• Disciplinary Group Banned

    Baron Munchhausen

    Have Larry Marx check out the ENIGMA FORMULA.

    Subs only gets a sneak attack in the first round.

    There isn’t a bench mark unit for 8D. It is a simple conversion from 6D to 8D.

  • Disciplinary Group Banned

    @Imperious:

    Larry-Marx considers 2 hit BB and subs first strike. Your didn’t. Remember?

    Basically you need a 8D battlecalc to figure that stuff out, without it it’s going to take you a very long time. 8D battlecalcs don’t exist, but however I can produce one.


  • @Dauvio:

    @Young:

    @Dauvio:

    @Imperious:

    The Vann formulas are superseeded by Larry Marx Formula. Nobody bases or uses Van formulas anymore

    They are the same thing IL. Larry Marx got his formula based off from one of my tables that is from the VANN FORMULAS. So you don’t know what you’re talking about. I bet Larry Marx, and the Baron would agree with me on that about you.  :x :x :x

    Vann, aren’t you basing this “VANN 8D UNIT PROPOSAL” off my 8D system?.. aren’t they the same thing? What if people started saying that your 8D PROPOSAL superseded mine?.. should I than get as upset as you are now?.. I think you’re putting way to much emphasis on what’s yours.

    With all do respect YG. You are basically saying if anyone says 8D, it’s your idea, IT"S NOT.

    I beg to defer Vann he posted the D8 Mod first on site unless somebody else can come up with an old post showing D8 values.


  • @R:

    we have be using a 20D Formula for years.  With all the units that HGB came out with you almost have to. 1939 Variant

    OH NO

    I don’t have time to test this yet !!!  :-D :-D :-D :-D

  • '17 '16

    @Baron:

    @Dauvio:

    Hi guys, I have given a lot of of thought on Young Grasshopper’s 8D proposal, and this is what I came up with.

    INF            C3/M1/A1/D2
    ART           C4/M1/A2/D2
    MECH          C4/M2/A1/D2
    TANK          C6/M2/A4/D4
    FIGHTER      C10/M4/A4/D5
    T-BOMBER    C11/M4/A4/D4
    S-BOMBER    C12/M6/A6/D2
    BATTLESHIP C20/M2/A6/A6
    CARRIER      C16/M2/A0/D3
    CRUISER     C12/M2/A5/D5
    DESTROYER C8/M2/A2/D2
    SUB           C6/M2/A2/D1

    INF            C3/M1/A1/D2
    ART           C4/M1/A2/D2 18.0 powerhit
    MECH          C4/M2/A1/D2
    TANK          C6/M2/A4/D4
    FIGHTER      C10/M4/A4/D5
    T-BOMBER    C11/M4/A4/D4
    S-BOMBER    C12/M6/A6/D2 6.00 power
    hit
    BATTLESHIP C20/M2/A6/A6
    CARRIER      C16/M2/A0/D3 4.42 powerhit
    CRUISER     C12/M2/A5/D5
    **DESTROYER C8/M2/A2/D2  4.5 power
    hit
    SUB           C6/M2/A2/D1**  8.00 or first strike: 12.00, 4.00 or first strike: 5.32   power*hit

    I bolded the difference between you and YG.
    That might be interesting to know why you prefered these values.
    For instance, DD does not defend as well as Carrier.
    I suggested D3 for both, YG kept A3 D3 for DD but D2 for Carrier.

    Here is YG’s complete D8s roster:

    Inf     A1-2 D2 strength 16.0 or 32.0
    MI      A1-2 D2 strength 9.0 or 18.0
    Arty   A3 D2 strength 27.0, 18.0
    Tank  A4 D4 strength 16.0
    AAA   A0 D1*


    Fighter      A4 D5 strength 5.76, 7.20
    TcBomber  A4-5 D4 strength 5.95 , 4.76
    StBomber  A5 D1 strength 5.00 , 1.00


    Submarine   A3 D2 strength 12.00, first strike 18.00, 8.00 first strike 10.64
    Destroyer    A3 D3 strength 6.75
    Cruiser        A5 D5  strength 5.00
    Carrier, 2 hits A0 D2 strength 2.95
    Battleship    A6 D6 strength 3.77

    Here is the value based on 12 IPCs Cruiser put at 5.00 as the benchmark for YG numbers.
    Formula is 144*power/Cost^2.
    *2.618034 for 2 hits Battleship or Carrier

    If Battleship was A7 D7 C20, you would get a strength factor of 6.60 powerhit.
    If Destroyer is A2 D2 C8, you would get 4.5 power
    hit.
    2 hits Carrier A0 D3 C16 is 0.00, 4.42 power*hit

    Comparison:
    Infantry  A1-2 D2 M1 C3: 16.00 / 32.00
    Mech Inf A1-2 D2 M2 C4: 9.00 / 18.00
    Artillery  A2    D2 M1 C4 : 18.00 / 18.00
    Artillery  A3    D3 M1 C4 : 27.00 / 27.00
    Tank      A4    D4 M2 C6 : 16.00 / 16.00

    YG Arty+Inf combos: Attack: 29.39 Defense: 23.51
    Vann Arty+Inf combos: Attack/Defense: 23.51

    YG Arty+MechInf combos: Attack: 22.5  Defense: 18.00
    Vann Arty+MechInf combos: Attack/Defense: 18.00

    YG’s StBomber A5 D1 C12: 5.00 , 1.00
    Vann’s StBomber A6 D1 C12 6.00, 1.00

    YG’s Destroyer A3 D3 C8: Attack/Defense: 6.75
    Vann’s Destroyer A2 D2 C8: 4.5

    YG’s Submarine A3 D2 strength 12.00 first strike 18.00, 8.00 first strike 10.64
    Vann’s 8.00 or first strike: 12.00, 4.00 or first strike: 5.32   power*hit

    YG’s 2 hits Carrier A0 D2 strength 2.95
    Vann’s 2 hits Carrier A0 D3  strength 4.42 power*hit

    YG’s Carrier+ 2 Fgs A8 D12 C36 strength: attack 4.65 defense 5.33
    Vann’s Carrier+2 Fgs A8 D13 C36 strength: attack 4.65 defense 5.78

  • Sponsor

    @Dauvio:

    @Young:

    @Dauvio:

    @Imperious:

    The Vann formulas are superseeded by Larry Marx Formula. Nobody bases or uses Van formulas anymore

    They are the same thing IL. Larry Marx got his formula based off from one of my tables that is from the VANN FORMULAS. So you don’t know what you’re talking about. I bet Larry Marx, and the Baron would agree with me on that about you.  :x :x :x

    Vann, aren’t you basing this “VANN 8D UNIT PROPOSAL” off my 8D system?.. aren’t they the same thing? What if people started saying that your 8D PROPOSAL superseded mine?.. should I than get as upset as you are now?.. I think you’re putting way to much emphasis on what’s yours.

    With all do respect YG. You are basically saying if anyone says 8D, it’s your idea, IT"S NOT.

    Not at all, I’ve never had a problem with others building off my ideas… I was simply using this thread and your reaction to Imperious Leader to show that you do.

  • '17

    You all are not Grand Masters and may never be unless you start using the Ichabod Equations…unfortunately I’m not so sure the community is worthy of it!


  • @Ichabod:

    You all are not Grand Masters and may never be unless you start using the Ichabod Equations…unfortunately I’m not so sure the community is worth of it!

    I’m dieing to see them. I’ll probably agree with them all !  :-D

  • '17 '16

    @Young:

    @Dauvio:

    @Young:

    @Dauvio:

    @Imperious:

    The Vann formulas are superseeded by Larry Marx Formula. Nobody bases or uses Van formulas anymore

    They are the same thing IL. Larry Marx got his formula based off from one of my tables that is from the VANN FORMULAS. So you don’t know what you’re talking about. I bet Larry Marx, and the Baron would agree with me on that about you.  :x :x :x

    Vann, aren’t you basing this “VANN 8D UNIT PROPOSAL” off my 8D system?.. aren’t they the same thing? What if people started saying that your 8D PROPOSAL superseded mine?.. should I than get as upset as you are now?.. I think you’re putting way to much emphasis on what’s yours.

    With all do respect YG. You are basically saying if anyone says 8D, it’s your idea, IT"S NOT.

    Not at all, I’ve never had a problem with others building off my ideas… I was simply using this thread and your reaction to Imperious Leader to show that you do.

    The tone and aim of IL is more likely to deny all relevance to Vann and his formula.
    It is unfair to deny any contribution on his part in Enigma formula of A&A.

  • '17 '16

    Here is the comparative values based on 12 IPCs Cruiser put at 5.00 as the benchmark for YG numbers.
    Formula is 144*power/Cost^2.
    *2.618034 for 2 hits Battleship or Carrier

    If Battleship was A7 D7 C20, you would get a strength factor of 6.60 power*hit.
    If Destroyer is A2 D2 C8, you would get 4.50
    2 hits Carrier A0 D3 C16 is 0.00, 4.42

    Comparison:
    YG’s Arty   A3 D2 strength 27.0, 18.0
    Vann’s Arty A2 D2 : 18.0

    YG Arty+Inf combos: Attack: 29.39 Defense: 23.51
    Vann Arty+Inf combos: Attack/Defense: 23.51

    YG Arty+MechInf combos: Attack: 22.5  Defense: 18.00
    Vann Arty+MechInf combos: Attack/Defense: 18.00

    YG’s StBomber A5 D1 C12: 5.00 , 1.00
    Vann’s StBomber A6 D1 C12 6.00, 1.00

    YG’s Destroyer A3 D3 C8: Attack/Defense: 6.75
    Vann’s Destroyer A2 D2 C8: 4.50

    YG’s Submarine A3 D2 strength 12.00 first strike 18.00, 8.00 first strike 10.64
    Vann’s 8.00 or first strike: 12.00, 4.00 or first strike: 5.32

    YG’s 2 hits Carrier A0 D2 strength 2.95
    Vann’s 2 hits Carrier A0 D3  strength 4.42

    YG’s Carrier+ 2 Fgs A8 D12 C36 strength: attack 4.65 defense approx.  5.33
    Vann’s Carrier+2 Fgs A8 D13 C36 strength: attack 4.65 defense approx. 5.78


    First thing I can see is that Subs - Destroyer - Cruiser - Battleship - Full Carrier get a different strength progression:

    YG’s attack:     12.00 _____ 6.75 ______ 5.00 ______ 5.65  ____ 4.65
    Vann’s attack:    8.00 _____ 4.50 ______ 5.00 ______ 5.65 ____ 4.65

    YG’s is following a clean decreasing order of strength which worked accordingly to OOB decrease (except for Cruisers which was broken).

    Vann’s is following a weaker path but Destroyer 4.50 is now under the strength of Cruiser 5.00.

    Why did you make this choice Vann?

    Following the increasing in strength from DD to Cruiser then Battleship.

    That way, the costlier the unit, the better you can afford to your fleet.

    Second, on Subs, both are proportionate to DDs. A3 D2 Sub meet A3 D3 DD /  A2 D1 Sub meet A2 D2 DD
    Any particular reason to have chosen this value?
    Is it only because Destroyer is at a lower combat value?

    Also, you choose to keep the high attack value of 6.00 to StBomber instead of the lower 5.00 which make it even with Cruiser.

    Is it only because you need to follow BB value (Attack 6)?
    YG’s nerfed Bombers because of Dark Sky, IMO.

    However you did not give defense 6 to Fighter but only 5, and this will nerfed a lot aircraft defense against bombers:
    Fighter      A4 D5 strength 5.76, 7.20

    Any reason?

    Third, Vann’s Full Carrier get a better defense factor: 5.78 which is slightly above Cruiser than YG’s 5.33.
    To me, it seems OK, but did you boost Full Carrier defense because it is linked to Fighter nerfing?

    Finally, it seems that keeping Artillery moving 1 as low as Inf and MechInf make Tank (16.0) much more competitive particularly both offense and defense compared to MI (18.0):
    YG Arty+Inf combos: Attack: 29.39 Defense: 23.51
    Vann Arty+Inf combos: Attack/Defense: 23.51

    YG Arty+MechInf combos: Attack: 22.5  Defense: 18.00
    Vann Arty+MechInf combos: Attack/Defense: 18.00

    Tank: Attack/Defense: 16.00
    MInf: Attack/Defense: 9.00 / 18.00

    Don’t you think it might make Tank too much interesting on offense when paired to MI?

    Tank+MI A5 D6 C10, 2 hits:  Attack/Defense: 14.40 / 17.28


  • YA !!! The VANN DAM FORMULAS are back !!!


  • Thats more like a no. The larry marx formula is back. The original


  • @Imperious:

    Thats more like a no. The larry marx formula is back. The original

    I know. Just being sarcastic.

  • Sponsor

    Baron,

    With the differences between my 8D units and VANNs 8D units… which do you like best? Please don’t give me a bunch of analytics and than play neutral, give me a straight opinion. Thanks.

  • Disciplinary Group Banned

    @Baron:

    Here is the comparative values based on 12 IPCs Cruiser put at 5.00 as the benchmark for YG numbers.
    Formula is 144*power/Cost^2.
    *2.618034 for 2 hits Battleship or Carrier

    If Battleship was A7 D7 C20, you would get a strength factor of 6.60 power*hit.
    If Destroyer is A2 D2 C8, you would get 4.50
    2 hits Carrier A0 D3 C16 is 0.00, 4.42

    Comparison:
    YG’s Arty  A3 D2 strength 27.0, 18.0
    Vann’s Arty A2 D2 : 18.0

    YG Arty+Inf combos: Attack: 29.39 Defense: 23.51
    Vann Arty+Inf combos: Attack/Defense: 23.51

    YG Arty+MechInf combos: Attack: 22.5  Defense: 18.00
    Vann Arty+MechInf combos: Attack/Defense: 18.00

    YG’s StBomber A5 D1 C12: 5.00 , 1.00
    Vann’s StBomber A6 D1 C12 6.00, 1.00

    YG’s Destroyer A3 D3 C8: Attack/Defense: 6.75
    Vann’s Destroyer A2 D2 C8: 4.50

    YG’s Submarine A3 D2 strength 12.00 first strike 18.00, 8.00 first strike 10.64
    Vann’s 8.00 or first strike: 12.00, 4.00 or first strike: 5.32

    YG’s 2 hits Carrier A0 D2 strength 2.95
    Vann’s 2 hits Carrier A0 D3  strength 4.42

    YG’s Carrier+ 2 Fgs A8 D12 C36 strength: attack 4.65 defense approx.  5.33
    Vann’s Carrier+2 Fgs A8 D13 C36 strength: attack 4.65 defense approx. 5.78


    First thing I can see is that Subs - Destroyer - Cruiser - Battleship - Full Carrier get a different strength progression:

    YG’s attack:    12.00 _____ 6.75 ______ 5.00 ______ 3.77  ____ 4.65
    Vann’s attack:    8.00 _____ 4.50 ______ 5.00 ______ 3.77 ____ 4.65

    YG’s is following a clean decreasing order of strength which worked accordingly to OOB decrease (except for Cruisers which was broken).

    Vann’s is following a weaker path but Destroyer 4.50 is now under the strength of Cruiser 5.00.

    Why did you make this choice Vann?

    And if following the increasing in strength from DD to Cruiser, why not increase Battleship A7 D7 to keep a constant rising such as:
    attack:    8.00 _____ 4.50 ______ 5.00 ______ 3.77 6.60?

    That way, the costlier the unit, the better you can afford to your fleet.

    Second, on Subs, both are proportionate to DDs. A3 D2 Sub meet A3 D3 DD /  A2 D1 Sub meet A2 D2 DD
    Any particular reason to have chosen this value?
    Is it only because Destroyer is at a lower combat value?

    Also, you choose to keep the high attack value of 6.00 to StBomber instead of the lower 5.00 which make it even with Cruiser.

    Is it only because you need to follow BB value (Attack 6)?
    YG’s nerfed Bombers because of Dark Sky, IMO.

    However you did not give defense 6 to Fighter but only 5, and this will nerfed a lot aircraft defense against bombers:
    Fighter      A4 D5 strength 5.76, 7.20

    Any reason?

    Third, Vann’s Full Carrier get a better defense factor: 5.78 which is slightly above Cruiser than YG’s 5.33.
    To me, it seems OK, but did you boost Full Carrier defense because it is linked to Fighter nerfing?

    Finally, it seems that keeping Artillery moving 1 as low as Inf and MechInf make Tank (16.0) much more competitive particularly both offense and defense compared to MI (18.0):
    YG Arty+Inf combos: Attack: 29.39 Defense: 23.51
    Vann Arty+Inf combos: Attack/Defense: 23.51

    YG Arty+MechInf combos: Attack: 22.5  Defense: 18.00
    Vann Arty+MechInf combos: Attack/Defense: 18.00

    Tank: Attack/Defense: 16.00
    MInf: Attack/Defense: 9.00 / 18.00

    Don’t you think it might make Tank too much interesting on offense when paired to MI?

    Tank+MI A5 D6 C10, 2 hits:  Attack/Defense: 14.40 / 17.28

    The destroyer strength is lower then the cruiser, and the combo of the cruiser&battleship makes the cruiser, and battleship worth buying (not obsolete). Having a higher defense strength for the carrier composites the lower fighter defense strength.

    With the s-bomber&tank combo, it will make the tank more viable, and you are maybe right having the s-bomber being C12/M6/A5/D1 because of dark sky.

    Having the art to a A3 will down grade the tank, and having the art to a A2 makes the tank more viable. The only good feature the tank has is blitzing.

  • '17 '16

    @Young:

    Baron,

    With the differences between my 8D units and VANNs 8D units… which do you like best? Please don�t give me a bunch of analytics and than play neutral, give me a straight opinion. Thanks.

    I don’t forget.
    It is a hard case based on analysis and what are your intent.
    Analysis help decide but it is not the main factor, it has to be referred to your goals.
    It is always a case of means to an end.
    Takes time to see into it and an interesting challenge to find the main factors and the whole picture.
    I agree with Vann, his values are increasing Tank pertinence.
    D8 provides this opportunity.
    I will come back later.

  • '17 '16

    With the s-bomber&tank combo, it will make the tank more viable, and you are maybe right having the s-bomber being C12/M6/A5/D1 because of dark sky.

    There is only Tactical Bomber & Tank combo.
    Strategic Bomber don’t have such.


  • What the hell with the drama train all the time… geez… sometimes I wonder if some people are 40 going on 14…

    Fucking grow up…

  • Sponsor

    @DiveCrewCanada:

    What the hell with the drama train all the time… geez… sometimes I wonder if some people are 40 going on 14…

    ����ing grow up…

    You’re right, my apologies.


  • @Young:

    @DiveCrewCanada:

    What the hell with the drama train all the time… geez… sometimes I wonder if some people are 40 going on 14…

    ����ing grow up…

    You’re right, my apologies.

    Sir, no need to apologize, my comment was not aimed at you but at the situation in general.

Suggested Topics

  • 28
  • 27
  • 5
  • 20
  • 158
  • 17
  • 21
  • 2
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

37

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts