• Which unit do you think holds the most overall value? (including price, abilities, atk/def, etc.)

    😄 :-? 😞 :x :evil:

  • '17 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    Of course Infantry!! you kidding right? Infantry get you 3 points for 3 and take one hit, while say tanks are 3/3 at 5… so the math says 2 Infantry taking two hits with combined values of 2+4+6 points, while that tank costs 5 takes one hit and has the same point value. The extra movement point cannot compare with the fact that you get a 2/1 on hit points. Also they can be at two places at one time, not with the tank.
    If you mean some other criteria for “value” then let me know…

    Ok i see some of you are scratching your heads on the apparent problem of the tank getting 6 points for 5 IP spent.

    15 Ip spent you buy 3 tanks=18 points combined and takes 3 hits
    vs.
    15 Ip spent you buy 5 Infantry= 15 points combined and takes 5 hits

    So the choice is a gain of 3 points of unit value and trade it for 2 additional hits.


  • By “value” I meant to factor in more than just the unit’s combat values and such. Like in the case of bombers, they can bomb ICs for cash. With battleships, they can take two hits. Destroyers can prevent sub sneak attacks. Tanks can blitz. And remember also to apply any possible techs that can boost your units. So I ask you; with all these factors, which unit do you find to have the most value monetarily as well as strategically?


  • A&A is all about who can buy the most infantry and win by attrition. infantry are definitely the best value. who voted for anything but infantry???


  • Infantry, no doubt


  • Why do so many people think infantry is so good? Sure, they’re cheap fodder, and their importance cannot be understated, but they’re just not good at all for assaulting areas alone, and you probably want to mix in tank/art with them in trannies rather than load 2 inf per trannie.

    If all you do is build infantry then you will never be able to advance. Their attack sucks, they’re not as flexible as planes/tanks. I think it’s a great idea to mix in art/tanks so you actually have the attack power to invade well. Massing infantry gives you good fodder and cheap defense, but if you look at the numbers, their offense really really sucks.

    Unless you’re the king of rolling ones, you’ll find your mass infantry falling flat on their faces against defending infantry or mix of infantry/tank/fighter. I think it’s usually best to start with lots of infantry because they move slowly, then build tanks/fighters to catch up them and do a combined attack, whereas if you keep massing infantry you have to wait another turn for them all to meet before going in, which gives the enemy extra time to build infantry on his end for defense.

    Also if you have an IC in an isolated area, you want to build the most quality units you can afford there because the mobilization limits are usually very hefty (like 2 or 3 units). While building infantry is obviously the cheapest and best defense, having 3 tanks there is better than 3 infantry if you can afford either one. Infantry is the best when your deployment limits are higher than the number of infantry you can build, but if you have spare cash it’s better to go for quality attacking/defending units, since 3 infantry still take the same number of hits as 3 tanks.

    I think the most versatile unit is the fighter. Yeah, it’s fairly expensive, but it has great mobility, ability to attack sea and land, has best defensive value, and isn’t forced to move into a country just invaded (can’t even land there) which is usually weak after you get it. They don’t need transports to move around, and are comfortable with sinking large navies from afar and then helping you take land.

    I wouldn’t recommend massing fighters purely, but sometimes they’re just the best thing you can build for nations like Germany/Japan who need to deal with navies and land. After you see a good germany/japan use their fighters to great effect you’ll see the use of fighters.


  • I had to vote Subs. I’m aware that in all honesty they don’t have the flexibility and utility of nearly all other comparable units.

    -However-

    I can’t get over the satisfaction (Call it -sick- satisfaction, if you will) that is invoked upon a solid pack of subs rolling well, and wiping the floor of an attacking Navy. Particularly when the casualties invoked turned out to be some of the carriers your opponent was planning on landing his fighters on, only to have the Subs submerge, leaving little fighter monuments at the bottom of the ocean.


  • Subs would be good, except one destroyer in the opposing navy removes all their bonuses, both submerging and sneak attacks ; / No running from those fighters……

  • '17 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    we were asked to decide which “ONE” unit is of the most value. By your own admission you buy mostly Infantry like the rest of us, so the result is……drum roll… Infantry become the best value. If you mostly buy any other unit in huge quantities over time you lose the game everytime. That is not to say other units dont play a part in winning, but i dont really see why this is a question to ponder it should be self evident by experience.


  • Maybe you should pose the question this way: Which unit is your favorite? INF are the best value, and the backbone of any land army, but c’mom, boorrinng. We can all agree the war is won on land, and INF play the major role in land combat, but what’s you favorite unit?Certainly not INF. They’re not spectacular in any way (attack at one?), and you can’t get too attached to them because they have such a high casualty rate :lol:. Didn’t you ever have that one Battleship you had since the beginning of the game, and had survived so many battles that you actually named it? Those are the kinds of units that stick with you–not INF. For my vote, I say fighters. They are very mobile, have good attack and defense values, and always seem to come out smelling like roses. Plus, they’re two IPC’s cheaper now, and can be utilized on a sea-based platform: Carriers (I still think that’s way cool). Very versatile–just like yours truly :D.


  • If all you do is build infantry then you will never be able to advance. Their attack sucks, they’re not as flexible as planes/tanks.

    taking a AA batttle simulator to determine the following numbers, here is what I got:

    20 inf attacking at 1’s vs. 15 rtl attacking at 2’s => inf win only 35% of the time (i know in the game one side has to be on defense but for this experiment all i want is to compare attack strengths facotring in unit cost)

    20 inf attacking at 1’s vs. 12 arm attacking at 3’s => inf win only 40% of the time

    20 inf attacking at 1’s vs. 6 ftr attacking at 3’s => inf win only >99% of the time

    infantry don’t have as good an attack strength as art or arm, but they have much (much much much much much much) better attack strength than planes. i invite anyone who still thinks infantry aren’t the best unit to run similar numbers for both types of units on defense against each other. can anyone tell me what those numbers are? anyone still say infantry aren’t the best?


  • What’re you talking about Imperious? You build mainly infantry for UK, US, and Japan? Germany and Russia probably build mostly infantry (since Germany already has armor/planes, and Russia is playing defense).

    With Japan you’re mostly going navy and tanks on the ICs on land. With UK you’re not just massing infantry in the transports, you mix it equally with tanks/art and you’re also building a navy. I probably build more IPC worth of stuff other than infantry for every country except Germany and Russia.

    If you build large quantities of infantry as UK/US/Japan you’re destined to lose since you have low attack power in the sea and on land. Since those countries use transports already you’re spending more on tanks/art since transports carry one of each and one tank/art has more value than one inf.


  • Oh Whatever,

    You can get numbers to say anything, and you’re still only using # of units with equal IPC values. I would never attack 20 INF with 6 FTR’s. You’re going to need at least half that in INF (10 would probably do it), along with at least five ARM, and maybe some FTR’s and BMR’s. You still might win, and would force me to retreat with my higher value units intact, but I’d bet I’ll take more of your INF than you would of mine.

  • '17 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    The question:

    "Which unit do you think holds the most overall value? (including price, abilities, atk/def, etc.) "

    The answer:

    Infantry

    If the question is something else like which you like the best? or what has the best offensive bang for the buck Id say Tanks easily.

    20 inf attacking at 1’s vs. 15 rtl attacking at 2’s => inf win only 35% of the time (i know in the game one side has to be on defense but for this experiment all i want is to compare attack strengths facotring in unit cost)

    20 inf attacking at 1’s vs. 12 arm attacking at 3’s => inf win only 40% of the time

    Duke… what were the results each round? who had what at the end of each round and how many rounds did the affair last?

    Also, when you say Infantry v. Artillery wins 35% clip so if you reverse and say artillery attacks infantry then what are the numbers and same for equal IPC in tanks vs infantry… say 30 IP worth that would be informative for the rest.

  • '17 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    Also look at the ratio of units you buy that are infantry vs. the ratio that comprise of anything else. I have never bought more transports than infantry as japan and i have never bought more tanks than infantry as Germany. Nobody debates that these other units have their utility, but next time you play total each type of unit you buy as any player and i know you know the answer is allways INFANTRY.

    Dont be angry In just stating what you allready know. I cant believe this can be a debatable topic. WOW! too funny :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


  • How do you think I feel? I just started this topic, hoping it would bring people to put up good points about the pros/cons of various units. I did get that. But what I also got is a huge friggin’ debate about the economic value of infantry vs. that of everything else. I’m just glad that the issue of strategic value came into the picture SOMEWHERE… :oops: :roll:

  • '17 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    Im glad i helped get this “problem” out in the open as well. I didnt think it was that hard to figure out. Alas, we have to move at the speed of the slowest ship sometimes that way we protect the interests of the group. The math has to stand on its own on this one… i dont see why its being questioned. This game has alot of problems that arent even covered with any historical accuracy and places it clearly into the “introductory” level of wargaming. The “infantry push mechanic” is an ugly head in this game with alot of static battlefield conditions. to correct this we need the following:

    1)better retreat rules (allowing defenders to retreat, etc.)
    2) manpower limitations (you cant just buy more crap “boring” units)
    3) Combined arms rules for using additional types of units COMBINED with infantry


  • …but I appreciate all the input regardless. And on that note, I can’t just watch all this go on, and not even vote. So I went for fighters. Aside from the fact that they’re the perfect combination of defense and mobility, their good defense is made outstanding by a tech called jet power. I’ve always loved jet power, even since the original version, for this very reason. And who can complain about having 2 or 3 full carriers in a decent sized fleet, with jet power? Every round, that would equal 4 to 6 rolls at 5 or less, making your assailants drop like flies, while BBs take hits for you. Jet power also makes a navy awesome too. 😎


  • Do you honestly build more infantry than any other unit as Japan, US, and UK? The most “valuable” unit is different for each country. I’d definitely vote for infantry as Germany/Russia for most valuable, but really since you’re building tank/art at a 1:1 ratio for the transports for other nations, no, infantry is definitely not the most valuable for those nations. You just don’t infantry push with mass infantry on transports, it doesn’t work. You never build more infantry than other stuff as one of the island nations unless for some reason you’re being assaulted on the your capital, which is rare.

  • '17 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    Ok so your actually saying that when your Japan USA or UK your buying more of any other unit besides infantry? your buying more Tanks than infantry? more fighters than infantry? more transports than infantry? more battleships than infantry? more subs than infantry? please tell us how its possible to win this way… I need to know state the nation your playing what the basic build structure is …etc. I have never seen anything like this before. Does this work for 2nd edition too? aa europe? aa Pacific? or just revised?


  • No, I agree with ImpLeader on this one; you should always buy more INF than any other unit, especially as Russia and Germany, otherwise you will die, quickly. You want to vary the types of units you buy in order to maintain a good balance, but there should be more INF on the mobilization box on every turn than any other unit. I still think they’re an uber-boring unit though :P.


  • In terms of IPCs, you will be buildling other units more than infantry as the naval nations. Usually as stuff like UK/Japan you’re busting out like 1 inf per 1 tank, and quite obviously the tank costs you more, so I would think that overall you’re spending more on tanks since you have to consider the IPC cost. Do you honestly load up transports with 2 x infantry? Thought not.

    Take into the account the actual cost of the unit, not just the numbers you purchased. Battleships cost 8 infantry, so you can’t just say oh I’m buying 3 infantry compared to one battleship therefore infantry is better than battleship in value. You have to factor in IPC cost.

    I’ve never disagreed with infantry as the most valuable buy for Germany/Russia, but I heavily disagree with the other 3 nations who pour much more IPCs into naval units and supplements to go into transports. You can’t just count the number of infantry, you have to count their cost. In numbers they aren’t built more than other units as the naval nations because you’re building 1:1 ratio with tanks. And if you look at the costs entailed, they’re skewed in favor of non-infantry units as naval nations.

    Infantry are really great for advancing slowly since they’re able to hold the territories they captured with cheap cost, and really necessary for defense for Germany/Russia, but I simply observe that more IPCs go into noninfantry as the other three nations because of the transport limits and heavy naval buildup costs.

  • '17 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    I dont think thats correct… and i think you have somewhat changed the “form” of our debate. Again we are looking at the single unit that is of most value based on value and cost per unit. If in terms of quantity of each unit purchased… Infantry has the largest number of units purchased in practical play, then it has the most value and thats proven by your own buys.
    But now your going on this total investment of money angle and again in my experience i dont allways just buy 2 tanks because they are more effecient on a transport than 2 infantry. I have to look at my budget plus the factors of tempo, positional, and material considerations. But the most common feature of the lowest common denomination when all things are equal say you have to buy more infantry on the board. Its possible to have invested more in some other unit, but if you count each unit you built in the game including the destroyed units… infantry will have the highest count every time ( unless you lost the game).


  • Yeah, my simple point is that you can’t just count the number of infantry; you have to factor in the cost. It’s about cost. You don’t say rulers are more valuable than a house even though you probably can and have bought more rulers than houses. It’s like saying you value infantry more if you spend 6 IPCs on 2 of them rather than 24 on one battleship.


  • ok i know that the price dropped on fighters, but i think that tanks still have the best value. they atack and defend at three, common. fighters are very nice with jet power however.
    dp nightmare out

Suggested Topics

  • 9
  • 30
  • 4
  • 2
  • 33
  • 48
  • 2
  • 2
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

76
Online

15.1k
Users

35.9k
Topics

1.5m
Posts