• curious


  • keeping this more popular for a while


  • I believe it is very situation dependent. But based on pure stats it would be the tank. But if you needed cheap defence it would be infantry. If you opponent has a heavy air force coming your way you would need to have AA’s. If you wanted to get units quickly to the frontline the tank and if you needed to support infantry Artillery


  • Infantry, period.

    Let’s say I’m attacking you with a horde of tanks.  Let’s say you have a load of infantry.

    My 5 IPC tank attacks on 3, your 3 IPC infantry defends on 2.  For each dice pip, I pay 1.67 IPCs.  For each dice pip, you pay 1.5 IPCs.  You got the better deal.  For each casualty I take, I lose 5 IPCs of units.  For each casualty you take, you lose 3 IPCs of units.  Every unit I lose costs me 166% of the cost it costs you.

    Oh, but that’s just DEFENSE, you say.  Tanks are SURELY better for offense.

    No.

    5 inf 3 tanks (30 IPC) attack 7 infantry.  74% success rate, average survivors:  3 tanks (15 IPC) (when they DO win)
    6 tanks (30 IPC) attack 7 infantry.  57% success rate, average survivors 2 tanks (when they DO win)

    So you see, when you have equal values of units attacking, the fact that infantry are cheap makes a big difference.  You can afford more of them, so they can absorb more hits.  In the example battles, an infantry-tank mix had a higher success rate for a battle, and higher expected IPC value of survivors, than a simple tank-heavy build.

    Tanks have a logistic advantage that cannot be denied. Some game plans (tank dash to Moscow) use almost nothing but tanks.  Tanks are great for Africa.  Tanks are great for Germany, when it needs to switch between defense of Eastern and Western Europe, or for the final push on Moscow, when later-produced piles of tanks catch up to earlier-produced piles of infantry for a rather nasty combined arms attack.  But with all that can be said for the tank, infantry are undeniably useful for offense AND defense.

    So that’s my feeling on infantry and tanks.  Infantry are always useful, in greater or lesser quantities, so long as you can GET THEM TO THE BATTLE.  Tanks are the hitting power that are protected by an infantry shield that soaks up hits; tanks also have a great logistic advantage with their move of 2.

    Artillery are useful in some situations, but I don’t use them a lot except with Russia.  For Russia, they can provide extra attack power that Russia lacks because of its lack of air.  (For example, Russia might want to trade 4 territories on its turn, but with only 2 fighters, its attack power will be lacking.  Tanks are expensive.  So for battles with low numbers, artillery are a cheap alternative.)  For any other power, artillery have the problem that they need to get to the front.  If I had to get artillery to the front, I might as well have produced infantry instead, and tanks later.  Besides, other powers that trade a lot of territories usually have a lot of air (Germany or Japan), or only trade a few territories a turn at most (UK/US).

    AA guns are useful to discourage strategic bombing and repeated trading of territory for air-power nations.  For example, if Japan pops an industrial complex on India, and Allied bombers are on Moscow, that India complex should be bombed to pieces if there’s no AA gun.  The Japan player WILL want to use it at full capacity, so a bomber run equates to a free shot on Japan’s economy.  (The only time a bomber shouldn’t hit such a complex is if there’s an even better target - in which case it’s still bad for the other side!)  As far as repeat trade - say the Allies have massive airpower and just a few ground units, and want to trade Western Europe every turn.  If Germany sticks to infantry and artillery to retake Western Europe, and sticks an AA gun on Western Europe, the Allies will have a tough choice.  Either send more ground units and have them bled out by the Germans, or use air power that will be whittled away by the AA gun.  The German player will obviously be bleeding strength into Western Europe heavily, but it IS an option for the German player.

    Used to be AA guns were a strategy, with OOB (Out of the Box) Revised “Rockets” technology rules abuse.  No more.

    Both sides start out with plenty of AA guns, neither should have to build more.

    (edit) - Basically, the idea is, Axis and Allies is a combined arms sort of game; in the sandwich of A&A, infantry are the bread.  Of course, as the Bible says, man cannot live on bread alone.  So if the BIBLE says you should build infantry AND other things, then you had better do it.  Or else.  Dun dun dun . . .  cough fighter bomber carrier sub tank transports (/edit)


  • @Bunnies:

    Infantry, period.

    Let’s say I’m attacking you with a horde of tanks.  Let’s say you have a load of infantry.

    My 5 IPC tank attacks on 3, your 3 IPC infantry defends on 2.  For each dice pip, I pay 1.67 IPCs.  For each dice pip, you pay 1.5 IPCs.  You got the better deal.  For each casualty I take, I lose 5 IPCs of units.  For each casualty you take, you lose 3 IPCs of units.  Every unit I lose costs me 166% of the cost it costs you.

    Oh, but that’s just DEFENSE, you say.  Tanks are SURELY better for offense.

    No.

    5 inf 3 tanks (30 IPC) attack 7 infantry.  74% success rate, average survivors:  3 tanks (15 IPC) (when they DO win)
    6 tanks (30 IPC) attack 7 infantry.  57% success rate, average survivors 2 tanks (when they DO win)

    So you see, when you have equal values of units attacking, the fact that infantry are cheap makes a big difference.  You can afford more of them, so they can absorb more hits.  In the example battles, an infantry-tank mix had a higher success rate for a battle, and higher expected IPC value of survivors, than a simple tank-heavy build.

    Tanks have a logistic advantage that cannot be denied. Some game plans (tank dash to Moscow) use almost nothing but tanks.  Tanks are great for Africa.  Tanks are great for Germany, when it needs to switch between defense of Eastern and Western Europe, or for the final push on Moscow, when later-produced piles of tanks catch up to earlier-produced piles of infantry for a rather nasty combined arms attack.  But with all that can be said for the tank, infantry are undeniably useful for offense AND defense.

    So that’s my feeling on infantry and tanks.  Infantry are always useful, in greater or lesser quantities, so long as you can GET THEM TO THE BATTLE.  Tanks are the hitting power that are protected by an infantry shield that soaks up hits; tanks also have a great logistic advantage with their move of 2.

    Artillery are useful in some situations, but I don’t use them a lot except with Russia.  For Russia, they can provide extra attack power that Russia lacks because of its lack of air.  (For example, Russia might want to trade 4 territories on its turn, but with only 2 fighters, its attack power will be lacking.  Tanks are expensive.  So for battles with low numbers, artillery are a cheap alternative.)  For any other power, artillery have the problem that they need to get to the front.  If I had to get artillery to the front, I might as well have produced infantry instead, and tanks later.  Besides, other powers that trade a lot of territories usually have a lot of air (Germany or Japan), or only trade a few territories a turn at most (UK/US).

    AA guns are useful to discourage strategic bombing and repeated trading of territory for air-power nations.  For example, if Japan pops an industrial complex on India, and Allied bombers are on Moscow, that India complex should be bombed to pieces if there’s no AA gun.  The Japan player WILL want to use it at full capacity, so a bomber run equates to a free shot on Japan’s economy.  (The only time a bomber shouldn’t hit such a complex is if there’s an even better target - in which case it’s still bad for the other side!)  As far as repeat trade - say the Allies have massive airpower and just a few ground units, and want to trade Western Europe every turn.  If Germany sticks to infantry and artillery to retake Western Europe, and sticks an AA gun on Western Europe, the Allies will have a tough choice.  Either send more ground units and have them bled out by the Germans, or use air power that will be whittled away by the AA gun.  The German player will obviously be bleeding strength into Western Europe heavily, but it IS an option for the German player.

    Used to be AA guns were a strategy, with OOB (Out of the Box) Revised “Rockets” technology rules abuse.  No more.

    Both sides start out with plenty of AA guns, neither should have to build more.

    (edit) - Basically, the idea is, Axis and Allies is a combined arms sort of game; in the sandwich of A&A, infantry are the bread.  Of course, as the Bible says, man cannot live on bread alone.  So if the BIBLE says you should build infantry AND other things, then you had better do it.  Or else.  Dun dun dun . . .  cough fighter bomber carrier sub tank transports (/edit)

    It seems to be that artillery is the least useful because they attack and defend at 2 but they yet cost 1 more ipc and have 1 more attack point.


  • In a lot of ways, it’s like asking “Which screwdriver is the best?”

    If you have a straight edge, you can use it to undo some Phillips head screws, to pry open paint cans, lot of different things.

    But in some situations, you just need the right Phillips head to get the job done.

    In even rarer instances, you need something like an Allen wrench.

    So you could think of a straight like infantry, Phillips like tanks, and an Allen wrench like artillery.  Infantry are most generally useful, but there are specific times and places where substitutes just won’t do.  As useful as straights are, you don’t want to have nothing but straights in your toolkit.  You want a few Phillips and Allen wrenches too.


  • Nothing better than a tank division!
    I like seeing my panzer 4 kicked down the poor infantries of my opponent!

  • '12

    Well the Robertson screwdriver is the best, pity the Americans stick to the good ole philips….


  • Man, I was never good with those names.

    In French for once, it’s less complicated: we call 'em square, star, and flat line.

    I’m partial to the square one.


  • artillery and infantry are the best combonation


  • Tanks.

