Grasshopper's 8d System - Conversion tables for 1940 Global units

  • Sponsor

    you and Vann are not looking at the cost per hit calculations.

  • '17 '16

    Yes, cost per hit ratio is considered by the Enigma formula. It does not directly appear but it is.
    A higher cost make for weaker hit/cost value.
    That is considered when divided by squared cost.

    A 1 hit @1 per 3 IPCs is as strong as 1 hit @4 per 6 IPCs.
    1/ (3^2) or 9 = 4 / (6^2) or 36
    In both case, you get 0.111 which is in power*hit.

    Using odds instead of number: 16.7% / 9  =  66.7% / 36
    You get : 1/54 or  0.0185 odds* hit

    @Baron:

    @Dauvio:

    It came to my attention that one of my formulas are already out there that I discovered 30 years ago.
    http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?action=profile;u=185969 has also discovered the formula P^2*N=S
    And just for fun you can try these formulas also. S/P^2=N. √(S/N)=P
    P=POINTS
    N=NUMBER OF UNITS
    S=STRENGTH OF ONE KIND OF UNITS IN A TERRITORY
    This formula should replace the punch formula. It is much better then the punch formula.

    Now the next formula is (P100)/(C^26)=S
    P=POINTS
    C=COST
    S=STRENGTH OF THE UNIT BASED ON COST
    With this formula you can also price units according to their strength. √((P100)/(S6))=C
    This formula is for points. (S*(C^2*6))/100=P

    For better results for some of these formulas, have all your units cost ten times then what they are. These are some of the VANN FORMULAS I came up 30 years ago.

    If you have any questions about these formulas, please ask.

    I found how you can get the main part of Vann formula or Baron-Larrymarx according to a specific unit as benchmark.

    I took the Fighter A3 D4 C10 and I wanted to convert into Tank A3 D3 C6 as benchmark (Baron-Larrymarx formula).

    Then I saw what I did.

    Power (of attacking Fighter): A3 * C6 (cost of Tank)/C10 (cost of Fg) * 1 Hit Point C6 (cost of Tank)/C10 (cost of Fg) = 1.08
    You can reduce this equation because (cost of Tank)
    (cost of Tank)/ (cost of Fg)*(cost of Fg) is same to
    (cost of Tank) IPCs^2 / (cost of Fg) IPCs^2 and give a simple ratio.

    C6^2*A3/C10^2 = 1.08
    36 squared IPCs 3 Power * 1 Hit /100 squared IPCs = 1.08 PowerHit Point

    This explained what is hidden in Baron-Larrymarx formula:
    Offence or defence strength factor= 36*Power/Cost^2.

    The whole Enigma formula is
    Refence unit Cost^2Power of the actual unit1 HP/Cost of the actual unit^2

    So, the Basic offence or defence strength factor result (1.08, in this case) is express in Power*Hit Point
    1^2*Power (of a given unit)*1 hit/Cost (of this same given unit)^2

    And this formula can be adapt according to any benchmark, for instance a 1 IPC unit:
    131 hit/10^2 = 0.300

    And this is a very small number. That’s why Vann formula:
    Strength= (Power100)/(Cost^26)

    add an arbitrary 1001/6= 16.667
    So, 16.667131 hit/10^2 = 0.5
    And this would provide the Fighter strength attack factor based on an hypothetical benchmark unit of √16.667 = 4.0825 IPCs.
    A 5 IPCs revised Tank in Vann formula gives a Strength : 16.667
    31 hit/5^2 = 2.00 powerhit

  • '17 '16

    @Young:

    you and Vann are not looking at the cost per hit calculations.

    Also, D8 system keeps the same as OOB D6 if looking directly to cost per hit:
    Sub is 6 IPCs/hit
    DD is 8 IPCs/hit
    Cruiser 12 IPCs/hit
    BB is 10 IPCs/hit

  • Sponsor

    @Baron:

    @Young:

    you and Vann are not looking at the cost per hit calculations.

    Also, D8 system keeps the same as OOB D6 if looking directly to cost per hit:
    Sub is 6 IPCs/hit
    DD is 8 IPCs/hit
    Cruiser 12 IPCs/hit
    BB is 10 IPCs/hit

    Baron… why don’t you just show us what you believe the whole table should look like under the 8d system?.. use the following chart and fill in the blanks.

