Yeah, I think it might be the league that you’re hearing about
Here are the current rankings, so you can take a look -
I think it is possible, however tedious, to count the number of meaningful choices that players have in any given game, and to guess at one’s enjoyment threshold in terms of these.
It is utterly impossible to count the number of meaningful choices that players have in any given game because each “meaningful choice” is a product of the other “meaningful choices” that were made previously. Furthermore, each “meaningful choice” is then subject to all of the possible dice outcomes, and thus multiplied by all of those possibilities and then multiplied by all of the “meaningful choices” offered by the various non-combat possibilities as they are determined by the dice outcomes. As you can see we get into these massive factorial situations where we are multiplying massive exponentials by even more massive exponentials until what is essentially infinity.
To make a comparison: In chess there are only 20 possible moves to make on the first turn. (16 pawn moves and 4 knight moves) The opponent is faced with the same. So the possible combinations for the opening 2 moves (1 each) in chess is 400. None of which are absolutely stupid. there are 8,902 possible moves by 2 each and by move 7 there are almost eleven MILLION possible positions. That’s without dice, with only 2 players, with a much much much more limited scope for unit movement, no scope for adding units and far far fewer spaces.
Now you asked about the “meaningful choices”. Some work has been done in this regard in chess and it seems that in the average game of about 30 moves (moving a single piece at at time. There are over 4.5 MILLION games outcomes in smart competitive situations. Now, multiply that by the factor of dice, multiple movement of units, game spaces, purchases and the fact that most AA games will see over 100 times that 60 units move factor and you have an utterly infinite combination of outcomes.
Which is part of the reason it is so much more entertaining than chess.
…or maybe just because we get to play with little tanks and planes.
Must you send a lone sub against a huge fleet that is blocking the way that is preventing you from bringing a carrier into position (say during NCM) to pick up planes that could potentially survive and need a landing space from some other battle, even though you “know” that you cannot win this battle in any event and that the planes will end up ditching?
Yes in low luck, and yes without. The only hitch here is that you MUST send the sub to make this attack. You cannot win a battle you do not attempt to fight.
I do see what you are saying, that in low luck, there are no “hits and misses” and therefore, since the attack could never be won without immense luck, that it doesn’t meet the summary judgment rule (all attacker hits and all defender misses). But as you also mention, low luck is a tacked-on rule, so we just go back to what it says in the main rulebook; if there is any chance no matter how slight of you winning, you can bring the fighters as long as you make some attempt with at least 1 unit to clear the crucial zone. The sub still meets the test of the rule even though low luck makes its odds go from 1% to 0%.
What if we attack the blocking fleet with a (damaged?) aircraft carrier, alone, which has no combat rating and therefore, can never “inevitably” hit? Maybe this is an even gameyer test of this rule (though we may find some other rule that states that you have to bring at least 1 attacker with attack value into a combat…)
You must be able to win, if you play low luck this becomes a bit of a strange situation indeed.
Low-Luck is a house rule ( like many others ) so if you dont specify anything for this situation it becomes a mather of debate.
Since there should be a non 0 chance, and there is no way a sub will win in low luck you can easy calculate that result, your carrier can never move there.
But if you are attacking with air against some defenders you can also garantee dat your fighters will never survive ( so cannot kill a stack of transports )
Personaly even with low luck i would ignore the low-luck rules during combat moves but you could agrue that since you make use of them during combat-moves you also have to use them if they are not in your favor. So i guess this is something to clarify in advance before starting a game, just like the limitations on where to place your bids.
Does this work? and it is worth the spending of a minor, carrier and transport?
yes, it might work somehow.
And No, it is miles away from being worth those 35 IPCs. Against a good Allies player that move brings Axis to the certain road of defeat.
Yes but i forgot about that so you would keep enough to rebuild it or enough to build 3 fighters which gives you two hits out of three.
If you rebuilt t what would you build?
3 figh 50 ipc
3 arm 38 ipc
Shouldn’t rebuild it
1 arm, 2 fig 26 ipc
11 def value so nearly two hits