LL v ADS

[Lucifer]

Am I  the only player who thinks LL or ADS is not a big difference? I use both, although most players in the lobby
use LL, specially the 1vs1 games.
I started playing revised earlier this year in the lobby, I played mostly multiplayer,
and the majority of all games I participated in until couple of months ago,  was ADS and multiplayer. 
I also played classic many years ago, we did not start with LL.
As for what is best, if anyone prefer ADS thats what they should play, obviously. Same goes for LL players.
And there are several good players (believe it or not) who plays both multiplayer and 1vs1, and sometimes
they play with LL other games they use ADS.
Imo ADS is preferable in 2vs2 or 2vs3. LL doesn’t feel right in multiplayer for some strange reason.
Another issue is that it is the ADS players who claim LL is a different game, not LL players  :-P
I learned to play classic with ADS, I also learned to play revised with ADS.
Those strats that I prefer, I have tried first in ADS…. those strats I don’t use, they failed me in ADS games  :-o

[Lucifer]

@axis_roll:

But the biggest difference LL is the guarenteed hit and run.  IMHO, this defintely helps the axis, specifically Germany and she turtles up and waits for Japan to win the game.  Keeping the allies at bay one or two rounds can defintely affect a games outcome.

Generally, with somewhat equal experienced players, it’s almost always Japan who takes Moscow, not Germany.
This is not different in LL or ADS.
What is the big difference in the option of strafing when it’s not much used in many LL games?
This thread is not about the balance of the game, but isn’t a bid or no bid, more important than LL or ADS?
Seriously, I cannot see much difference between ADS and LL.

[trihero]

I agree with Lucifer, it’s not a very different game. Even though you can strafe precisely, I do not really see how this helps Germany that much. Even in ADS you shouldn’t be putting units in a vulnerable position to be strafed. You do not throw 4 inf 4 arm in Karelia when there’s a huge stack of 30 inf 7 arm in E. Europe. Just because the Germans can’t precisely strafe it doesn’t mean they shouldn’t or that you should be advancing units into a deadzone like that.

[Jennifer]

I play both, LL and ADS.  And there is a SIGNIFICANT difference in strategies employed between them.

And no, Bean, 1@1 + 1@3 is NOT the same as 2@2.  Check the math.  In LL they are identical, but in ADS they are not.  You have 3% better chance with 1@1 + 1@3 to score hits then 2@2 in ADS.  Multiply that out across 30-40 individual baby battles and you can see a major shift.

Sure, you can attempt to lock us into looking at one, and only one, individual battle.  But that’s only indicative of ONE battle!  Over the course of the game you might have hundreds of battles, all skewed ever so slightly by LL resulting in a game so totally off base as to be un-usable for diagnostic purposes in ADS.

I’m not saying LL isn’t fun.  I’m just saying you can’t really use LL to work out good strategies in ADS (or vice-versa, for that matter.)

[DarthMaximus]

@Bean:

I agree with Lucifer, it’s not a very different game. Even though you can strafe precisely, I do not really see how this helps Germany that much. Even in ADS you shouldn’t be putting units in a vulnerable position to be strafed. You do not throw 4 inf 4 arm in Karelia when there’s a huge stack of 30 inf 7 arm in E. Europe. Just because the Germans can’t precisely strafe it doesn’t mean they shouldn’t or that you should be advancing units into a deadzone like that.

Exactly.

[trihero]

And no, Bean, 1@1 + 1@3 is NOT the same as 2@2.  Check the math.  In LL they are identical, but in ADS they are not.  You have 3% better chance with 1@1 + 1@3 to score hits then 2@2 in ADS.  Multiply that out across 30-40 individual baby battles and you can see a major shift.

I already showed you the math. Let’s make it easy, 1@4 compared to 2@2.

1@4 is 66% chance to hit once, 33% to miss. (one round of battle) (low luck)

2@2 is 44% chance to miss (2/3 x 2/3), 11% to hit twice (1/3 x 1/3), and 44% to hit once. (ADS)

So in ADS, you have an 11% chance more to miss, but you have an 11% chance to hit twice. Those average out to one hit over many battles. I already showed you this once. I hope this isn’t a repeat of our previous arguments where I have already shown you the answer, yet you come back with erroneous information.

You need to check your facts once again, Jen. I agree that if you’re fighting a single unit that LL makes the inf/artillery combo more likely to hit one unit, but that does not fundamentally alter anything. You should still use planes if you have them, and in ADS you should still take the odds since it’s over 50% to take the opposing unit in one strike.

[Jennifer]

You say my math is off, then go on to say I am right.

You have multiple personalities?