    Attacking unit dice odds

    1/8 - White (12.5%)

    2/8 - Green (25%)

    3/8 - Blue (37.5%)

    4/8 - Purple (50%)

    5/8 - Red (62.5%)

    6/8 - Black (75%)

    Defending unit dice odds

    1/8 - White (12.5%)

    2/8 - Green (25%)

    3/8 - Blue (37.5%)

    4/8 - Purple (50%)

    5/8 - Red (62.5%)

    6/8 - Black (75%)

    Strategic bombing air combat values

    1/8 - White (12.5%)

    2/8 - Green (25%)

    Kamikaze Token defense values


  • :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D

  • '17 '16

    Mostly here:
    Art, Sub, DD, Carrier, with debatable values are put side by side, followed by OOB comparison.

    If DD going down to A2 D2, then I would go Sub A2 D1 and keep Carrier D2.
    Less changes from habit is another factor.
    I made the case for Arty A3 D3, but A3 D2 or A2 D3 will be more gradual progress compared to Inf or MI.

    Numbers is one thing but there is other factors.
    I miscalculated BB when Vann bring is own D8 units.
    Looking deeper, I saw my mistake and could see what he was telling.
    IMO, it is mostly wrapped up. Only Art and DD & Sub are unfinished business.

    @Baron:

    YG’s complete D8s roster

    Here is the comparative with Enigma formula (still using a 12 IPCs unit reference) based on odds, not dice number.
    144*Odds/cost^2 = strength of unit on same odds by hit per IPCs basis.

    I bolded the greatest number between D8 or D6 for same unit.
    When there is no difference, I quoted it.
    So, you can see at glance which is boosted or nerfed compared to OOB.

    Unit type  Combat value  (D8 system) (D6 OOB)
    Infantry      A1-2 D2    (2.00-** / 4.00)        (2.67-3.92 / 5.33)
    Inf A2+Arty A2 D2        2.94**  /  2.94        (3.92 / 3.92)
    Inf A2+Arty A3 D2        3.67**  /  2.94        Same as above
    Inf A2+Arty A3 D3        3.67**  /  3.67        Same as above

    MechInfantry A1-2 D2  (1.125-** / 2.25)      (1.50-3.00 / 3.00)
    MechInf A2+Art A2 D2  (2.25** / 2.25) vs      (3.00 / 3.00)
    MechInf A2+Art A3 D2  (2.81** / 2.25) vs        Same as above
    MechInf A2+Art A3 D3  (2.81** / 2.81) vs        Same as above

    Artillery  A2 D2      (2.25 / 2.25)                  (3.00 / 3.00)
    Artillery    A3 D2      (3.375 / 2.25)              Same as above
    Artillery    A3 D3      (3.375 / 3.375)            Same as above

    Tank        A4 D4            (2.00 / 2.00)            (2.00 / 2.00)

    Anti-Air A  A0 D1* (0.00 / 0.72 per plane)      (0.00 / 0.96 per plane)


    Fighter      A4 D5    (0.72 / 0.90 )              (0.72 / 0.96)

    TcBomber  A4-5 D4 (0.595-** / 0.595)      (0.595 / 0.595)

    TcB A5+Tank C17    (1.12** / 1.00)        (1.16 / 1.00)
    TcB A5+Fighter C21 (0.735** / 0.653)    (0.761 / 0.653)
    StBomber  A5 D1    (0.625 / 0.125)        (0.667 / 0.167)


    Submarine  A2 D1 (1.00, fs: 1.50 / 0.50 fs: 0.67)  (1.33, fs: 2.00 / 0.67 fs: 0.89)
    Submarine  A3 D2 (1.50, fs: 2.25 / 1.00 fs: 1.33)  (1.33, fs: 2.00 / 0.67 fs: 0.89)
    Destroyer    A2 D2 (0.563 / 0.563)                        (0.75 / 0.75)
    Destroyer    A3 D3 (0.844 / 0.844)                        (0.75 / 0.75)
    Cruiser        A5 D5  (0.625 / 0.625)                      (0.50 / 0.50)
    Carrier, 2 hits A0 D2 (0.0 / 0.368)                            (0.00 / 0.491)
    Carrier, 2 hits A0 D3 (0.0 / 0.552)                           As above
    Battleship    A6 D6  (0.707 / 0.707)                      (0.628 / 0.628)


  • baron…the best we can do is art 3 attack and 2 defend…
    the sub could go to 7 ipcs…that would soften strength with 3 attack and 2 defend…
    same thing with destroyer going to 9 ipcs…that would soften strength with 3 attack and 3 defend…

    the whole idea here though is to NOT change ipc values and only attack and defend…the changes made for the most part balanced units so they would eliminate the so called “obsolete” notion…
    namely the tank, cruiser, and battleship…
    by weakening land units, planes, and strengthening ships the units on whole become more likely to be bought in a typical game in this 8 sided version of 2nd edition…
    so, in other words we should try to not re-invent the wheel as much as possible so that more players will hopefully move towards this version…

  • '17 '16

    @bigalmeacham:

    baron…the best we can do is art 3 attack and 2 defend…
    the sub could go to 7 ipcs…that would soften strength with 3 attack and 2 defend…
    same thing with destroyer going to 9 ipcs…that would soften strength with 3 attack and 3 defend…

    the whole idea here though is to NOT change ipc values and only attack and defend…the changes made for the most part balanced units so they would eliminate the so called “obsolete” notion…
    namely the tank, cruiser, and battleship…
    by weakening land units, planes, and strengthening ships the units on whole become more likely to be bought in a typical game in this 8 sided version of 2nd edition…
    so, in other words we should try to not re-invent the wheel as much as possible so that more players will hopefully move towards this version…

    I agree with your second verse all bolded, except that Tank were a bit weak but not obsolete because of blitz and M2. Tank have is own niche OOB.

    I don’t understand then what you are suggesting first part.
    To be within YG’s parameters, we need to keep cost as OOB.
    And it is clearly possible.

    I believe the game will be better with Arty A3 D3 M1 and DD A2 D2.
    I also like this because Sub A2 D1, DD A2 D2 and Carrier A0 D2 would keep their same numbers as OOB.
    And the strength increase from cheap DD to affordable Cruiser and costly BB makes for no “obsolete” warship.

    Artillery A3 D3 will be more purchase relatively to D8 Inf A1 D2, compared to G40 OOB (Art vs Inf).
    But Inf is the best defense (4.00 even if weaker than OOB 5.33) compared to A3 D3 Arty (3.375)
    Also, this Arty keeps similar equal number 3 offense and 3 defense.
    And in combined arms will still be 4.1% weaker than OOB Inf+Art (3.67 vs 3.92) or MI+Arty (2.81 vs 3.00)
    I know HBG make Artillery better defense than offense: like A2 D3 (A3 D4 on D12).
    But, Infantry will still be best choice for cheap defense, fodder and useful for combined arms.
    Artillery A3 D3 will not make Tank A4 D4 obsolete because of M2 Mobility and Blitz, and Tank is also better against Inf and MI in D8 system (compared to OOB).

    It requires a solid logistic strategy to bring this Artillery+Inf slow movers up to Moscow for the big battle.
    MI and Tank still do the job much faster and the longer it takes for Germany, the more Russia can built up his defense.

  • '17 '16

    Here is my wish list :
    :-) :-) :-)

    @Young:

    Attacking unit dice odds

    1/8 - White (12.5%)
    Infantry (-16.7%)
    Mech Infantry (-16.7%)

    2/8 - Green (25%)
    Infantry w/Artillery (-33%)
    Mech Infantry w/Artillery (-33%)
    Destroyer (-33%)
    Submarine (-33%)

    3/8 - Blue (37.5%)
    Artillery (+33%)

    4/8 - Purple (50%)
    Tank (0%)
    Fighter (0%)
    Tactical Bomber (0%)

    5/8 - Red (62.5%)
    Strategic Bomber (-66.7%)
    Cruiser (+50%)
    Tactical Bomber w/Fighter or w/Tank (-66.7%)

    6/8 - Black (75%)
    Battleship (+66.7%)

    Defending unit dice odds

    1/8 - White (12.5%)
    AA Guns (-16.7%)
    Strategic Bomber (-16.7%)
    Submarine (-16.7%)

    2/8 - Green (25%)
    Infantry (-33%)
    Mech Infantry (-33%)
    Aircraft Carrier (-33%)
    Destroyer (-33%)

    3/8 - Blue (37.5%)
    Artillery (+33%)

    4/8 - Purple (50%)
    Tank (0%)
    Tactical Bomber (0%)

    5/8 - Red (62.5%)
    Fighter (- 66.7%)
    Cruiser (+50%)

    6/8 - Black (75%)
    Battleship (+66.7%)

    Strategic bombing air combat values

    1/8 - White (12.5%)
    Tac Bomber (-16.7%)
    Strategic Bomber (-16.7)

    2/8 - Green (25%)
    Fighter interceptor (+16.7%)
    Fighter escort (+16.7%)

    Kamikaze Token defense values

    2/8 - Green (25%)
    Kamikaze Token (-33%)

    *Special thanks to Big Al “Mike Tyson” for contributing in this idea & Baron Munchhausen for his calculations.


  • I kinda like this, but the costs need to be adjusted as well, especially naval

  • '17 '16

    How can you adjust cost without coming back to Cruiser (warship) conundrum?
    Assuming YG parameters is to not play with cost, I’m still curious about how you would solve the issue.

  • Sponsor

    @Imperious:

    I kinda like this, but the costs need to be adjusted as well, especially naval

    Zero cost adjustments in this conversion model please.

  • Sponsor

    I’ve changed Destroyers and Subs… Attacking unit dice odds

    1/8 - White (12.5%)
    Infantry (-16.7%)
    Mech Infantry (-16.7%)

    2/8 - Green (25%)
    Infantry w/Artillery (-33%)
    Mech Infantry w/Artillery (-33%)
    Destroyer (-33%)

    3/8 - Blue (37.5%)
    Artillery (+33%)
    Submarine (+33%)

    4/8 - Purple (50%)
    Tank (0%)
    Fighter (0%)
    Tactical Bomber (0%)

    5/8 - Red (62.5%)
    Strategic Bomber (-66.7%)
    Cruiser (+50%)
    Tactical Bomber w/Fighter or w/Tank (-66.7%)

    6/8 - Black (75%)
    Battleship (+66.7%)

    Defending unit dice odds

    1/8 - White (12.5%)
    AA Guns (-16.7%)
    Strategic Bomber (-16.7%)
    Submarine (-16.7%)

    2/8 - Green (25%)
    Infantry (-33%)
    Mech Infantry (-33%)
    Artillery (-33%)
    Aircraft Carrier (-33%)

    3/8 - Blue (37.5%)
    Destroyer (+33%)

    4/8 - Purple (50%)
    Tank (0%)
    Tactical Bomber (0%)

    5/8 - Red (62.5%)
    Fighter (- 66.7%)
    Cruiser (+50%)

    6/8 - Black (75%)
    Battleship (+66.7%)

    Strategic bombing air combat values

    1/8 - White (12.5%)
    Tac Bomber (-16.7%)
    Strategic Bomber (-16.7)

    2/8 - Green (25%)
    Fighter interceptor (+16.7%)
    Fighter escort (+16.7%)

    Kamikaze Token defense values

    2/8 - Green (25%)
    Kamikaze Token (-33%)

    *Special thanks to Big Al “Mike Tyson” for contributing in this idea & Baron Munchhausen for his calculations.

  • Sponsor

    I really like the new chart.

  • '17 '16

    @Young:

    I really like the new chart.

    It is an elegant way to not make them weaker or stronger compare to OOB.
    Average strength is just below OOB strength.
    A bit of iconic in a way that Artillery and Subs seems to be for attack while Destroyer is first intended as an escorting vessel.
    Cruiser issue is partly resolved by making it a better attacking unit per IPC ratio compared to DD, but not for defense.

    | Artillery | attack 3 | defense 2 | move 2 | Cost 4 | +1A to Inf or Mech Inf | Strength: 3.375 / 2.25 | Avg 2.813 | OOB: 3.00 |

    | Destroyer | attack 2 | defense 3 | move 2 | Cost 8 | Anti-Submarine Weapon | Strength: 0.563 / 0.844 | Avg 0.704 | OOB: 0.750 |

    | Submarine | attack 3 | defense 1 | move 2 | Cost 6 | Submarine’s capacities |

    | Strength: 1.50 / 0.50 | OOB: 1.33 / 0.667 |
    | Strength for surprise strike: 2.25 / 0.667 | OOB: 2.00 / 0.89 |

    Compared to:

    | Submarine | attack 3 | defense 2 | move 2 | Cost 6 | Submarine’s capacities |

    | Strength: 1.50 / 1.00 | OOB: 1.33 / 0.67 |
    | Strength for surprise strike: 2.25 / 1.50 | OOB: 2.00 / 0.89 |

    | Cruiser | attack 5 | defense 5 | move 2 | Cost 12 | Shore bombard @5 | Strength: 0.625 | OOB: 0.50 |
    | Battleship | attack 6 | defense 6 | move 2 | Cost 20 | Shore bombard @6  Hits 2 | Strength: 0.707 | OOB: 0.628 |

  • '17 '16

    @Young:

    I’ve changed Destroyers and Subs… Attacking unit dice odds

    1/8 - White (12.5%)
    Infantry (-16.7%)
    Mech Infantry (-16.7%)

    2/8 - Green (25%)
    Infantry w/Artillery (-33%)
    Mech Infantry w/Artillery (-33%)
    Destroyer (-33%)

    3/8 - Blue (37.5%)
    Artillery (+33%)
    Submarine (+33%)

    4/8 - Purple (50%)
    Tank (0%)
    Fighter (0%)
    Tactical Bomber (0%)

    5/8 - Red (62.5%)
    Strategic Bomber (-66.7%)
    Cruiser (+50%)
    Tactical Bomber w/Fighter or w/Tank (-66.7%)

    6/8 - Black (75%)
    Battleship (+66.7%)

    Defending unit dice odds

    1/8 - White (12.5%)
    AA Guns (-16.7%)
    Strategic Bomber (-16.7%)
    Submarine (-16.7%)

    2/8 - Green (25%)
    Infantry (-33%)
    Mech Infantry (-33%)
    Artillery (-33%)
    Aircraft Carrier (-33%)

    3/8 - Blue (37.5%)
    Destroyer (+33%)

    4/8 - Purple (50%)
    Tank (0%)
    Tactical Bomber (0%)

    5/8 - Red (62.5%)
    Fighter (- 66.7%)
    Cruiser (+50%)

    6/8 - Black (75%)
    Battleship (+66.7%)

    Strategic bombing air combat values

    1/8 - White (12.5%)
    Tac Bomber (-16.7%)
    Strategic Bomber (-16.7)

    2/8 - Green (25%)
    Fighter interceptor (+16.7%)
    Fighter escort (+16.7%)

    Kamikaze Token defense values

    2/8 - Green (25%)
    Kamikaze Token (-33%)

    *Special thanks to Big Al “Mike Tyson” for contributing in this idea & Baron Munchhausen for his calculations.

    @Baron:

    @Young:

    I really like the new chart.

    It is an elegant way to not make them weaker or stronger compare to OOB.
    Average strength is just below OOB strength.
    A bit of iconic in a way that Artillery and Subs seems to be for attack while Destroyer is first intended as an escorting vessel.
    Cruiser issue is partly resolved by making it a better attacking unit per IPC ratio compared to DD, but not for defense.

    | Artillery
    | attack 3
    | defense 2
    | move 2
    | Cost 4
    | +1A to Inf or Mech Inf
    | Strength: 3.375 / 2.25 | Avg 2.813
    | OOB: 3.00

    | Destroyer
    | attack 2
    | defense 3
    | move 2
    | Cost 8
    | Anti-Submarine Weapon
    | Strength: 0.563 / 0.844
    | Avg 0.704
    | OOB: 0.750

    | Submarine
    | attack 3
    | defense 1
    | move 2
    | Cost 6
    | Submarine’s capacities

    | Strength: 1.50 / 0.50
    | OOB: 1.33 / 0.667
    |
    | Strength for surprise strike: 2.25 / 0.667
    | OOB: 2.00 / 0.89
    Compared to:

    | Submarine
    | attack 3
    | defense 2
    | move 2
    | Cost 6
    | Submarine’s capacities

    | Strength: 1.50 / 1.00
    | OOB: 1.33 / 0.67 |
    | Strength for surprise strike: 2.25 / 1.50
    | OOB: 2.00 / 0.89

    @Young:

    I really like the new chart.

    Can you tell us why and what you like about these 3 units and values:
    Submarine Att 3 Def 1,
    Destroyer Att 2 Def 3 and
    Artillery Att 3 def 2, please?

    I like it too, but probably for different reasons.

    Such as Submarines surprise strike being 3.6 times stronger than Cruiser instead of 4 times OOB.
    But, now Cruiser in defense is same strength than Sub Surprise strike in defense (0.625 near 0.667) while OOB Cruiser was dominated 0.89 vs 0.50, 178%.

    | Cruiser | attack 5 | defense 5 | move 2 | Cost 12 | Shore bombard @5 | Strength: 0.625 | OOB: 0.50
    |
    | Battleship | attack 6 | defense 6 | move 2 | Cost 20 | Shore bombard @6  Hits 2 | Strength: 0.707 | OOB: 0.628 |

    |

    |

    |

    |

    |

    |

  • Disciplinary Group Banned

    @Baron:

    @Young:

    I’ve changed Destroyers and Subs… Attacking unit dice odds

    1/8 - White (12.5%)
    Infantry (-16.7%)
    Mech Infantry (-16.7%)

    2/8 - Green (25%)
    Infantry w/Artillery (-33%)
    Mech Infantry w/Artillery (-33%)
    Destroyer (-33%)

