inf + 10 fighters vs 77 inf + 3 AAA = 28 attackers remaining.
Doesn’t seems a significant difference over such large stack 4/110 units (3.6%) in an almost optimal scenario for AAA.
Infantry have more mobility, offensive capacity. AAA cannot be part of an attack in amphibious assault, it cannot be loaded in CM to be unloaded in NCM.
The versatility effect on tactics of Infantry cannot be considered through calculator.
And once in a while a nice little cluster of AA guns might be just enough to dissuade your opponent from attacking in the first place.
8-)
We can call it the fear factor.
It is psychological, but staying on a rational level adding three 5 IPCs AAA instead of five 3 IPCs Infantry is more like a gambler sweepstake than a sound optimized strategy.
It seems there is only a very few conditions in which it worth to buy AAAs.
The circumstance comes up almost every single game: a final raid on Moscow. Usually you know that the Germans have one or two rounds to do the attack and then have to return their planes to western Europe to defend against Allied invaders. Russia must choose how to spend their final 10-15 PUs. The choice might only change the outcome by a couple percentage points, but why not take the best odds.
