Try reading some of wodan46’s posts. ;)
Posts made by Unknown Soldier
-
RE: Weird, but effective
-
RE: New odds calc for AAAE
I tried your calc. with 4 subs vs 1 CV with 2 figs. It should show the same results as 4 subs vs 1 CV, but it did not. Defending figs. should not be able to hit the attacking subs or be taken as hits.
It works fine.
The results are not the same because the attacker can only hope for a “draw” in the case when fighters are present. Since the subs can only hit the CV, the battle will end once this happens because they can’t hit the fighters (and vice-versa). So you end up with forces remaining on both sides (a draw) a high % of the time, whereas the attacker wins a high % of the time (no defenders left) when the fighters aren’t present.
Run the battles again, you’ll see that the chance of victory for the subs in the case where fighters are not present is the same as the chance to draw in the case where they are. So the results are the same, its just categorized as a draw in one case.
-
RE: Can u use allies transport to bridge your men in the same turn?
Yeah, tin snips is right.
It would be really nice for Italy though if you cold use that German transport in the Med this way.
-
RE: Japan First Move and US Reply
You didn’t reference that part of my statement in conjunction with your link to wiki.
Well, if you read the original quote I took from your post you’ll see that I did. I should have taken out the part about the probability of BB hitting twice, though, as it was irrelevant to the point I was making. Sorry about the confusion.
As for your personal bad karma, don’t look at me bud. I have one person I give bad karma to and that’s it. You gotta be the world’s biggest jack-ere, donkey to get me riled up to the point you get BK from me.
My apologies then.
-
RE: Japan First Move and US Reply
My statement is statistically correct.
No, it absolutely is not. Even though you’re probably going to give me -karma again for pointing out your error, I will anyway.
The odds of getting two hits with two dice when your target number is 4 or less is .67 * .67 which is approximately 45%
No argument, this is obv true.
What your link refers too is a gambler saying that BECAUSE he missed in round 1, he WILL hit in round 2.
Right. And this is what you said:
Odds are, if you missed in R1, you’ll get two hits in R2
So how does the link not apply? You’re suggesting that if you get “bad” luck in R1 (no hits), you will have “good” luck in R2 (2 hits) to balance things out. This is the gambler’s fallacy: odds don’t “even out” on future rounds because you got a bad result. Probabilities don’t work that way, because the dice have no memory of what happened. The odds of hitting with both fighters in R2 is exactly the same as they were in R1.
What I am saying is that the odds of getting two hits in a row is 45%
OK, but that doesn’t matter. The first hit already happened. Its in the past, so it’s not a probability event anymore, it either happened or it didn’t. Given that the BB hit in R1, the odds of it hitting again at the start of R2 are 67% (just like they were at the start of R1), not 45%.
Statistics are statistics.
Yes, yes they are. But we’re discussing probability here, not statistics.
-
RE: Japan First Move and US Reply
That’s why moving 4 Russian Infantry to India on R2, is a good idea. Toss in the Russian Tank and it becomes even better.
Even if you can beat that kind of force, Britain can recapture India on B2 with 3 Infantry, an Artillery, and potentially its entire starting Air Force in UK, if need be.
Wow, that’s quite a burden on the Soviets, don’t you think? 4 inf lost, plus their only decent starting attack piece, AND you’re gonna land UK air in Soviet territory, denying them another 5 IPCs and letting the German Baltic fleet survive? As Germany, I be salivating at the thought…
And all this does what, exactly? Prevents India from falling for a turn? Maybe 2? Meanwhile, on the Eastern front, Caucasus/Moscow falls a few turns earlier as compensation. Good trade for the Axis I’d say.
Or they can simply retreat from India on B1, then capture it with 2 Artillery, 6 Infantry, and the same potential air support, except this time the Japanese forces have no air support of their own, meaning that you wipe out the majority of the Japanese Infantry.
How does the UK get 6 inf, 2 art to attack India on their second turn? Are you moving Aussies on the tp into sz39? Because that won’t work, they’ll be dead on J2 when the Japs sink the tp with fighters. They have a cv in sz37, remember.
-
RE: Japan First Move and US Reply
If the US built anything resembling a fleet, this will be quite hard on Japan assuming they dont pile their who fleet there (which in turns means no attack on India, a delayed or no attack on Australia and less moving inland into China.
Well, I don’t see how sending your fleet to the Carolines prevents an attack on India. With my J1 open I’ll have 6-7 ground units and 4-5 fighters ready to attack regardless of what my fleet is doing. And if I have to delay an attack on Australia, so be it. It’s not a priority as long as Germany/Italy took Egypt (which they should have by now).
The fact is, if the US wants to fight you in the Pacific, then they can. You’re not going to be able to expand as quickly as you would otherwise, and there’s nothing you can do about it. Whether or not you attack sz56 isn’t going to have a major impact if the US decides to take it to Japan.
-
RE: Japan First Move and US Reply
Odds are, if you missed in R1, you’ll get two hits in R2 and the defender will miss.
.67*.67=45% chance he scores two hits in a row.
I hope this is a joke.
If not, you might want to have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler’s_fallacy
-
RE: DJKGKJ
Sure. I can actually think of only one way that a BB is better than a DD and CA, and that is the “free hit”. The BB can take a hit each turn and no unit is lost, with the DD/CA combo one is lost to a hit. That is the only advantage of a sinlge BB that I can think of (thought of that after I posted).
lol, is that all?
That is a huge advantage. Think about it.
Anytime you’re in combat against a fleet with one or more BBs, you first have to score enough hits to overcome the free soaks before you even inflict a single casualty. Everytime the BB soaks up a hit, it saves its owner the cost of replacing the naval unit that would otherwise have been killed. And naval units are expensive.
Sure, if the BB is sunk won’t have saved you anything, but… this shouldn’t happen in the first place. In engagments where you have overwhelming force (smart play, in other words), you’ll save a bundle not having to replace those DDs and CAs.
To claim that a DD + CA is always better than a BB is ridiculous. You could almost claim the opposite, imo.
-
RE: DJKGKJ
There is absolutely no reason to buy a BB in AA50. DD/CA is better than 1 BB in every way.
uh… false?
You assert this as though it is self-evident, with no explanation. I’d love to hear your reasoning.
-
RE: Bombarding territory that has a fleet?
Can the attacker split his attacking Navy to accomplish both the naval battle and the offshore fire for landing troops
The rulebook clearly states that this is not possible, so no.
-
RE: Japan First Move and US Reply
the DD in Hawaii prevents a US Turn 1 capture of the Carolines which gives the Brits their $5 bonus
The Brits will never get this bonus, because Japan moves before them. So this moves seems rather dubious to me. In any case, the DD could go to Caroline Islands sz, along with the carriers if you feel it necessary to prevent this. This would also put fighters in range of both Australia and sz56 on J2.
-
RE: Japan Blitz, Is it to easy?
I was looking at the battle map for a bit the other day and I think that a Japan turn 2 taking India and turn 3 Persia would put huge amouts of pressure on russia by turn 4.
Yes, I was thinking about making a post on this very subject. Looks like you beat me to it. :lol:
I think Japan’s no.1 priority should be pushing hard into India and the Middle East as quickly as possible. Japan nedds to mount some kind of threat on the Soviets, just as in previous editions of A&A, except now the quickest way to do this is via India -> Persia -> Caucasus rather than pushing through the Soviet Far East territories to threaten Moscow directly.
If Japan takes Burma, East Indies, and Borneo J1 they can have 6-7 ground units plus 4-5 fighters ready to pound India on J2. Now, if Germany attacked Egypt (with the bomber!) on G1 as they should have, the Brits will be left with only 5 inf, 1 art, 1 aa in the Middle East - India region (possibly a fighter if Egypt went bad). Even if they put everything in Persia on UK1, Japan should have enough to hold India vs. any counter-attack. That allows them to build an IC in India on J3, meaning tanks will be threatening Caucasus as early as J4. Now, combine this with an IC in Burma on J2 and bombers from Japan, and the Soviets really have something to worry about!
Additionally, Japan can help Italy out in Africa if need be, which is always nice.
-
RE: Japan First Move and US Reply
2 fighters + 1 DD –> 1 BB is too dicey IMO. It really sucks when you miss on the first round.
Also, I’m not sure its strategically sound to sac your only DD on J1. If you keep it around, US sub purchases look much less attractive.
I’d go with all 4 fighters vs. the BB. You have ~85% chance to lose 1 or less fighters. Yeah, you leave the TP and DD in sz56 alone, but I don’t think it’s as critical as taking out the BB.
-
RE: Art Deco map
You should make the boards and sell them dude. Seriously. I would buy one.
+1
-
RE: Small ICs
This makes building ICs in low cost territories more viable, though still less efficient. It also means you can’t just start plonking 1 Battleship a turn out of Madagascar.
I like this idea, but your implementation bit clunky I think. Considering the level of abstraction in A&A, I’m not sure it’s necessary (or desirable) to have multiple different types of ICs.
You might like the idea I have proposed in this thread though:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=13612.0
The motivation behind it is much the same as yours.
-
RE: An extension of the 'limited IC' idea
for the system that you have made, i think that the cost of i.c. would have to be very low,
Yeah, I agree. After thinking about this some more, 10 IPCs for a factory is probably still too high.
Thanks for the feedback, I think I’ll try re-costing them at 5.
-
RE: Is this game balanced well?
Its too early to tell how well balanced it is.
But its well worth the money regardless IMO, best A&A evaaar.
-
RE: On the subject of the Russian Sub
Correct me if I’m wrong: Subs can’t attack each other, because a sub can dive instead of rolling a dice, and both attacking and defending sub has first strike? So the definding sub could dive instead of rolling defending dice?
You are correct sir.
-
RE: Soviet Union first buy
is there any reason why Russia can’t hit large German groups with their Tank stack, then retreating them after both Germany and Russia have lost their Infantry buffer?
This is known as a ‘strafe’ attack, and has been a common tactic since Classic.
And yes, it is quite effective. ;)