    3/8 - Blue (37.5%)
    Artillery (+33%)
    Submarine (+33%)

    4/8 - Purple (50%)
    Tank (0%)
    Fighter (0%)
    Tactical Bomber (0%)

    5/8 - Red (62.5%)
    Strategic Bomber (-66.7%)
    Cruiser (+50%)
    Tactical Bomber w/Fighter or w/Tank (-66.7%)

    6/8 - Black (75%)
    Battleship (+66.7%)

    Defending unit dice odds

    1/8 - White (12.5%)
    AA Guns (-16.7%)
    Strategic Bomber (-16.7%)
    Submarine (-16.7%)

    2/8 - Green (25%)
    Infantry (-33%)
    Mech Infantry (-33%)
    Artillery (-33%)
    Aircraft Carrier (-33%)

    3/8 - Blue (37.5%)
    Destroyer (+33%)

    4/8 - Purple (50%)
    Tank (0%)
    Tactical Bomber (0%)

    5/8 - Red (62.5%)
    Fighter (- 66.7%)
    Cruiser (+50%)

    6/8 - Black (75%)
    Battleship (+66.7%)

    Strategic bombing air combat values

    1/8 - White (12.5%)
    Tac Bomber (-16.7%)
    Strategic Bomber (-16.7)

    2/8 - Green (25%)
    Fighter interceptor (+16.7%)
    Fighter escort (+16.7%)

    Kamikaze Token defense values

    2/8 - Green (25%)
    Kamikaze Token (-33%)

    *Special thanks to Big Al “Mike Tyson” for contributing in this idea & Baron Munchhausen for his calculations.

    @Baron:

    @Young:

    I really like the new chart.

    It is an elegant way to not make them weaker or stronger compare to OOB.
    Average strength is just below OOB strength.
    A bit of iconic in a way that Artillery and Subs seems to be for attack while Destroyer is first intended as an escorting vessel.
    Cruiser issue is partly resolved by making it a better attacking unit per IPC ratio compared to DD, but not for defense.

    | Artillery
    | attack 3
    | defense 2
    | move 2
    | Cost 4
    | +1A to Inf or Mech Inf
    | Strength: 3.375 / 2.25 | Avg 2.813
    | OOB: 3.00

    | Destroyer
    | attack 2
    | defense 3
    | move 2
    | Cost 8
    | Anti-Submarine Weapon
    | Strength: 0.563 / 0.844
    | Avg 0.704
    | OOB: 0.750

    | Submarine
    | attack 3
    | defense 1
    | move 2
    | Cost 6
    | Submarine’s capacities

    | Strength: 1.50 / 0.50
    | OOB: 1.33 / 0.667
    |
    | Strength for surprise strike: 2.25 / 0.667
    | OOB: 2.00 / 0.89
    Compared to:

    | Submarine
    | attack 3
    | defense 2
    | move 2
    | Cost 6
    | Submarine’s capacities

    | Strength: 1.50 / 1.00
    | OOB: 1.33 / 0.67 |
    | Strength for surprise strike: 2.25 / 1.50
    | OOB: 2.00 / 0.89

    @Young:

    I really like the new chart.

    Can you tell us why and what you like about these 3 units and values:
    Submarine Att 3 Def 1,
    Destroyer Att 2 Def 3 and
    Artillery Att 3 def 2, please?

    I like it too, but probably for different reasons.

    Such as Submarines surprise strike being 3.6 times stronger than Cruiser instead of 4 times OOB.
    But, now Cruiser in defense is same strength than Sub Surprise strike in defense (0.625 near 0.667) while OOB Cruiser was dominated 0.89 vs 0.50, 178%.

    Okay Baron, show me all the unit stats for eight sided dice.

    | Cruiser | attack 5 | defense 5 | move 2 | Cost 12 | Shore bombard @5 | Strength: 0.625 | OOB: 0.50
    |
    | Battleship | attack 6 | defense 6 | move 2 | Cost 20 | Shore bombard @6  Hits 2 | Strength: 0.707 | OOB: 0.628 |

    |

    |

    |

    |

    |

    |

  • '17 '16

    Here it is:

    @Baron:

    YG’s complete D8s roster

    Here is the comparative with Enigma formula (still using a 12 IPCs unit reference) based on odds, not dice number.
    144*Odds/cost^2 = strength of unit on same odds by hit per IPCs basis.

    I bolded the greatest number between D8 or D6 for same unit.
    When there is no difference, I quoted it.
    So, you can see at glance which is boosted or nerfed compared to OOB.

    Unit type  Combat value  (D8 system) (D6 OOB)
    Infantry      A1-2 D2    (2.00-** / 4.00)        (2.67-3.92 / 5.33)
    Inf A2+Arty A2 D2        2.94**  /  2.94        (3.92 / 3.92)
    Inf A2+Arty A3 D2        3.67**  /  2.94        Same as above
    Inf A2+Arty A3 D3        3.67**  /  3.67        Same as above

    MechInfantry A1-2 D2  (1.125-** / 2.25)      (1.50-3.00 / 3.00)
    MechInf A2+Art A2 D2  (2.25** / 2.25) vs      (3.00 / 3.00)
    MechInf A2+Art A3 D2  (2.81** / 2.25) vs        Same as above
    MechInf A2+Art A3 D3  (2.81** / 2.81) vs        Same as above

    Artillery  A2 D2      (2.25 / 2.25)                  (3.00 / 3.00)
    Artillery    A3 D2    (3.375 / 2.25) avg: 2.813  Same as above
    Artillery    A3 D3      (3.375 / 3.375)            Same as above

    Tank        A4 D4            (2.00 / 2.00)            (2.00 / 2.00)

    Anti-Air A  A0 D1* (0.00 / 0.72 per plane)      (0.00 / 0.96 per plane)


    Fighter      A4 D5    (0.72 / 0.90 )              (0.72 / 0.96)

    TcBomber  A4-5 D4 (0.595-** / 0.595)      (0.595 / 0.595)

    TcB A5+Tank C17    (1.12** / 1.00)        (1.16 / 1.00)
    TcB A5+Fighter C21 (0.735** / 0.653)    (0.761 / 0.653)
    StBomber  A5 D1    (0.625 / 0.125)        (0.667 / 0.167)


    Submarine  A2 D1 (1.00, fs: 1.50 / 0.50 fs: 0.67)  (1.33, fs: 2.00 / 0.67 fs: 0.89)
    Submarine  A3 D1 (1.50, fs: 2.25 / 0.50 fs: 0.67)  (1.33, fs: 2.00 / 0.67 fs: 0.89)
    Submarine  A3 D2 (1.50, fs: 2.25 / 1.00 fs: 1.33)  (1.33, fs: 2.00 / 0.67 fs: 0.89)
    Destroyer    A2 D2 (0.563 / 0.563)                        (0.75 / 0.75)
    Destroyer    A2 D3 (0.563 / 0.844) avg:  0.704      (0.75 / 0.75)
    Destroyer    A3 D3 (0.844 / 0.844)                        (0.75 / 0.75)
    Cruiser        A5 D5  (0.625 / 0.625)                      (0.50 / 0.50)
    Carrier, 2 hits A0 D2 (0.0 / 0.368)                            (0.00 / 0.491)
    Carrier, 2 hits A0 D3 (0.0 / 0.552)                           As above
    Battleship    A6 D6  (0.707 / 0.707)                      (0.628 / 0.628)

  • '17 '16

    The real difference is between OOB ground units and naval units decreasing with higher cost compared to ground units strength decrease with higher cost compared to naval units strength increase with higher cost, if totally following Enigma formula with D8.

    OOB: Inf 5.33, > MI 3.00, Art 3.00, MI+Art 3.00, > Tank 2.00
    DD 0.75, > Cruiser 0.50, < BB 0.628

    D8 system:
    Inf 4.00, > MI D2 2.25 , Art D2  2.25, MI+Art D2 2.25, > Tank 2.00
    DD A2 D2 0.563, < Cruiser A5 D5 0.625,  < BB A6 D6 0.707.

    With DD A2 D3, defense is rising to 0.844 and this make DD above > Cruiser (0.625) and BB (0.707).
    This is the same as OOB strength distribution: DD 0.75,> Cruiser 0.50 & BB 0.628.

    Again, Cruiser on defense is still unoptimized but it is not different than OOB.
    So, this can be a reason to change that way to not affect too much balance.

  • '17 '16

    @Baron:

    The real difference is between OOB ground units and naval units decreasing with higher cost compared to ground units strength decrease with higher cost compared to naval units strength increase with higher cost, if totally following Enigma formula with D8.

    OOB: Inf 5.33, > MI 3.00, Art 3.00, MI+Art 3.00, > Tank 2.00
    DD C8 0.75, > Cruiser C12 0.50, < BB C20 0.628

    D8 system:
    Inf 4.00, > MI D2 2.25 , Art D2  2.25, MI+Art D2 2.25, > Tank 2.00
    DD C8 A2 D2 0.563, < Cruiser C12 A5 D5 0.625,  < BB C20 A6 D6 0.707.

    With DD A2 D3, defense is rising to 0.844 and this make DD above > Cruiser (0.625) and BB (0.707).
    This is the same as OOB strength distribution: DD 0.75,> Cruiser 0.50 & BB 0.628.

    Again, Cruiser on defense is still unoptimized but it is not different than OOB.
    So, this can be a reason to change that way to not affect too much balance.

    Compared to D10, D8 sided dice brings a more interesting scale of strength for warships.
    Simply because 6/8 get 75% for BB, which is the highest acceptable combat values vs 4/6 (67%) or 7/10 (70%)
    And Destroyer can be lowest but acceptable: 2/8 get 25% compared to 2/6 (33%) or 3/10 (30%)
    Cruiser can reach the most interesting middle range: 5/8 (62.5%) compared to 3/6 (50%) or 6/10 (60%).

    DD C8 A2 D2 0.563, < Cruiser C12 A5 D5 0.625,  < BB C20 A6 D6 0.707

    DD C8 A2 D3 avg A/D 0.704, > Cruiser C12 A5 D5 0.625,  < BB C20 A6 D6 0.707

    And this different scale makes DD much stronger than Cruiser on defense, but Destroyer on average it is the same as BB.

    @Baron:

    Scale on D10:

    | **Unit
    type  ** |     | **D10 com.
    values  ** | **OOB odds
    offense  ** | **OOB odds
    defense  ** | OOB values |

    | Infantry | A2-3 D3 | 17-33% | 33% |             | A1-2 D2 |
    | Mechanized
    Infantry
    | A2-3 D3 | 17-33% | 33% |             | A1-2 D2 |
    | Artillery | A3 D3 | 33% | 33% |             | A2 D2 |
    | Anti-Aircraft
    Artillery
    | A0 D1 | 0% | 17% |             | A0 D1 |
    | Tank | A5 D5 | 50% | 50% |             | A3 D3 |
    | Fighter | A5 D7 | 50% | 67% |             | A3 D4 |
    | Tactical
    Bomber
    | A6-7 D5 | 50-67% | 50% |             | A3-4 D3 |
    | Strategic
    Bomber
    | A6 D2 | 67% | 17% |             | A4 D1 |
    | Submarine | A3 D2 | 33% | 17% |             | A2 D1 |
    | Destroyer | A3 D3 | 33% | 33% |             | A2 D2 |
    | Cruiser | A6 D6 | 50% | 50% |             | A3 D3 |
    | Carrier | A0 D3 | 0% | 33% |             | A0 D2 |
    | Battleship | A7 D7 | 67% | 67% |             | A4 D4 |

    Destroyer strength: .30144/8^2  = 0.675
    Cruiser     strength: .60
    144/12^2= 0.600
    Battleship strength: .701442.618/20^2 = 0.660

    Even such cost structure would not solve the warships DD vs Cruiser vs BB issue.
    D8 allows it, because it goes from DD@2 25%, CA@5 62.5%, BB@6 75%:
    Destroyer    A2 D2 (0.563 / 0.563)
    Destroyer    A3 D3 (0.844 / 0.844)
    Cruiser        A5 D5  (0.625 / 0.625)
    Battleship    A6 D6   (0.707 / 0.707)

    So, buying cheap you get weaker unit but costlier it becomes stronger, as it is suppose to be.

    Is it what you will use?

    I would probably ponder about AAA, StB and Sub defense values.
    Maybe the weak odds are more realistic @1 out of 10 instead of rising them to 20%.

    I might go this way:
    AAA A0 D1 vs up to 3 planes but lower cost to 3 IPCs each.
    OOB you get near 50% when 3 planes targeted for 5 IPCs: 10% per IPC.
    Here you keep same ratio: 30% for 3 IPCs: 10% per IPC.

    StB A7 D1
    Bombers were made for offense and already very good at it.

    Sub A3 D2
    Because Subs on defense are usually trapped by planes and 1 DD.
    The game mechanic make Subs too much vulnerable. Defense @2 is a small compensation.

    I would prefer TcB A6-7 D5, that way combined arms simply gives +1A to Inf, MI and TcB.
    Fg A5 D7 vs TcB A6 D5 seems a nice way to make both planes different.

Suggested Topics

  • 18
  • 44
  • 33
  • 2
  • 3
  • 27
  • 3
  • 7
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

30

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts