LL v ADS

ADS is just regular dice rolling.

LL is Low Luck.  You add up the attacking and defending points of all the att and def units divide by six then roll only for the remainder.

Example

4 inf, 3 arm vs. 5 inf, 2 arm

Attacker
4 inf = 4 * 1 = 4
3 arm = 3 * 3 = 9

So attacker has 13 which means 2 hits (13/6) and then you would try and roll for a 1.

Defender
5 inf = 5 * 2 = 10
2 arm = 2 * 3 = 6

So the Defender gets 2 hits (16/6) and then would roll for a 4 or less for a 3rd possible hit.

In LL, I don’t think any gambit would work unless your opponent doesn’t know how to calculate the correct punch to get the victory conditions s/he wants.

Thus, every action by Germany needs to be done with the knowledge aforethought that the allies will be able to hit you with just enough punch to win what they want.  There will be no need for the allies to worry that your transport will hit in defense of the SZ 14 fleet, since your combined punch is 5.  That means 2 fighters/bomber will get at least one hit (probably two hits) and the defender can get no more then one hit in the first round of battle OR the second round of battle.  Thus, it is impossible for the attacker to lose both fighters and the bomber.  Where-as in ADS, there’s at least hope that the transport will hit and the battleship will hit. A pretty decent chance of both hitting, actually (11%).

That’s what I mean when it’s a DIFFERENT GAME.  Which is what I’ve been saying the WHOLE time.  (And evidentially getting bad karma from people LIKE you for saying.)  It is a different game.  It’s as different as LHTR 1.3 is to AAR-OOB or LHTR 2.0 is to LHTR 1.3.

@DarthMaximus:

ADS is just regular dice rolling.

LL is Low Luck.  You add up the attacking and defending points of all the att and def units divide by six then roll only for the remainder.

Example

4 inf, 3 arm vs. 5 inf, 2 arm

Attacker
4 inf = 4 * 1 = 4
3 arm = 3 * 3 = 9

So attacker has 13 which means 2 hits (13/6) and then you would try and roll for a 1.

Defender
5 inf = 5 * 2 = 10
2 arm = 2 * 3 = 6

So the Defender gets 2 hits (16/6) and then would roll for a 4 or less for a 3rd possible hit.

I see, thanks.

That’s kind of neat.

On a side note……who smited me! Very uncalled for.

Most players buy the same stuff regardless of LL or ADS, and most people use the same strats.

A game with no bid is different from 6-9 bid, but also every game without bids, and every game with exact same
amount of bid and same bid rules are also different.

Your difference definition is worthless Jennifer. If I played you with x rules, x bid and whatever setting, and after the
first game we play again, with the exact same settings, the new game is still different from the first one.
You’re trying to claim there’s a huge difference between LL and ADS, which is not true.
LL or ADS is a minor difference.
It may be a difference in your head but then you are delusional.

@Bean:

C’mon!  If you are going to use examples, use realistic, practical ones.  Now I just might leave stacks of 5 inf around that German monster EEU stack in kar, belo and ukraine.  In MY (more realistic strategic example), Germany would be hard pressed to straffe my 3 stacks of 5 inf in ADS.

How’s that a better example? I already told you, Germany has enough figs + 3 inf to crush one stack, then they can move hard into another stack. Then you’re 10 inf down at the cost of 3-4 inf. Losing all that kind of inf makes no sense, it means you can’t counter Germany’s stack or defend as well in any location.

OK, to specifics again.  In my example of the 5 inf picket in Kar, Bel and Ukr…. the Russians have huge numbers just like your Germans did in EEU… Those three territories are dead zoned.  You CAN NOT move into one HARD as you point out.  That’s part of the point of actually throwing out the 5 inf picket fence.  Expensive trading areas.

You guys (Darth and Bean) seem to point to big stacks … I am not talking big stacks.  I am talking a picket of 5-6 inf that are hard to straffe favorably without getting stuck or while making it worth while.

Against 5 inf, what would you bring in ADS as a strafe?
4 inf and 4 tanks?

No guarentees in ADS, I’ve seen 4/4 get 6 hits, I’ve seen it miss.  THAT SORT OF STRAFFE ODDITY does not happen in LL.  THIS is my whole point.

Remember you have to do this three times since I’ve stacked the dead zone with throw away allied inf, trying to bait you in or cause the Germans to commit enough to only take one of the three territories.

This can be a very effective way of grabbing and holding one or two of these "dead zoned’ territories (kar/bel/ukr).

If the German player has many ftrs and lots of inf, then it’s easier to do TUV trading, not only TT trading.

Those examples you’re talking about, doesn’t matter much in the whole picture.

Right, ftrs can do a pretty good job against 5 inf, but assuming they weren’t available.

For 5 inf,

in LL I’d bring 2-3 inf, 7 arm for the perfect 4 hits.
in ADS probably 3 inf, 5 arm (maybe 6) depending on status of the game.

Yes, with 3 inf, 5 arm I may get 5 hits but that would require one heck of a roll and I chance I’d probably take.

I just did a quick check on Frood, with 3 inf, 5 arm against 5 inf there is a 12% chance for 5 hits, and with 3 inf, 6 arm there is a 23% chance.
I certainly feel comfortable with the 88-75 range, but would probably lean toward the 3/5 attack unless I have availabel planes, then I might go with 3 inf, 4 arm, 2 ftrs or something.

@Lucifer:

Most players buy the same stuff regardless of LL or ADS, and most people use the same strats.

A game with no bid is different from 6-9 bid, but also every game without bids, and every game with exact same
amount of bid and same bid rules are also different.

Your difference definition is worthless Jennifer. If I played you with x rules, x bid and whatever setting, and after the
first game we play again, with the exact same settings, the new game is still different from the first one.
You’re trying to claim there’s a huge difference between LL and ADS, which is not true.
LL or ADS is a minor difference.
It may be a difference in your head but then you are delusional.

But we’re not talking a simple difference in tactics or bid.  We’re talking a completely different set of rules.  So yes, my definition is valid.  LL is as different from ADS as LHTR is from OOB.  They are DIFFERENT GAMES. You seem to be the ONLY person who is arguing they are the same game.

And, for the record, anyone who does the exact same moves in ADS as they do in LL will lose every ADS game or every LL game.  Which is why NO ONE does the exact same moves.  To state otherwise means you are either a fool or lying.

In LL, I have no problem doing 1 Inf, 4 Fig vs 2 Inf attacks.  In ADS you better DAMN well be certain I’m coming at you with 2 infantry!

Why?  In LL, I have a 33% chance of taking the land and 100% chance of my fighters surviving and killing all your defenders.  In ADS I have almost 100% chance to kill you off, but also a 15% chance to lose a fighter!

(Yes, I used fighters just so I could decimate your entire argument that fighters change everything so you can use ADS tactics.  Congratulations, your last argument has been proven wrong.  Will you please come up with a new argument or actually consider that everyone else on this board who has any level of experience with both systems might actually be telling you the truth that ADS and LL are not the same tactically or strategically?)

I do not understand why this is such a hard message to convey.  If you can use cheaper units to accomplish the same thing, if you can set up perfect strafes without risk and if you can economize your assets to the nth degree, then the game is fundamentally different.

I’m not saying it’s bad.  Personally, it’s kinda fun to throw in a LL game or two.  It takes a lot of the stress off those battles where the enemy gets 22 AA Gun shots.  I know that there’s 0% chance of losing 11 fighters in LL!  But honestly, that is not the same scenario you face in ADS.  In ADS you could lose all 22 fighters to that AA gun, or none.  Makes a HUGE difference on when you are willing to make the attack.  And that is exactly why ADS is a different game then LL.

@DarthMaximus:

For 5 inf,

in LL I’d bring 2-3 inf, 7 arm for the perfect 4 hits.
in ADS probably 3 inf, 5 arm (maybe 6) depending on status of the game.

Yes, with 3 inf, 5 arm I may get 5 hits but that would require one heck of a roll and I chance I’d probably take.

I just did a quick check on Frood, with 3 inf, 5 arm against 5 inf there is a 12% chance for 5 hits, and with 3 inf, 6 arm there is a 23% chance.
I certainly feel comfortable with the 88-75 range, but would probably lean toward the 3/5 attack unless I have availabel planes, then I might go with 3 inf, 4 arm, 2 ftrs or something.

The key here in ADS is the variable of how many will hit in that first round for either side.  With such low numbers, it can be all over the board.  This variablilty is not a aspect of LL.

Going by best approximation for the ‘odds’ in our example, 3 inf, 5 arm should hit 3.  Defense most likely will get 2.

KEY QUESTION: Do you go another round?  inf, 5 arm versus 2 inf.  Tough one.
I can definitely see 5 tanks getting 2 hits.  Ouch.  Tanks vulnerable to counter.

Or do you take the +1 unit count and w/d?

@Cmdr:

But we’re not talking a simple difference in tactics or bid.  We’re talking a completely different set of rules.  So yes, my definition is valid.  LL is as different from ADS as LHTR is from OOB.  They are DIFFERENT GAMES. You seem to be the ONLY person who is arguing they are the same game.

It’s different, but the it’s only a minor difference. The overkill needed in ADS is obvious.

And, for the record, anyone who does the exact same moves in ADS as they do in LL will lose every ADS game or every LL game.  Which is why NO ONE does the exact same moves.  To state otherwise means you are either a fool or lying.

Same arguments can be claimed about every game. If I did the exact same moves in game nr.2 that I did in game nr.1 then I would lose every game, regardless of LL or ADS.

In LL, I have no problem doing 1 Inf, 4 Fig vs 2 Inf attacks.  In ADS you better DAMN well be certain I’m coming at you with 2 infantry!

Why?  In LL, I have a 33% chance of taking the land and 100% chance of my fighters surviving and killing all your defenders.  In ADS I have almost 100% chance to kill you off, but also a 15% chance to lose a fighter!

The overkill in ADS is obvious, specially with air units involved.
To do bad combat is no different from ADS and LL, how many units to use will vary from battle to battle.

(Yes, I used fighters just so I could decimate your entire argument that fighters change everything so you can use ADS tactics.  Congratulations, your last argument has been proven wrong.  Will you please come up with a new argument or actually consider that everyone else on this board who has any level of experience with both systems might actually be telling you the truth that ADS and LL are not the same tactically or strategically?)

My old arguments still holds  :-P
Most strats are the same both in LL and ADS.

I do not understand why this is such a hard message to convey.  If you can use cheaper units to accomplish the same thing, if you can set up perfect strafes without risk and if you can economize your assets to the nth degree, then the game is fundamentally different.

Not often that I see perfect strafes in LL games. Players who let the opponent do a strafe to their 10 tank stack needs more experience. An inf+ ftrs attack against tanks only would probably be a good move
in ADS as well.

I’m not saying it’s bad.  Personally, it’s kinda fun to throw in a LL game or two.  It takes a lot of the stress off those battles where the enemy gets 22 AA Gun shots.  I know that there’s 0% chance of losing 11 fighters in LL!  But honestly, that is not the same scenario you face in ADS.  In ADS you could lose all 22 fighters to that AA gun, or none.  Makes a HUGE difference on when you are willing to make the attack.  And that is exactly why ADS is a different game then LL.

The biggest difference is that you can get lucky in ADS, in LL only to a small degree.
As for the overkill, this is so obvious that only those who have not played LL would do bad moves and use the same
overkill tactics which is needed in ADS.

@axis_roll:

KEY QUESTION: Do you go another round?  inf, 5 arm versus 2 inf.  Tough one.
I can definitely see 5 tanks getting 2 hits.  Ouch.  Tanks vulnerable to counter.

Or do you take the +1 unit count and w/d?

Yep, it would be a one round try in this case.  You take your shot and get out.

No the biggest difference is that there are no more medium battles.  Only very small, or very large.

6 defending infantry will always get two hits.  If you hit them with 3 infantry, artillery, 4 fighters you will always get 3 hits and be able to retreat with infantry, artillery, 4 fighters thus never jeapordizing fighters and always coming out ahead.

It’s a completely different rule, thus it is a completely different game.  LHTR is not the same game as OOB.  LL is not the same game as ADS.

If you use ADS tactics in LL (right down to the territory trade level) you will lose almost every game.

If you use LL tactics in ADS (right down to the territory trade level) you will lose almost every game.

OK, to specifics again.  In my example of the 5 inf picket in Kar, Bel and Ukr…. the Russians have huge numbers just like your Germans did in EEU… Those three territories are dead zoned.  You CAN NOT move into one HARD as you point out.  That’s part of the point of actually throwing out the 5 inf picket fence.  Expensive trading areas.

Again your example is incomplete and bad. If the Russians have enough inf such that they can throw 15 of them into dead zones and still be able to kill a German stack if it advances heavily, then the Germans have already lost anyways. I don’t see how Russia could be missing that much inf and still kill a complete German stack move-in. I would like I say throw 3 inf + 5-6 figs + 1 bomb to one stack, which I don’t even care if I take it’s simply trading 3 inf for 5 inf, then I move completely into the other stack, Russia is missing 15 infantry with which to counterattack me. 10 are dead, and 5 are far away in some other zone, unable to reach the one I just moved into. If Russia can still attack me and win without heavy casualties, then I did something wrong somewhere else, not with the attacks, which aren’t even strafes at this point.

It’s probably better to use that in reverse.

If GERMANY has 5 Infantry in Karelia, Belorussia and Ukraine as a picket then it becomes exceptionally costly for Russia to take them.

@Cmdr:

In LL, I don’t think any gambit would work unless your opponent doesn’t know how to calculate the correct punch to get the victory conditions s/he wants.

Thus, every action by Germany needs to be done with the knowledge aforethought that the allies will be able to hit you with just enough punch to win what they want.  There will be no need for the allies to worry that your transport will hit in defense of the SZ 14 fleet, since your combined punch is 5.  That means 2 fighters/bomber will get at least one hit (probably two hits) and the defender can get no more then one hit in the first round of battle OR the second round of battle.  Thus, it is impossible for the attacker to lose both fighters and the bomber.  Where-as in ADS, there’s at least hope that the transport will hit and the battleship will hit. A pretty decent chance of both hitting, actually (11%).

That’s what I mean when it’s a DIFFERENT GAME.  Which is what I’ve been saying the WHOLE time.  (And evidentially getting bad karma from people LIKE you for saying.)  It is a different game.  It’s as different as LHTR 1.3 is to AAR-OOB or LHTR 2.0 is to LHTR 1.3.

Jennifer, you’re backpedaling and I’m not even sure what you’re saying anymore. I think previously the impression I got from you was that LL is not just a different game, but a completely/significantly different game that has no value in diagnosing strategy. Now you’re backpedaling to “it’s just different.” Where are you at now?

It’s very similar to how you backpedaled on your KJF strategy by saying first it’s better than KGF, to it’s viable, to “well, Germany has to kill Russia in a KJF.” You start with something you can’t prove, then jump back to something beyond obvious in order to save face.

Your original impression was not far off.

IT IS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT GAME.  It has different rules.  It has different tactics.  The only similarities are the movements, the costs, the models and the map.

You cannot really use LL for strategy building in ADS because you cannot run an ADS game under the same results most times.  ADS has a lot of flux.  Defenders can get 80% hits.  Attackers with punch in the hundreds can totally miss.  And there is only a 67% chance that an infantry + 4 fighters is going to kill two defending infantry and NOT lose a fighter.

That means most people are going to bring two attacking infantry.  And thus, you have completely changed the buying process, the building process, the positioning of units, and the use of units to CYA in regards to the dice.

That’s even MORE true in large battles where one bad round in ADS kills you.  One good round in ADS saves you. (Odds of good and bad are equal, so it’s not so much getting lucky as it is just normal dice fracks.)

Not a concern in LL.  Because LL is a different animal all together.  You know that if you attack with 100 Infantry and 100 Armor you will beat 200 defending infantry.  Not so true in ADS.  You could get really nailed!  (maybe instead of 17 hits with your attacking infantry you get 3?  What if the defender gets 80 hits instead of 67 in round 1?)

You cannot really use LL for strategy building in ADS because you cannot run an ADS game under the same results most times.  ADS has a lot of flux.  Defenders can get 80% hits.  Attackers with punch in the hundreds can totally miss.  And there is only a 67% chance that an infantry + 4 fighters is going to kill two defending infantry and NOT lose a fighter.

Err…didn’t we just discuss this? 11% to lose a fighter, not 33%.

And I’m very aware that ADS fluxes, but it fluxes both ways. It still averages out for the vast majority and for the most imporant battles to the same result, and even in the ones in which it is different such as 100% trading precision, it does not clearly favor one side since either side can build artillery or use fighters. Hence why I do not think it is a comletely, significantly different game to the point where it’s absolutely useless for looking at strategy. Did I miss any nuances?

You could get really nailed!  (maybe instead of 17 hits with your attacking infantry you get 3?  What if the defender gets 80 hits instead of 67 in round 1?)

Every time I hear an argument like this my head implodes. You have to balance it out by the fact that you could also with the exact same frequency, hit a massive windfall in that battle. It’s a bell curve. It’s symmetric on both sides. There’s no point in saying that “oh, well the bad part could happen” because I immediately respond “well, the good part could happen” and we’re back to ground zero.

I can’t bring much more arguments then I already have done. My “feelings” when I play is not much different from
LL to ADS.
Other factors and issues are much more important to me than if it’s LL or ADS.
Multiplayer or 1vs1, tech, bid rules, strats, and the most important one is the skill level of my opponent.

Maybe I have the same relationship to tech that many ADS players see LL games. There are no gamebreaking
techs, but still I’m not used to it, and would need several tech games to get the confidence of when to roll, with
what country etc.

I guess we have different perception to A&A on different levels, Jennifer.
I don’t see any point in trying to convince you that my perception is the rightest one.

@Bean:

OK, to specifics again.  In my example of the 5 inf picket in Kar, Bel and Ukr…. the Russians have huge numbers just like your Germans did in EEU… Those three territories are dead zoned.  You CAN NOT move into one HARD as you point out.  That’s part of the point of actually throwing out the 5 inf picket fence.  Expensive trading areas.

Again your example is incomplete and bad. If the Russians have enough inf such that they can throw 15 of them into dead zones and still be able to kill a German stack if it advances heavily, then the Germans have already lost anyways. I don’t see how Russia could be missing that much inf and still kill a complete German stack move-in. I would like I say throw 3 inf + 5-6 figs + 1 bomb to one stack, which I don’t even care if I take it’s simply trading 3 inf for 5 inf, then I move completely into the other stack, Russia is missing 15 infantry with which to counterattack me. 10 are dead, and 5 are far away in some other zone, unable to reach the one I just moved into. If Russia can still attack me and win without heavy casualties, then I did something wrong somewhere else, not with the attacks, which aren’t even strafes at this point.

Who said that all 5 stacks were Russian infantry?

You mentioned major German stacks in this thread of 30 inf 7 arm in E. Europe.  I think UK, US and USSR might have a spare 5 inf each to use as bait as I have proposed.  These size numbers indicate a game that is several rounds old (8+).

I have seen a said dead zone situation as described above (Russia has enough units to whack a moved in EEU stack into Kar/bel/ukr).  It’s really not THAT out of the realm of possibility.

Does this happen every game?  No.  Would I utilize this tactic all the time?  No.

My key point is that this tactic I have described is effective under the right circumstances. However under LL, you can not utilize this tactic, so in this sense LL alters the game as compared to ADS.

I will say often times, as the allies, an effective move is to give the axis many options, and force them to choose the right ones as well as win all those options choosen.  This is more effective in ADS than it is in LL due to the guarentees offered in LL.

I think we’ve beaten this dead horse enough Bean.  If you can not see my points as described above, my fingers are tired of trying to explain it any further.

I see your point that you cannot bait ever at all in LL, and you are absolutely 100% correct about this. In fact, this is what I have been saying from a a few months about LL that strafing is too precise is the main difference between LL and ADS. I know that. And you know it too.

But do you see my point that you can still strafe in ADS? It’s a very subtle difference we’re talking about now. We don’t have to be in contradiction since we’re talking about different things - you say baiting doesn’t work in LL (true) I say you can still strafe in ADS (also true). I’m not saying you have the same precision in ADS obviously, but you can still find the numbers to make it at least slightly favorable. Like Darth said, switching from ADS to LL does not suddenly make strafing invalid due to doubt of taking the territory. You can modify your attack to have a small chance of taking the territory. There is a point at which the risk is small enough that the gains are still worth it.

If you send too much offense, you take the territory too often, which is bad. If you send too little offense, you do not deal enough damage compared to the losses you take, which is also bad. But there has to be something in between in which you do not have a significant chance of taking the territory (5-10%), yet still are dealing more damage than you take (1:1 at worst). Do you acknowledge this? Maybe I have not been making myself clear until this point, but now do you understand what I am saying? There’s no need for all of this frustration between us. I say strafing is still an option in ADS. You say it’s not as great of an option as in LL. We are in agreement, or at least we are not in disagreement, aren’t we?