@Romulus:

Maybe I have an idea.

You said that you are attacking a territories defended by 100 infantries with a defensive punch of 200, that are about 33 hits for the attacker.

When your forces of infantries and artilleries loses 33 units you are losing 66 in terms of attack punch.
With your forces of infantries and tanks losing 33 units means losing only 33 in terms of attack punch.
So in the second round first formation (infantries and artilleries, F1) have a punch of 134 while the second formation (infantries and tanks, F2) have a punch of 167.

So first formation losses in attack strenght respect to the second is double.

In the second round formation F1 will inflict 22 hits on the defender while the formation F2 will inflict 27-28 hits to the defender.
The defender will inflict 22 hits.

So in round three the situation is:

F1 45 art vs 45 inf
F2 45 tank vs 40 inf

I think that formation F2 has a greater chance to win the battle.

yes thats right there only equal in teh first round of combat. ayou have to recalculate after each round.

@Romulus:

Cyan, this necessity to recalculate the odds is the things that you called skew?

yes. lets say I lose 25 in each battle. thats 25 inf per side. (50 art or 50 tanks deonding on which group). the artillery now only have a punch of 150 while the tanks have a punch of 175. thats 4 more hits. and then it continues to cascade for each additional round. the reason skew works is because the artilery group loses  punch faster.( equaling less attacker hits which  in turn equals more defender hits which then means even less attacker hits next round and so on and so on.)

@Brain:

@allboxcars:

@Guerrilla:

Thanks it’s fixed… C’mon, don’t tell me that doesn’t look cool…

totally amazing.

Now he just needs to hire some locals to dress up as orcs so he can smite them with a foam sword while yelling in Elvish.

that post wasn’t in the topic which made this entire topic make no sense.

why are only half the posts still alive in this topic? also he needs a moat.

wow complete and utter fail. I think we need more russian battleships. I tend to run more battleships than infantry for russia when i play. they don’t include enough in my own humble opinon

@Fleetwood:

Yes.

you’re on. email is ak_zorro_47@yahoo.com to do PBEM. I’ll be bidding 10 so please bid more than that all you need is my email to start PBEM on triplea, right?
edit: llink http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=16888.new#new

@Brain:

Yeah, we can’t talk about the US economy, but we can talk about the Haiti economy. What’s up with that?

stop failing at trolling please

@Fleetwood:

I bid about the same way, only I’m hesitant to go under 8. If I really wanted Allies, I might bid 10 but 9 is the usual cutoff.

@cyan:

I bid 7 when i want axis, 9 when i want allies, and 8 if i don’t care.  I would like to try a 10 bid with a German fighter though. would be really interesting to have an extra 5 fighters by round 2.(4 fighters for Germany’s 40 IPC start). I usually put my bid in the Ukraine of Africa just depends on my mood.  A sub/transport bid would be interesting though.

If you’d like to try the fighter bid and the 4 fighter G1, I’d play you. I’ve never tried it or played against that sort of strategy.

sure, do you have triple a?

@ABWorsham:

@allboxcars:

Botswana Democratic Party.
They were holding a convention at the time.

Watch out dude, you are getting political!

I hope that was sarcasm.

I bid 7 when i want axis, 9 when i want allies, and 8 if i don’t care.  I would like to try a 10 bid with a German fighter though. would be really interesting to have an extra 5 fighters by round 2.(4 fighters for Germany’s 40 IPC start). I usually put my bid in the Ukraine of Africa just depends on my mood.  A sub/transport bid would be interesting though.

@Historybuff:

Another Panzer divison WITH A GOOD SUPPLY LINE!!  Thats what killed Rommel was lack of supplies.

that’s why I voted for the aquila; an CV would had helped keep the supply line alive and develop air superiority in the sea and on the coast.

@Kiyoshi:

I thought that it was already stated on an earlier forum that Canada was going to be receiving income, thereby making them a power.  They already have their own flag/symbol in AAP40.

i can think of 100 arguments against a canadian power. would there be any benefit at all to adding it? Other than making the UK already more divided and weak.