G1 Attack on Russia?



  • My opponent’s best bit of luck (a questionable SBR roll notwithstanding), was G1 when he scrambled fighters against a 2 sub, 3 f/tac. pair attack on sz110 (2 cruisers, 1 BB).

    I got 3 hits, he got 4, and I retreated (again, to scramble in that situation is a toss-up for the UK. You don’t do it if you expect a Sea Lion. I credit my opponent for doing it because he recognized a chance to destroy Luftwaffe and thereby help Russia, which is exactly what happened). The end result? He has 2 BB’s, 2 cruisers, and what should be 2 dd’s in sz109.

    My opponent was conservative in the med–no attack on the Italian navy–but given the fact that he now has 3 f. and a tac. to send to Moscow, I think his approach was correct. He could’ve been aggressive (I had no German f. in Rome for UK1), but what good is disrupting Italy if it means losing Moscow?

    UK is also slightly weak in the Middle East, because Russia had to go in first for some ICs.

    UK3 will be interesting.



  • I’d expect UK to be in something of a powerful position in the Med/Atlantic, but honestly I’d prefer not as much of a “Russia crush” as  a “Russia Slow Death” game while SBR’ing and convoying UK to the poorhouse (considering their power in Med w/out Sealion, perhaps a few subs to hit convoys in the Med or the RN?



  • Well, it’s all about reacting to your oppoent’s moves, and the beauty of the Axis is, they start on offense.

    If you start a full-out drive for Moscow on G1, your opponent must react. If he fails, great; if he succeeds, you counter. I still may hold back in the game I’m currently in, but if I do I have Leningrad, Stalingrad, and the Caucasus ripe for the picking, because he’s had no choice but to turtle.

    Again, it’s too early to say too much, but one thing I am absolutely convinced of is this: With a G1 drive for Moscow, that Leningrad stack must retreat on R2 at the latest, or the game is over. A G1 Barbarossa gives you a gift-wrapped Leningrad by G3, in other words, plus the Ukraine tt’s.

    As for the Middle East, what can be done? Russia got their early for some desperately-needed IPCs, but even if it was saved for Britain: UK1; take Persia, UK2; build an IC, UK3; buy planes (not cheap, BTW), UK4; finally, do something of consequence, on the last possible turn before Moscow falls.


  • 2017

    Since forum games are public, I hope you don’t mind my noting two critical things:
    1. Leaving Yugoslavia untouched for a turn 2 strafe retreat to Romania helps immensely.  This lets mechs and tanks go from Paris to Romania (none of which had been lost) in a single turn.  This means they rejoin the rest of the German army on NUKR on G3 making Soviet counterattack impossible.
    2. Even poor to mediocre SBR puts extreme pressure on Russia at this early stage.

    Taranto won’t win or lose this particular scenario in my opinion.

    One thing I really did screw up: I didn’t run the dice on a possible G4 all air buy when I planned UK2.  As a result, I failed to move London fighters to Scotland on UK2 so they could make it to Moscow on UK4.  That could very well have saved Moscow from a G5 sack.

    Despite that error, I believe I can still lower Germany’s turn 5 victory odds at Moscow to 50-60% (we can post the finalized odds when we come to it, if people are curious).  Though even a costly German victory on G5 is disastrous for the Allies.



  • Getting those extra fighters in place probably would save Moscow, especially given the razor-thin margins we’re dealing with at present.

    In the end, the basis for this entire strategy rests with SBR rules that are poorly thought out, IMO. Interceptors should fire @ 2.



  • @Jercules:

    Interceptors should fire @ 2.

    YES THEY SHOULD OMG YES!!!

    But then what about Jet interceptors? @3 is too high, @2 is too low.



  • Jets firing either at 2 or 3 would probably be fine; techs are not quite as important to balance as the vanilla game.
    I agree completely, though, that interceptors should fire at 2.
    It worked perfectly when they did, and now it’s so very easy to exploit when they don’t.



  • @Alsch91:

    Jets firing either at 2 or 3 would probably be fine; techs are not quite as important to balance as the vanilla game.
    I agree completely, though, that interceptors should fire at 2.
    It worked perfectly when they did, and now it’s so very easy to exploit when they don’t.

    Yeah. You need so many interceptors to scare the enemy away. Before I’d think twice if I didn’t outnumber the enemy, but now I’ll go even with slightly bad numbers, which is impossible given the fact that attacking bmrs fire @1 as well.