Inf+Art vs Inf in one round of battle, ADS = 56% Chance of killing the defender
Inf+Art vs Inf in one round of battle, LL    = 67% Chance of killing the defender

Inf+Arm vs Inf in one round of battle, ADS = 58% Chance of killing the defender
Inf+Arm vs Inf in one round of battle, LL    = 67% Chance of killing the defender

How are these the same in your reality?  In my reality 58 != 67.  Neither is 56 = 67.

This large shift spread over hundreds of battles during the course of a game CAN and most likely WILL skew the ultimate result.  Thus, one cannot use LL as a means to test strategies in ADS since they are fundamentally different games.

I’m not saying LL is worthless.  I’m just saying that LL is not appropriate for testing ADS strategies just like ADS isn’t appropriate for testing LL strategies.  (Mainly because battles are much easier to win in LL.)

[trihero]

I am saying you are right about one thing, but wrong about another. That is not split personality. You can be right about 1+1  = 2, but fail when you say 2+2 = 3. You are right about versus one unit, but you are wrong versus more than that. You were saying that 1@1 + 1@3 is not the same as 2@2, but they are exactly the same if there are 2 or more targets available.

You are right in the case of one round of battle. Good job gold star, you rediscovered the wheel. Again, so what? Did your fighters mysteriously disappear so that every battle you are using only artillery/inf? Are you always fighting one inf? The answer is a resounding no. You’re only talking about a minority of battles - and in ADS, you would still make the same attack because it is favorable, just with slightly lower results.

[Jennifer]

Maybe your fighters are busy elsewhere.

Anyway, are the odds of success the same if we multiple 10 fold?

Let’s see!

10 Inf + 10 Art has Attack Punch 40
10 Inf Defending has Defense Punch 20

In one round you have a 65% chance of hitting 7 defenders (9% chance to win in one round)

10 Inf + 10 Arm has Attack Punch 40
10 Inf Defending has Defense Punch 20

In one round you have a 68% chance of hitting 7 defenders (8% chance to win in one round)

In LL, regardless of Arm or Art, if you have 10 Inf + 10 Art (or Arm) you have Attack Punch 40
10 Inf Defending STILL has Defense Punch 20

In one round you have a 70% chance of hitting 7 defenders (0% to win in one round.)

As you can see, the microcosm holds true for the macro-scale.  The results are still way off from ADS in LL, thus, LL is NOT a good indicator of good tactics to use in ADS.  (And vice-versa.)

They are both fun games to play.  They are NOT the same.  The tactics are NOT the same.  ADS battles and LL battles don’t need the same force compliments.  LL only needs punch.  ADS needs units of strong punch individually to increase odds of hits.

I’d be just as happy to send inf/art into battle in LL as I would inf/fig if I could use the figs somewhere else and the territory is secure from counter attack. (ie you are liberating Archangelsk and England had just liberated karelia preventing Germany from attacking Archangelsk.)

[Infantry Rocks]

Being unable to strafe precisely may in fact mean that you should not strafe. Do to the reasons I mentions a profitable LL strafe may not be a profitable ADS strafe. A dead zone in LL may not be a dead zone in ADS.

[axis_roll]

@Bean:

I agree with Lucifer, it’s not a very different game. Even though you can strafe precisely, I do not really see how this helps Germany that much. Even in ADS you shouldn’t be putting units in a vulnerable position to be strafed. You do not throw 4 inf 4 arm in Karelia when there’s a huge stack of 30 inf 7 arm in E. Europe. Just because the Germans can’t precisely strafe it doesn’t mean they shouldn’t or that you should be advancing units into a deadzone like that.

Sorry, but I have to disagree with you.  In ADS, leaving a stack of 4 inf and 4 tanks can be a VERY GOOD strategic move at times. Especially for the Allies, especially against Germany.

For example, I might want to throw said Russian inf and tanks to bleed Germany dry while building my UK forces (since they attack Germany first).  Now would I put 4 Russian tanks at risk… probably not.  But your example is a poor one.  I may throw 6 inf and a tank in Ukraine for the purposes described above.  Consider Germany having to trade Ukaine, Balkans, and Belorussia with stacks described above.  In ADS, these stacks can be rather problematic.

Not a strategy for every round, but this is a strategy this is non-existant/poor in LL.

[Lucifer]

@axis_roll:

I may throw 6 inf and a tank in Ukraine for the purposes described above.  Consider Germany having to trade Ukaine, Balkans, and Belorussia with stacks described above.  In ADS, these stacks can be rather problematic.

Not a strategy for every round, but this is a strategy this is non-existant/poor in LL.

In 20%-30% of all ADS games this can be problematic yes…  If you can throw 6 inf + 1 tank to waste then Russia is in
very good shape or else this is a bad move.
If Germany must trade Balkans also the allies already have contained Germany.
In most battles, and most games the dice in ADS does not determine the battles, because players use overkill in ADS
games, as opposed to LL games with 2 inf + 1 bmr :)
You cannot trust the dice to be average in important battles in ADS games.
Thats why G should overkill Ukr in that example, else then G is doomed, but then again not if it’s ADS cause you can always get lucky…  :roll:

[Jennifer]

The idea of throwing 6 Russian Infantry/ 1 Russian Armor in is to make Germany chose between hitting 6 Inf/Arm in Ukraine, 4 Inf/4 Arm in Belo and 8 inf in Karelia. (Just to pick some arbitrary numbers.)

it’s not a matter of if Russia’s in great shape or not.  It’s to make Germany give up attacks at all or face expensive battles.  But in LL that doesn’t really work out since Germany just calculates the minimum required units to kill the Russians and maybe the British in Karelia and doesn’t face the possibility of catastrophic defeat.

It’s an ADS tactic used to scare the enemy into not attacking you, or focusing too heavily on your one territory at the expense of other attacks they could make if the dice ran perfectly down the middle (like they do in LL.)

I admit, I use LL to mentally calculate how a battle should turn out before I use the calculators to examine likely out comes.  But I VERY RARELY see the calculators line up with the LL estimates and even more rarely do the results of the ADS ever line up with the LL and that’s very easy to explain:

Easier to get hits in LL.  Easier to compute force needed.  Easier to gauge results.  Easier to cut battles closer to the marginal line with assured victory.

We’ve already proven that mathematically you are more likely to get a hit using LL with multiple units then you are with ADS.  We’ve shown how you can tailor your responses just right to get the result you want.  We’ve proven that you can be just as offensive with lesser units in LL then you can with expensive units in LL resulting in different buys (and thus different tactics.)

What more do you want before you finally admit that LL is NOT the same game or tactics as ADS?

[Pervavita]

and that is why the nature of the games are diffrent and give you diffrent games. if in ADS you have to over kill, then you are making fewer attacks per turn as you could see a front with 2 teritories with 3I each, in LL that’s 1 kill on round 1, in ADS that could be 0-3 kills; now say you as the attacker can hit both or ether with 2 fighters, 2 tanks, and say 4I to ether (but not 8 to ether). so what do you do?
in LL you can send in 4I and 1 tank and 1 fighter into each, as the attacker you get 1.8 kills first round with each attack (lets say you only get the 1 kill in both), then you take 1 fatality, next round you still get 1 kill with 50% chance of geting the last guy, well the deffender has a 60% chance of killing one more infantry. say in both casses you both hit on the last shot. so you take 2 teritories with 2I and 1 tank.
in ADS then you would send in more then just 4I, 1 tank, and 1 fighter as the odds are still in your favor, but there is a chance that you would start taking tank losses or at the vary least you would have fewer Infantry for the counter attack. OR you would leave the Tanks out of the one strike and just move in the 4I and fighters.
my point is, i may have never played LL, but i can tell by knowing with prity good accuracy what i will lose/take in each battle that i will change the way i play as i can plan vital battles better and don’t have to play like i expect bad rolls on my invasion of normandy well the Germans roll like mad men.

[Lucifer]

@Cmdr:

It’s an ADS tactic used to scare the enemy into not attacking you,

Oh my pants are wet already, I’m so cared of your ADS tactics  :roll: :evil:

I fear the Dice Gods and no one or nothing else, whatsoever in this world.

[Lucifer]

@Cmdr:

What more do you want before you finally admit that LL is NOT the same game or tactics as ADS?

Stronger pills from my psychiatrist. Your delusions is stronger than mine, I admit it.

[trihero]

For example, I might want to throw said Russian inf and tanks to bleed Germany dry while building my UK forces (since they attack Germany first).  Now would I put 4 Russian tanks at risk… probably not.  But your example is a poor one.  I may throw 6 inf and a tank in Ukraine for the purposes described above.  Consider Germany having to trade Ukaine, Balkans, and Belorussia with stacks described above.  In ADS, these stacks can be rather problematic.

Not a strategy for every round, but this is a strategy this is non-existant/poor in LL.

It’s enough that Darth Maximus agrees with me. Just because you cannot strafe precisely does not mean you should not try.  Do not be so naive as to think that your opponent thinks the same you do and will not attempt to take all the stacks down or one very hard and the other one strafing.

[axis_roll]

@Bean:

For example, I might want to throw said Russian inf and tanks to bleed Germany dry while building my UK forces (since they attack Germany first).  Now would I put 4 Russian tanks at risk… probably not.  But your example is a poor one.  I may throw 6 inf and a tank in Ukraine for the purposes described above.  Consider Germany having to trade Ukaine, Balkans, and Belorussia with stacks described above.  In ADS, these stacks can be rather problematic.

Not a strategy for every round, but this is a strategy this is non-existant/poor in LL.

It’s enough that Darth Maximus agrees with me.

So silly of us to argue with the end-all be-all of A&A knowledge: Darth Maximus.

Is there an alter so that I too may worship his omnipotence?

@Bean:

For example, I might want to throw said Russian inf and tanks to bleed Germany dry while building my UK forces (since they attack Germany first).  Now would I put 4 Russian tanks at risk… probably not.  But your example is a poor one.  I may throw 6 inf and a tank in Ukraine for the purposes described above.  Consider Germany having to trade Ukaine, Balkans, and Belorussia with stacks described above.  In ADS, these stacks can be rather problematic.

Not a strategy for every round, but this is a strategy this is non-existant/poor in LL.

Just because you cannot strafe precisely does not mean you should not try.

Well, no that’s the point.  You SHOULD not straffe unless you do not fear getting stuck.  That’s the problem with the hit and run… you can get stuck and those Russian 6 inf and tank were merely bait for the trap.  Again, a strategy that can not be utilized in LL.

And again, I am not saying that it’s better or worse… just that it DOES change the game.  Is the change ground breaking?  No.

But an LL newbie may not be as aware of these key kind of differences that exist between ADS and LL.

[trihero]

So silly of us to argue with the end-all be-all of A&A knowledge: Darth Maximus.

Is there an alter so that I too may worship his omnipotence?

No need to exaggerate, also U-505 agrees, one of the best players on this site. At least I have some high profile members so it’s not a cult =p

Well, no that’s the point.  You SHOULD not straffe unless you do not fear getting stuck.  That’s the problem with the hit and run… you can get stuck and those Russian 6 inf and tank were merely bait for the trap.  Again, a strategy that can not be utilized in LL.

And again, I am not saying that it’s better or worse… just that it DOES change the game.  Is the change ground breaking?  No.

But an LL newbie may not be as aware of these key kind of differences that exist between ADS and LL.

2 things, first I don’t think we really disagree then. LL does not make a groundbreaking difference.

Second, baiting like that invites not just a strafe, but a full move-in. Obviously there are many considerations in play here, but if I can bust up that many units by sending my stack en masse and still have my capital defended and still deadzone the territory I left and still have enough defense in the territory I took, then I’m in great shape.

For instance I have a big stack in E. Europe. You bait with 4 inf 4 arm Karelia. I send the big stack in, and make sure my capital is guarded. You’re down 8 units costing me 3 units, and if I did it right you should not have enough to counter Karelia, and also should still be scared to move into E. Europe because I can hit from both Germany and Karelia. There could be a lot of variations and we could discuss this endlessly, but baiting is very difficult and costly. Just because you cannot strafe perfectly does not make automatically make baiting a great move in ADS, which I think we both agree on. You have to be very careful of how you bait - too much and I’m moving in, too little and I don’t care or use fighters.

And yes when you fear getting stuck, you should think twice - but you should still consider strafing. Just strafe with say enough to take out 75% of the units in one go. If you go with much more then you are very likely to take the territory,if you go less it’s not worth it, but there is still a way to strafe. It will not be as rewarding, but you should still think about it.

[axis_roll]

@Bean:

So silly of us to argue with the end-all be-all of A&A knowledge: Darth Maximus.

Is there an alter so that I too may worship his omnipotence?

No need to exaggerate, also U-505 agrees, one of the best players on this site. At least I have some high profile members so it’s not a cult =p

I’ve never said one way was better.  I said they were different, I gave reasons how and said it was personal choice/preference.  You were the one to start drawing a line of who was on the ‘right’ side, lining up A&A gurus behind you.

It sounds like you agree with me that straffing is much less of a strategy in ADS.  Conversely, baiting CAN be utilized more.  The ‘baiting’ strategy, IMHO of over 500 A&A games, can be very effective for the allies when playing KGF, trying to bleed Germany dry.

If the allies first goal is to contain Germany, baiting helps achieve this more quickly.  Germany is forced to either not straffe or do it less efficiently (75% by your numbers)… and when you think of stacks of 5 inf or so, it’s hard to straffe so precisely.

Like many discussions about this game, especially past the first opening round or two, it is extremely hard to draw concrete, firm conclusions since there are so many variables in play in a game at a specific point in time.

Discussions like this MUST be generalizations, and it is that level to which I speak.

PS.

How do I sign up for the guru newsletter??