    10 Infantry
    Rolls: 10@1; Total Hits: 310@1: (2, 1, 2, 1, 1, 3, 2, 5, 3, 4)
    10 Artillery
    Rolls: 10@2; Total Hits: 610@2: (2, 5, 5, 1, 1, 1, 5, 2, 2, 4)
    10 Tanks
    Rolls: 10@3; Total Hits: 410@3: (3, 2, 4, 6, 5, 5, 2, 5, 4, 3)

    Unless your on welfare like Russia, tanks are worth it, because if you look at it this way

    Infantry Attack 1+Defense 2= 3
    Artillery Attack 2+Defense 2=4
    Tanks Attack 3+Defense 3=6 costs 5  😄


  • @Dylan:

    Tanks.

    10 Infantry
    Rolls: 10@1; Total Hits: 310@1: (2, 1, 2, 1, 1, 3, 2, 5, 3, 4)
    10 Artillery
    Rolls: 10@2; Total Hits: 610@2: (2, 5, 5, 1, 1, 1, 5, 2, 2, 4)
    10 Tanks
    Rolls: 10@3; Total Hits: 410@3: (3, 2, 4, 6, 5, 5, 2, 5, 4, 3)

    Unless your on welfare like Russia, tanks are worth it, because if you look at it this way

    Infantry Attack 1+Defense 2= 3
    Artillery Attack 2+Defense 2=4
    Tanks Attack 3+Defense 3=6 costs 5  😄

    uhhh, let’s re do that roll  :oops:

    10 Infantry
    Rolls: 10@1; Total Hits: 310@1: (1, 1, 5, 6, 3, 6, 1, 2, 6, 5)
    10 Artillery
    Rolls: 10@2; Total Hits: 110@2: (6, 3, 4, 2, 4, 4, 4, 3, 4, 3)
    10 Tanks
    Rolls: 10@3; Total Hits: 410@3: (4, 1, 5, 4, 6, 6, 5, 1, 1, 3)


  • Infantry
    Rolls: 10@1; Total Hits: 110@1: (4, 1, 6, 3, 2, 6, 4, 3, 4, 3)

    Artillery
    Rolls: 10@2; Total Hits: 210@2: (6, 6, 6, 6, 1, 3, 5, 2, 6, 6)

    Tanks
    Rolls: 10@3; Total Hits: 310@3: (4, 1, 5, 5, 5, 1, 6, 5, 1, 6)


  • there you have it in most cases tanks are the best souloution but if you play as russia you might just have to step down to artillery or infantry Its good idea to pair up your artillery and your infantry to make then both hit on a 2 Tanks however can move two spaces letting you get into the battle quicker so you put 10 infantry in west Germany then next round you buy 5 tanks the infantry all already in germany and when place them  next round the infantry and tanks can meet up get on a transport stuff like that all of this at the cost of 60 ips! Then say your oppenent russia has 9 infantry and 2 Mechanized infantry at the end i will put some battle rolls for ya.

    Germany:
    Rolls: 10@1; Total Hits: 110@1: (5, 1, 6, 3, 5, 4, 5, 4, 5, 5)

    Rolls: 5@3; Total Hits: 15@3: (1, 6, 5, 5, 6)

    Russia:
    Rolls: 11@1; Total Hits: 211@1: (4, 5, 5, 3, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 4, 4)

    :aaa


  • @450thMSAF:

    there you have it in most cases tanks are the best souloution but if you play as russia you might just have to step down to artillery or infantry

    Just build herds of infantry. The British got your back there’s no need to have to fight too much. Let Britain knock out their IPCS. Then Russia can make efficient push backs on the Germans. Think of it this way. 24+30=54    Germany has 40, though Britain may need to make a few purchases out in Asia, it’s still 14 more IPCS then though Britain might need to support India and Australia, but then again the US can balance it out.

    So artillery aren’t needed in Russia. Besides Russia is mainly on defense.


  • There is no “best” land unit. There are land units with different uses.

    -When you want to defend actively, you want mostly infantry while having some attack units (which one depends on the kind of front that you are defending) to stop your opponent from going forward with a big stack.
    -When you are all-out defense you want only infantry.
    -When you are attacking you want a mix of attacking units and infantry, yes an attack as a bigger win% with the right mix of inf/tanks then with just tanks (there was a very nice post earlier explaining this for people who’d doubt).
    -When you are all-out attacking well yes you’d want only tanks the only right scenario for that is blitzing Russia early with Germany and it necessites some prerequisites to be a fine option (in my own opinion, I know a good player who doesn’t agree with me there, depends on the play style I guess)

    So in a nutshell, the most needed unit is definitely the infantry, but I wouldn’t say it is the “best” unit because it seems too much of a specific case question (although if you’d tell me that you’ll give me 20 bucks just to shut up and answer the question, I’d go with infantry).

Suggested Topics

I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

61
Online

16.1k
Users

37.7k
Topics

1.6m
Posts