LHTR: Larry Harris Tournament Rules

Will you remember in 3 years when this game is over???

@Emperor:

@Jennifer:

In the “standard” version of 2.0’s NAs, the axis barely have a chance to get started before Germany gets royally spanked.

Voice of experience?  Seems you thought the NA’s in the previous version were way to much in favor of the Axis, and the new ones were even more so.  :roll: :evil:

I had this view too…but now I’m thinking that they may be a little more balanced than it appears, it boils down to “how you use them”.

I agree, NAs usefulness is connected to their utilization.
For this reason we allow the chosing of NA. For example, if someone would try the submarine warfare with Germany, may choose the NAs related to the UBoote, etc.
They are not to balance the game, but to differentiate strategy and planning.

@Jennifer:

Will you remember in 3 years when this game is over???

hehe…shouldn’t take that long…I see storm clouds gathering.

Which is the latest edition of lhtr, and where do I find it?
I think that the first post of this thread should be edited, so that it contains a link to the  latest verision of lhtr.
cheers  /  Perry

Go here: Home » House Rules » Axis & Allies Revised.

Or use the URL : http://www.axisandallies.org/LHTR

By the way I am having a big doubt on Strategic Bombing Limitation. LHTR states:
“The maximum combined damage inflicted in one turn by all strategic bombing raids on one
industrial complex and any rocket attack on the same industrial complex is the territory’s income
value.”

It means that If I am UK and I SBR GER then I may inflict a maximum of 10 IPC of combined damage to Germany.
Moreover if also USA SBR GER, in the same round, the maximum damage is still 10 IPC.
So in one round Germany may receive a maximum damage of 20 IPC. Is this correct?

That’s correct if you only target Germany’s IC.  If you have more than one bomber you can target Germany and Southern increasing UK’s damage potential to 16 and the US’s potential to 16 for a total of $32. You would need at least 3 UK bombers and 3 US bombers to theoretically reach the maximum potential.

Thanks!

Realistically you should expect to lose 1 bomber each (1 US, 1 UK) in that engagement.  So it’ll cost Germany 32 (max) and the allies 30.

Why?  50/50 you lose one bomber in each attack for 15 IPC.  I assume the wrong end of the 50/50.

I always avoid SBR.  :-D
A new player in our group is willing to try it, and so I had this doubt about the rules.

Only avoid it if you need that bomber badly.  Otherwise, I use it on whatever nation I happen to be targetting for destruction. (Usually little point in SBRing a nation you are not trying to subdue actively.  Why SBR England if you are trying to get Moscow?)

It’s my belief that you should SBR Russia with at the very least the Japanese bomber, if not also the German bomber.

On mathematical average they will deal 15.5 IPCs before going down, which is about 5 infantry’s worth. After those first few battles in which you do absolutely need your bomber to do things, it’s unlikely that your bomber will cause that much IPC damage. Think, in a normal battle, in order for a bomber to kill 5 infantry on average it has to survive about eight rounds of attacks. Even the biggest capital battles don’t last more than maybe 5-6 rounds. It’s very unlikely that you will get 8 rounds of true bomber usage (your fighters should be more than enough for the small engagements prior to capital assault), and 8 rounds is simply to break even.

As for the other bombers, there is more gray when thinking about them. Germany might need every bit of strafing power available, and UK/US might need every bit of dice to overpower W. Europe, so you might not want to risk them doing SBR. Generally I would still be in favor of them SBRing, but there is a little more to think about.

And get Rockets!

I’ve had many games where bombers survive through the whole game without being shot down.  I have no problem using my bombers for SBR, however I rarely purchase additional bombers.

Oh, I dunno.  I’ll buy a Russian bomber or 5 to really drive the point home that it’s game over, can we please pack up now and go home???

Sure, it is possible for a bomber to go over several SBR mission.
But from a statistical point of view it is not a good move.

Bomber do on average: 3.5 damage.
Bomber ma ybe shot down: 1/6 * 15 = 2,5 damage to the attacker.
If I have not done mistake the average gain of SBR is 1 IPC.

However in the real game, it may happens that bomber is shot down on first attempt. A loss of 15 IPc.
Or it is never hit and continue to destroy enemy IPC. A great drain of IPC from the enemy.

IMHO, SBR is one of the area of A&A where statistic is less useful. There are too few dices involved and the result is totally umpredictable.
Sometime gambling is awarded with a big prize!

It’s actually worse than it looks for SBR.

Because a bomber does not do on average 3.5 IPCs. When it gets shot down, it does not do its damage at all. So the average is 5/6 of 3.5 = 2.91, then -2.5 = 0.41 IPC gain.

But from a statistical point of view it is not a good move.

Statistically it’s fine as long as you don’t buy a bomber =P

I heard all the statistical arguments against SBR, and while mathmatically sound, it rarely holds up in game play.

Anyone care to put it to the test?

Good precisation Trihero! I made an optimistic evaluation!
Buying bomber will be a confortable thing when they will be sold with delayed payment!  :lol:

Emperor Mollari, the statistical analysis made by Trihero is mathematically unexceptionable.
However as you say the reality is very far from the statistical analysis.

The problem is that real SBR run works in different ways because there are too few dices involved and so the Law of the Great Numbers is not applicable at all. Even an experimentation will give useless results.
So a Bomber may bomb an enemy IC for all the game without even being scratched.  :-D
Or the bomber may go down in flame during its first mission.  :-o

And that’s my point, SBR’s don’t conform to statistical analysis, so they remain a viable strategy.

I agree.
No one may say that SBR is not an option.

However you must have the willingness to risk. I usually prefer not to take this risk. But this not means that SBR is not worthy to be used.