Something I am not sure is common in OTB play…

[Imperious Leader]

IN my most recent games we basically got rid of dice-

1)For every 6 combat factors = one hit allocated in attacks.

2)Any fraction left over is rolled. Thus if you have 3 left over its a hit on a 3 or less

3)Subs still roll normally due to ‘first strike’ measure

4. on AA rolls you count the number of planes that can be effected and say you have 3 potential targets , then you roll a 3 or less for a hit. If they have both fighters and bombers, then you assign each value to a plane : 1= fighter, 2= fighter, 3= bomber.

Example: you have a total of 14 combat factors. you get two hits, and another on a 2 or less.

The final thing is it: 1)saves time, 2) creates more calculations, because you now count ahead to determine what your attacking with, 3) eliminates those people who blame the dice for defeat.

After about 5 minutes the thing becomes very quick with battles finished soon. I am sure you all play this, but i am too lazy to find the thread where it was probably already discussed/debated.

[newpaintbrush]

Congrats, you have invented Low-Luck.

^^

[trihero]

Whoah, how’d you miss the low luck debate?

[Imperious Leader]

but isn’t that an online thing?  You using it for OTB play too?

Is that LL the same exact system?

I really don’t bother myself with many of these threads, but if its the same system- its really weird that i just came up with it  kinda like like something  Plato would have argued as the “ultimate self-evident ideal ‘form of truth’ that merely needs to be perceived in the mind”  Its really strange. oh well.

[trihero]

It’s exactly the same as low luck.

The greatest difference is precision strafing, while a close second is small number battles being more decisive than they usually are. But overall I like it. It cuts out the “oh noes I gots bad dice therefore you didn’t really beat me” outlook.

[Jennifer]

@Bean:

It’s exactly the same as low luck.

The greatest difference is precision strafing, while a close second is small number battles being more decisive than they usually are. But overall I like it. It cuts out the “oh noes I gots bad dice therefore you didn’t really beat me” outlook.

Or the OMG, I just got the one chance in 64 million that NONE OF MY FRIGGIN ATTACKS HIT. :P

But it does seriously skew large battles because you can figure out, to the iota, how many rounds and with what to hit the enemy and be relatively sure (to within a couple infantry) of the result.

[tekkyy]

@Imperious:

I am sure you all play this, but i am too lazy to find the thread where it was probably already discussed/debated.

heres that big thread
“LL vs ADS”
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=10748.0

[Crazy Ivan]

:-D
You gotta love LL!  :wink:

[newpaintbrush]

@Crazy:

:-D
You gotta love LL!  :wink:

I don’t love LL . . .

No love.  (oo a tennis pun . . .)  :lol: