@GCar:

Low luck was perfectly described. The idea is that in normal dice games, many times a huge fight (around 70-100 IPC on each side, sometimes more) happens and the luck potential of those fights is huge in comparison to the normal smaller fights. For exemple if both sides average hit number would be 10 hits, variance makes it quite likely to make it different then that, but even a small difference on turn 1 of attack (like 12 hits against 6 lets say) keeps affecting the following turn of attacks (more units left = more probable hits), therefore increasing the final effect (for exemple a 6 units variance early could end as a 12 units difference in the end, making for around 30-50 IPC depending of the planes in the fight (and if battleships are involved it can get ugly !). In a smaller fight, a lucky roll is unlikely to win you more then 10 direct IPC (usually quite less)  and maybe a couple more of circonstancial IPC due to the fact that a territory is not traded.

Oddly enough, the odds work in exactly the opposite way you are describing. The larger the battle is, the more closely it will follow low luck. Variations in hit results will follow the central limit theorem (an interesting google if you have the time). It’s small battles that will be most effected, and actually somewhat break the system.

Think about 2 tanks vs. 1 tank

2 Tank hits:
Low luck 1 hit 100% of the time
With Luck 0 hits 25%, 1 hits 50%, 2 hits, 25%, Thus the expected value is 0*.25+1*.5+2*.25= 1 hit. BUT, you can’t really hit twice against 1 tank, so the actual expected value is .75. So low luck gives an unintended boost in hits.

We’ve literally put about 18 hours into this game, well over 20 full turns. It looks like it will finally end with Germany taking Moscow in a turn or two.

Basic flow went like this:

First 5 rounds:

UK is a super power, the control Africa, have a fleet in the Med and in the Atlantic. Transport guys into Germany.
US built navy and bombers to invade UK. They never really get the chance though, UK loaded up about 20 inf over the first 5 turns and any landings would be futile.
Germany took out much of UK navy focused on ground game vs USSR+some UK+Japan coming in. Major battle of attrition they nearly lost.
Japan invaded Alaska and established a an Industrial complex. They constantly flooded troops into Alaska.
Russia did what Russia does, build infantry and trudge.

Next 10 rounds:
UK navy eventually gets completely destroyed by US and German air forces. They are crippled and poor for the rest of the game.
US Spends a lot of time and money fighting Japanese. Sends Transports into Archangel in Lieu of attacking UK. Loses Naval fleet to UK planes and switches to mass bombers for the Atlantic.
Germany gets pushed back pretty far into Germany by combined allied forces. With the help of US in Archangel, pushes forward though, and eventually takes Caucasus. Builds basically nothing but tanks, infantry and artillery.
Japan retakes Africa for UK, and sends ships int Mediterranean. Eventually builds some Industrial complexes in Asia to help push Germany.
Russia did what Russia does, build infantry and trudge.

Final rounds
US responds to Japan’s Asia activities by building a new Pacific fleet, eventually takes control of Pacific.
With Japaneses help, Russia vs. Caucasus is a massive stalemate, skirmishes for nearby territories ensue.
UK Can’t do much, at any point, 7 bombers are within range of anything they build. They build fighters to send to Russia.

In a few rounds it looks like Germany will have enough to take Russia.

So my roomate and I have been playing Germany-Us vs UK Japan USSR with the turn order UK,US,USSR,G,J.

It is actually extraordinarily balanced. We’ve played over 12 turns now, probably about 10 hours, and it looks like there is no end in sight. UK got shut down but it takes fairly constant US investment to keep them down while fending off the Japanese. Germany and Russia have been going back and forth forever now. Africa was conquered by Germany and US, but is now back in UK’s hands thanks to Japan. The game may finally end if Germany can take down Moscow, but Japan has built an IC in Sinkaing to flood in defensive troops, otherwise it could be at least 5 or 6 more turns and go either way.

@Nomarclegs:

If your games have become repetitive why not change the turn order.  US, Japan, USSR, Germany, UK would change the dynamic for sure.  No more Pearl Harbor; no more Brits in Borneo; US can stack up China; UK Indian Ocean fleet is toast, etc.
Might be cool. Lots of new angles.

Yeah there are a few things we are going to start playing around with. Also, sent you a pm Nomar in regards to the other thread, not sure if anything pops up when you have a new pm. But I may only be intermittently available over the next few days, had a recent death in the family.

Alright, my roommate and I just had another game with what I would called excellent Russian and US play(I was playing axis), and two IC’s were still ultimately unstoppable. Russia traded ground for a while, but in the end Japan couldn’t be held back. US devoted enough Navy to get in and take an undefended Indonesia and build an IC on it, but was retaken by Japan a couple turns later. I need to have a play by forum game against a really good allied player to show me this can really be stopped (without completely ignoring Germany). Hobbes you in?

@coorran:

@ragnarok628:

i think that would just take away options for japan– no more ‘pearl harbor lite’.  new units in SZ52 will just immediately die to japan again anyway.

Really? With 20 IPC, he could place AC+ 1 sub. Add to that the submerged sub already in SZ52+ W US BB + 1-2 FTR, that’s no small fleet to sink!

The only quirk there is that the BB can’t move into SZ52 without starting a combat. So if there is already a Japanese fleet in SZ52, you couldn’t combine the way you are saying. But…. since we are making up a rule anyways, you could always temporarily allow the BB to move in without starting a combat.

@ragnarok628:

i think that would just take away options for japan– no more ‘pearl harbor lite’.  new units in SZ52 will just immediately die to japan again anyway.

You could still go lite, you would just have to deal with the fact that you are killing SZ52 to slow down America in the Atlantic. Alternately you could go big as Japan, but it bogs you down for an extra turn.

I’m flooding this thing with questions it seems

If an ally (say US), builds an IC in a axis country (say Norway), then the axis retake it, then another ally retakes it (such as UK). Does the IC belong then to US or UK?

Thanks again.

Here would be an interesting added ruleset, not intended to shift balance, but shift motivations.

1. Pearl Harbor- If Japan gains control of SZ52 on J1, US player loses 10 IPC, representing naval losses on ships not in use.
2. Awoke a Sleeping Giant- If Pearl Harbor happens. US can place 20 IPC worth of free naval forces in SZ52 during the deployment phase of US1. This is scrambling the remaining fleet in Hawaii.

The result is that Japan would have to either kill SZ52, hurting US efforts to go to the Atlantic(10 IPC), but face a significant counter force, or Leave SZ52 alone and face a significant counter force anyway. I like it because it is not just adding to US power, there is a trade off. Though the 10 IPC damage and 20 IPC of navy may need to be tweaked.

@ragnarok628:

i think the most balanced way to change up the teams would be GER + UK vs RUS + JAP + US.   the german/british side i think would be stronger than the normal Axis, but not so much.  UK vs. JAP in the pacific and south asia would play out pretty much the same, but the UK BB would give the ‘new axis’ a good position in the atlantic.  UK would be able to quickly help germany pressure russia, but they would hang on to most of their income and japan can be of considerable help in propping up moscow.  US would have to focus on taking the atlantic, they’d have to go either africa or europe.

ANYWAY, it would be the same starting economies, except UK is a stronger power, due to not having to fight for africa initially and stronger in the atlantic.

I actually like this a lot. I’ll have to try this one. You may have to mix up turn orders though. 1-2 punch from UK and Germany hitting Russia on subsequent turns could be too much. I would disagree on UK being stronger though. Japan has lots of territories to take quickly in most games, UK would have almost nothing to grab in your scenario, plus they will lose canada, india australia quick.