To make such test I recommend using LL, even if most of you prefer ADS, with LL it means playing less games to determine if this is a better strat than other options.
The reason I think its inferior, is because we haven’t seen much of it.
If you are right, then AAR gameplay will change radically after other players also discover and use the SBR strat. FYI, SBR is not much used by allies (or axis) in most games, bombers are usually not bought…
SBR is used sometimes by bombers you start with, not often I see them bought by the top players.
Low Luck is an inferior testing tool, especially in terms of the way it handles SBR’s.
LL SBR’s bear no resemblance to reality. Indeed LL SBR is one of the BIGGEST flaws with LL.
In TripleA (LL setting) SBR is handled like this, if you have 1 bmr, then AA gun rolls @1, if AA gun misses then the bmr rolls 1 die, this means in the long run will average around 3,5, but it could be 1 ipc damage, or 6 ipc damage.
If you have 5 bmrs doing SBR, AA gun rolls 1D@5, so 5 or less is a good chance to shoot down a bmr, and lets assume the AA gun rolled 5 or less, then the 4 remaining bmrs roll 4 dice, which could mean 46=24 ipc, or 41=1 ipc.
IF you have 6 bmrs doing SBR, or attacking any territory with AA gun then one bmr is lost automatically.
With 7 bmrs, one bmr is lost and AA gun shoots @1, 11 bmrs, 1 bmr is lost to AA gun, AA gun rolls @5 or less, so if you got lucky to escape AA gun with 11 bmrs, you loose only 1 bmr, rolls for 10 bmrs, and can do 60 ipc damage…
I think that until someone crunches the numbers for 3 turns out for the probabilites then one can tell if this is luck strategy or actually viable.
What do you want calculated out to 3 turns?
If you want the probability for all possible #'s of bomber losses versus the average damage you’d do when you bomb with exactly 6 bombers every turn for 3 consecutive turns…that would be easy to do, but probably not very relevant. For instance, in a round where you lose 3 bombers chances are you won’t be bombing with 6 bombers on your next round.
If you want the same probabilities for 3 consecutive turns when you start the 1st turn with 6 bombers (3 each Germany and Japan) and don’t buy any bombers after that…then that would be a little tougher and more time-consuming. The same could also be done in a state where you buy 1 bomber any time one of the Axis drops below 3 bombers, though that would be even more time-consuming.
I could tell you right now that if you considered all outcomes (meaning anywhere from 0 to 6 aa hits in a round), without capping SBR damage, and bombing with 6 bombers every turn for 3 turns… your average net gain totalled over the 3 rounds would be 7.5 IPCs, with an average loss of 3 bombers (45 IPC-worth) and 52.5 IPCs of bombing damage done (17.5 per round). However, it seems that we’ve come to an agreement to exclude at least outcomes involving 4 to 6 aa hits in a single round as being too uncommon to consider, which makes things a bit more cumbersome.
And, putting some more thought into the whole strategy, there seems to be more luck that I hadn’t thought of…where (assuming KGF), if Germany takes heavier bomber losses than Japan you will probably be in a worse position than if the opposite is true, since Japan can afford to replace their bombers more than Germany. But if Germany takes light losses and Japan takes heavy losses you could have a more easily sustained bombing campaign. Then again Germany’s IC is closer to Russia than Japan’s so maybe I’m just spewing garbage.
So…after much wasted time. This list shows exact probabilities for losing a certain number of bombers after 3 consecutive rounds bombing with exactly 6 bombers per round, as well as the average amount of SBR damage done, IPC loss worth of bombers, and the net gain for the Axis.
Bomber Losses Probability Average Damage Done IPC Loss in Bombers Net IPC Gain
0 3.76% 63 0 63
1 13.52% 59.5 15 44.5
2 22.99% 56 30 26
3 24.52% 52.5 45 7.5
4 18.39% 49 60 -11
5 10.30% 45.5 75 -29.5
6 4.46% 42 90 -48
7 1.53% 38.5 105 -66.5
This includes all possibilities for AA losses in a single round. All outcomes of 8 bomber losses or more were below 1% probability (about .5% cumulative) so I left them out. Anyway, I still don’t think it’s incredibly relevant since I’m not sure how realistic it is to bomb with exactly 6 bombers every round. Whatever, it does show that in a situation like that you will have a negative net outcome just over 1/3rd of the time.
P.S. these numbers are once again without capping SBR damage
Assuming all things equal then 3 rounds of SBRing with 6 bombers without replacement would result in:
(6 Bombers)(1/6 Chance of Loss to AA Fire)(6!/6 average damage)(# of Surviving Bombers) + (5 Bombers)(1/6 Chance of Loss to AA Fire)(6!/6 average damage)(# of Surviving Bombers) + (4+5/6 Bombers)(1/6 Chance of Loss to AA Fire)(6!/6 average damage)(# of Surviving Bombers)
Therefore:
Round 1: 5 Bombers * 3.5 IPC = 17.5 IPC Damage done, (1 Bomber lost)
Round 2: 4.1667 Bombers Surviving * 3.5 IPC = 14.58 IPC Damage Done, (1.833 bombers lost)
Round 3: 3.6944 Bombers Surviving * 3.5 IPC = 12.93 IPC Damage Done, (2.305 bombers lost)
Damage Done to Russia = 45.01 IPC in 3 Rounds
IPC lost in attacking equipment = 34.575 IPC in 3 Rounds (note this cost is divided between the two axis powers.)
Now, that said, realistically speaking, you could not run the numbers like that because the data of subsequent sets is dependant on the results of previous tests.
I played two test games this week. The first was going to be an obvious Axis victory after round for so we decided to run it again. Now while my Allied opponent isn’t the best Allied player even after Germany had a horrid start in the first game it was decided very early. In the second things were going so well I decided to spread the Joy to England as well since by the time this is doable there income is already not so hot. I would say that barring some absolutely horrible dice this is a solid strategy for the Axis.
Still surprise me most everytime Japan buys 2 IC´s R1
Pineapple pizza is a very surprising first round purchase. ~ZP
Well i have done (usually do) a lot of “different” first round purchases.
Im seeing a lot of new people here so you prob don´t know who i am or if im shit or not :wink:
But things that do work:
4 figs G1.
alt, 3 figs ,1 bmb with bids.
or 2 figs , 1 bmb, 1 arm.
depends a little bit.
Also i have succesfully deployed the IC in WEU.
Rationale is if your doing the “hold the line” tactics with Germany, while coming in with the save with japan.
Mixes very well with the AF strat, and rationale is the same. When Allied Fleet build up is to much to handle, retreat figs from sea, and let the carriers die.
And it gives you a huge striking distance for the navy,
Allthought a IC in WEU should be used in combination with a bif for a Sub in SZ7? (with the other sub in atlantic)
For a strike on uk fleet on g1.
Also:
IC on Australia on UK1, combined either with a US build of warships on USA1, or a IC in sinkiang.
This works best with a 6 inf stack in bury and 2 arms of to Yakut, and a UK strike on FIC on UK1.
@Nix:
Also:
IC on Australia on UK1, combined either with a US build of warships on USA1, or a IC in sinkiang.
This works best with a 6 inf stack in bury and 2 arms of to Yakut, and a UK strike on FIC on UK1.
Australia plus z55 is not surprising to me. Australia plus IC sin but not z55 fleet is pretty surprising
Has anyone tried all Art for R1?
I was thinking the other day that might be interesting to see played.
I was thinking the other day that might be interesting to see played.
personally i wouldn´t see the point. don´t like arts…
Whats wrong with art?
I always, ALWAYS wanted to try a 6 Artillery build for Russia.
I will test it with you if u want
My style is more ‘tight’ than ‘wild’, but I’ve done:
R1: 1art 4tnk (all in Moscow and Caucasus empty, if Ukraine doesn’t fall to keep Caucasus defensible)
G1: 4inf 7art, also 8inf 4art and the usual 9inf 2art 1tnk
Guess more frequent ‘reactive’ buys don’t count, like:
UK1: 5inf 3tnk (when a large landing threatens)
UK1: 3ftr +US1: 2bmb 4inf (when Germans fleet comes out)
J1: 2 factories (when scattered UK ships are hard to beat fast)