  • I have attacked Russia G1 in every game of A+3.9 I’ve played so far as the Axis (5). I can say that I have been happy with the results so far (3 wins, 2 losses), and I have learned a technique that can only be developed by playing out the strategy. Leaving some ships during G1 hasn’t been a big deal, I just purchase many planes and send them out all at once when a fleet gets to large, but I must say, that the 2 Russian infantry walking into the middle east for extra cash and an NO has become a huge pain in the A55.



  • @Gargantua:

    Not a good plan   20 (41.7%)

    Sum’s up this entire thread.

    Almost 1700 views could be another way to sum up this thread.



  • @techroll42:

    @Jercules:

    Interceptors should fire @ 2.

    YES THEY SHOULD OMG YES!!!

    But then what about Jet interceptors? @3 is too high, @2 is too low.

    I’m pretty sure the probability of a SBR being successful now is somewhere in the range of 70%.  Changing that Interceptor to a value of 2 instead of one drops it down to a 55% chance of the SBR getting through.

    However, the SBR could only result in 3 IPC of damage from a Bomber, or up to 8 IPC.

    So a SBR risks a 15 IPC Aircraft that attacks at 4, in exchange for 70% chance to deny 3 IPC and upwards to 8 IPC which is half the value of the unit involved.

    I don’t see SBR ever happening if you drop the chance of the bomber getting through down to 55%.  A 50-50 shot to deny only 3 IPC?  And tossing away a 15 IPC Attack @4 aircraft with 6 (or 7 range)?

    Yup, keep your IPC as I’m better off statistically killing units rolling @4 that at a minimum cost 3 IPC which is the worst case tradeoff.

    The way it is setup now actually makes SBR viable, changing the interceptor to roll @2 removes the strategy for anyone paying attention.


  • 2017

    SBR is not useless when interceptors hit at 2.

    Lets say 6 Allied fighters guard Moscow (hitting at 2)
    Germany sends 3 fighter escorts, 3 strategic bombers to SBR

    On average this results in:
    German loss of 2 fighters in the dogfight and maybe 1 strategic bomber to aa fire
    Allied loss of 1 fighter and ~10-15 damage to the major IC

    If the bombers get lucky, the Axis net gain.
    If the bombers don’t get lucky, the Allies net gain.

    It’s also about more than just IPC.  Any time IPC goes to repairs instead of units, that is equivalent to killing units without letting them fire back.



  • Spendo, the fact that a 2-interceptor would make you think twice about sending a bomber against a fighter is exactly the point.
    If I’ve got interceptors then you should have to send escorts.  The way it is now, interceptors are nearly useless in all but the most extreme cases.

    @Young:

    Almost 1700 views could be another way to sum up this thread.

    To be fair Grasshopper, number of views means just about nothing.  If there were a hundred people that vehemently disagreed with you, there would still be a lot of views.



  • All I ment was, it’s an interesting topic, and a viable argument.



  • @Alsch91:

    Spendo, the fact that a 2-interceptor would make you think twice about sending a bomber against a fighter is exactly the point.
    If I’ve got interceptors then you should have to send escorts.� The way it is now, interceptors are nearly useless in all but the most extreme cases.

    1        IPC Reduction
    1 16.67% 0.17
    2 16.67% 0.33
    3 16.67% 0.50
    4 16.67% 0.67
    5 16.67% 0.83
    6 16.67% 1.00
    IPC Cost to Defender per SBR 5.5

    Event                                   P            LAC   IL     ID     IC     NC  
    Ftr @1 (Miss), AA (Miss Both) 76.39% $0 $0 $11 $8 $8
    Ftr @1 (Miss), AA (1 Hit) 4.63% $15 $1 $6 $0 -$0
    Ftr @1 (Miss), AA (2 Hit) 2.31% $30 $1 $0 $0 -$1
    Ftr @1 (Hit), AA (Miss Both) 15.28% $15 $2 $6 $1 -$1
    Ftr @1 (Hit), AA (1 Hit)        0.93% $30 $0 $0 $0 -$0
    Ftr @1 (Hit), AA (2 Hit)        0.46% $30 $0 $0 $0 -$0
    IPC Cost to Attacker                $4 $9 $5

    P = Probability of Event occurring
    LAC = Value of Aircraft Lost
    IL = P * LAC which when summed to $4 is the cost of the SBR to Germany
    ID = Damage to the Major IC based off the probability of rolling a 1 through 6 (its rounded from 5.5)
    IC = P * ID which when summed to $9 is the cost of the SBR to London
    NC = IC - IL which when summed to $5 and cross footed ( $9-$4 ) is the actual damage the SBR causes net of all probabilities.

    Event                                   P            LAC   IL     ID     IC     NC
    Ftr @2 (Miss), AA (No Hit) 61.11% $0 $0 $11 $7 $7
    Ftr @2 (Miss), AA (1 Hit) 3.70% $15 $1 $6 $0 -$0
    Ftr @2 (Miss), AA (2 Hit) 1.85% $30 $1 $0 $0 -$1
    Ftr @2 (Hit), AA (No Hit) 30.56% $15 $5 $6 $2 -$3
    Ftr @2 (Hit), AA (1 Hit)        1.85% $30 $1 $0 $0 -$1
    Ftr @2 (Hit), AA (2 Hit)        0.93% $30 $0 $0 $0 -$0
    IPC Cost                                                 $7 $9 $2

    P = Probability of Event occurring
    LAC = Value of Aircraft Lost
    IL = P * LAC which when summed to $7 is the cost of the SBR to Germany
    ID = Damage to the Major IC based off the probability of rolling a 1 through 6 (its rounded from 5.5)
    IC = P * ID which when summed to $9 is the cost of the SBR to London
    NC = IC - IL which when summed to $2 and cross footed ( $9 - $7 ) is the actual damage the SBR causes net of all probabilities.

    So the change from interceptors rolling @1 versus rolling @2 is approximately 3 IPC to Germany in a 2 Bombers versus 1 Ftr scenario; an entirely possible scenario on G2.

    Probabilities were derived from:
    (5/6) = Miss from Ftr @1 - meaning you rolled anything but a 1
    (1/6) = Hit from Ftr @1 - meaning you rolled a 1
    (33/36) = Miss from AA @1 - meaning you rolled anything but a 1 on either die
    (2/36) = 1 Hit from AA @1 - meaning the die roll was a 2 and a 1 or a 1 and a 2
    (1/36) = 2 Hit from AA @1 - meaning you rolled snake eyes

    (4/6) = Miss from Ftr @2 - meaning you rolled anything but a 1 or 2
    (2/6) = Hit from Ftr @2 - meaning you rolled a 1 or 2

    So in example, a Ftr @1 scoring a hit and AA misses both = 2/6 * 33/36 = 15.28% probability this occurs sequentially.  
    That probability is multiplied by the value of aircraft lost (either 15 or 30) and also by the most probable value a bomber would score for a successful SBR (5.5 per Bomber).  
    Then you just subtract the cost from the benefit and get the actual value (or loss) in a German SBR on London of 2 Bombers versus 1 Ftr.

    Something else to realize is that this is just a probability evaluation of if you should do something.  A positive number indicates a gain, a negative number indicates a loss - obviously you don’t want to do something that is a loss unless there are unmeasurable advantages to gain from it.

    The relevant range of IPC damage for both bombers escaping interceptors is as low as 6 IPC or as high as 16 IPC which you have approximately 6% of accomplishing against a single Ftr @1.  It drops to just over a 5% chance against a single Ftr @2.

    A better expectation, therefore, is to assume +/-1 from 9 IPC if both bombers get through which accounts for just shy of 50% of all probable outcomes.

    Edit: Apologies for the terrible column formatting.



  • Sorry Spendo but that’s pretty illegible.
    Most of the people here understand probability, so you can just skip to the results most of the time.

    I can’t really respond much because of that.
    Just that interceptors rolling at 2 worked great when that was the roll.
    It made the attacker think hard about bombing.  Now it’s just Germany bombing whatever it feels like because there’s no way the Allies can do anything with interceptors that roll at 1.  At 1, interceptors are useless.


  • 2017

    Also, Spendo, strategic bombers cost 12 IPC not 15 IPC.



  • @Alsch - I cannot defend my argument that a Bomber is a benefit of 9 IPC to Germany and costs Germany 7 IPC without providing how I came up with those numbers as they do not correlate to anything people see in the game.

    @Wheat - I have no idea why I was thinking 15 IPC for a bomber, I think that was the old game’s price?  Anyways, without re-running the analysis I believe that drops the German cost down to something in the range of 5 IPC, for a net benefit of 4 IPC to Germany for SBR with Ftr @2



  • @Alsch91:

    Sorry Spendo but that’s pretty illegible.
    Most of the people here understand probability, so you can just skip to the results most of the time.

    I can’t really respond much because of that.
    Just that interceptors rolling at 2 worked great when that was the roll.
    It made the attacker think hard about bombing.  Now it’s just Germany bombing whatever it feels like because there’s no way the Allies can do anything with interceptors that roll at 1.  At 1, interceptors are useless.

    Yeah, what I find is that what with Germany’s tacs, fgts, and strats, the RAF will lose planes if it goes up vs. the Luftwaffe, and it’ll never win like it did IRL (barring luck/jets/radar).



  • @Spendo02:

    @Alsch91:

    Spendo, the fact that a 2-interceptor would make you think twice about sending a bomber against a fighter is exactly the point.
    If I’ve got interceptors then you should have to send escorts.� The way it is now, interceptors are nearly useless in all but the most extreme cases.

    1        IPC Reduction
    1 16.67% 0.17
    2 16.67% 0.33
    3 16.67% 0.50
    4 16.67% 0.67
    5 16.67% 0.83
    6 16.67% 1.00
    IPC Cost to Defender per SBR 5.5

    Event                                   P            LAC   IL     ID     IC     NC  
    Ftr @1 (Miss), AA (Miss Both) 76.39% $0 $0 $11 $8 $8
    Ftr @1 (Miss), AA (1 Hit) 4.63% $15 $1 $6 $0 -$0
    Ftr @1 (Miss), AA (2 Hit) 2.31% $30 $1 $0 $0 -$1
    Ftr @1 (Hit), AA (Miss Both) 15.28% $15 $2 $6 $1 -$1
    Ftr @1 (Hit), AA (1 Hit)        0.93% $30 $0 $0 $0 -$0
    Ftr @1 (Hit), AA (2 Hit)        0.46% $30 $0 $0 $0 -$0
    IPC Cost to Attacker                $4 $9 $5

    P = Probability of Event occurring
    LAC = Value of Aircraft Lost
    IL = P * LAC which when summed to $4 is the cost of the SBR to Germany
    ID = Damage to the Major IC based off the probability of rolling a 1 through 6 (its rounded from 5.5)
    IC = P * ID which when summed to $9 is the cost of the SBR to London
    NC = IC - IL which when summed to $5 and cross footed ( $9-$4 ) is the actual damage the SBR causes net of all probabilities.

    Event                                   P            LAC   IL     ID     IC     NC
    Ftr @2 (Miss), AA (No Hit) 61.11% $0 $0 $11 $7 $7
    Ftr @2 (Miss), AA (1 Hit) 3.70% $15 $1 $6 $0 -$0
    Ftr @2 (Miss), AA (2 Hit) 1.85% $30 $1 $0 $0 -$1
    Ftr @2 (Hit), AA (No Hit) 30.56% $15 $5 $6 $2 -$3
    Ftr @2 (Hit), AA (1 Hit)        1.85% $30 $1 $0 $0 -$1
    Ftr @2 (Hit), AA (2 Hit)        0.93% $30 $0 $0 $0 -$0
    IPC Cost                                                 $7 $9 $2

    P = Probability of Event occurring
    LAC = Value of Aircraft Lost
    IL = P * LAC which when summed to $7 is the cost of the SBR to Germany
    ID = Damage to the Major IC based off the probability of rolling a 1 through 6 (its rounded from 5.5)
    IC = P * ID which when summed to $9 is the cost of the SBR to London
    NC = IC - IL which when summed to $2 and cross footed ( $9 - $7 ) is the actual damage the SBR causes net of all probabilities.

    So the change from interceptors rolling @1 versus rolling @2 is approximately 3 IPC to Germany in a 2 Bombers versus 1 Ftr scenario; an entirely possible scenario on G2.

    Probabilities were derived from:
    (5/6) = Miss from Ftr @1 - meaning you rolled anything but a 1
    (1/6) = Hit from Ftr @1 - meaning you rolled a 1
    (33/36) = Miss from AA @1 - meaning you rolled anything but a 1 on either die
    (2/36) = 1 Hit from AA @1 - meaning the die roll was a 2 and a 1 or a 1 and a 2
    (1/36) = 2 Hit from AA @1 - meaning you rolled snake eyes

    (4/6) = Miss from Ftr @2 - meaning you rolled anything but a 1 or 2
    (2/6) = Hit from Ftr @2 - meaning you rolled a 1 or 2

    So in example, a Ftr @1 scoring a hit and AA misses both = 2/6 * 33/36 = 15.28% probability this occurs sequentially.  
    That probability is multiplied by the value of aircraft lost (either 15 or 30) and also by the most probable value a bomber would score for a successful SBR (5.5 per Bomber).  
    Then you just subtract the cost from the benefit and get the actual value (or loss) in a German SBR on London of 2 Bombers versus 1 Ftr.

    Something else to realize is that this is just a probability evaluation of if you should do something.  A positive number indicates a gain, a negative number indicates a loss - obviously you don’t want to do something that is a loss unless there are unmeasurable advantages to gain from it.

    The relevant range of IPC damage for both bombers escaping interceptors is as low as 6 IPC or as high as 16 IPC which you have approximately 6% of accomplishing against a single Ftr @1.  It drops to just over a 5% chance against a single Ftr @2.

    A better expectation, therefore, is to assume +/-1 from 9 IPC if both bombers get through which accounts for just shy of 50% of all probable outcomes.

    Edit: Apologies for the terrible column formatting.

    On a purely equal playing field, this analysis shows the rules as-are make sense (well done Spendo).

    The trouble is, in the game the playing field is not equal; neither Britain nor Russia can compete with the Luftwaffe early on, and as a result a dedicated SB campaign by the Germans makes Sea Lion a certainty (on G3), and Barbarossa a likely certainty (although the evidence is, as of yet, scant).

    To cite an extreme example of what I’m talking about, a pure air raid by the Japanese on the fighter stack of the Chinese is often, statistically, a poor decision (as in, the expected losses for the attacker exceed those of the defender). Nonetheless, it is done, for the simple reason that the IPCs themselves have less value to Japan than to China.

    The situation is similar with Germany vs. USSR/UK.


  • TripleA

    problem is you can’t do sea lion and J2 DOW. USA flies 5 bombers into uk makes the takedown by germany highly unlikely (~20% odds). So your japan has to wait till round 3 to DOW and that buys uk pac and anzac lots of time.

    USA eventually liberates UK. Russia should have bought some mech/tank round 1 against a naval purchase from germany and round 2 move into position to hold romania and round 3 take 3 territories from germany for +9 on his turn with a big stack in one of the territories holding tight.

    The wonderful thing about usa bomber purchase is that if you don’t do sea lion and just bluffed it… it can always sink whatever naval purchase germany buys (follow up with more bombers land UK and blast away). even if japan does not declare war round 3. you get there in time as long as ruskies give you a spot to land.

    The air from germany has a triple threat, which is why I been seeing Egypt complex drop. People just tired of dealin with it lol.


  • TripleA

    if germany is full on attacking for russia, russia should not have little 1 man armies layin around, the exception is you sending 1 or 2 guys to kill 1 or 2 guys with your air.

    leaving guys for italy to kill is no good that 1. try to fight germans only, because that is who will all in you.



  • @Cow:

    problem is you can’t do sea lion and J2 DOW. USA flies 5 bombers into uk makes the takedown by germany highly unlikely (~20% odds). So your japan has to wait till round 3 to DOW and that buys uk pac and anzac lots of time.

    USA eventually liberates UK. Russia should have bought some mech/tank round 1 against a naval purchase from germany and round 2 move into position to hold romania and round 3 take 3 territories from germany for +9 on his turn with a big stack in one of the territories holding tight.

    The wonderful thing about usa bomber purchase is that if you don’t do sea lion and just bluffed it… it can always sink whatever naval purchase germany buys (follow up with more bombers land UK and blast away). even if japan does not declare war round 3. you get there in time as long as ruskies give you a spot to land.

    The air from germany has a triple threat, which is why I been seeing Egypt complex drop. People just tired of dealin with it lol.

    Yes if shown Sealion, 5 bombers by US is good, although if Germany Sealion’s on G3, that doesn’t guarantee a win in the game, it makes Russia stronger especailly with the NO they have.  Successful Sealion doesn’t equal an Axis win.

    I think the best threat to the Allies is still a turn 2 Russian crush by all Axis, though I believe there are ways to refute this.

    This is why I’m not convinced the game is Axis biased.  Way too early to determine this.  On a personal level, I think (as of right now) the game is slightly Allied advantage.



  • Cow are you going to play me a couple games or what???  I got a couple of TripleA games going now.  We can play by forum.


  • TripleA

    Log on the triple a lobby. suggest a time and a time zone for me to be on. Tell you what, I got saturday with zero plans. I got thursday with zero plans. Friday I am got work and plans… I’ll be home before midnight.

    I stay on hawaiian time so  suggest a time and i’ll sleep or coffee for it.


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 3
  • 11
  • 51
  • 19
  • 23
  • 9
  • 18
  • 15
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

77
Online

14.0k
Users

34.4k
Topics

1.4m
Posts