I tried doing the math by hand but I’m very bad with statistics, can someone who is good with statistics proof this strategy? Say you have even odds in a fight your thinking of taking, you win ~50% and you lose ~same IPC overall as opponent. Should you take the fight because attacker can choose to stay or flea vs defense doesn’t? If there are 2 scenarios A) the dice of first round go in your favor or B) the dice go against you and you now have sub 50% and bad IPC then couldn’t you just retreat if B happens and push if A happens? The computer calculating expected losses is doing so under the impression that you stay regardless of outcome so it’s the sum of all negative outcomes + sum of all positives. But if you leave when it goes against you you reduce the sum of negative outcomes partially while I believe reducing the sum of all positive outcomes by less. So you can achieve positive trades from equal fights by having the ability to choose if your going for their full stack or not.
Amphibious assault - what if no attacking land units survive
-
Hello, we are playing A&A 1942 2nd edition for the first time. So we are utter noobs. We did our best reading and analysing the rule book though, but still… :-)
During our game, Germany did an amphibious assault and attacked London. All attacking German land units that entered London from a transport ship got shot, but Germany won the assault (a lot of attacking planes destroyed all defending troops). So the situation is that London lost all of its defending troops (land and air units), but since Germany lost all its land units during combat and no attacking planes can land in London there are no German troops in London as well.
We have a few questions:
- Is it correct to assume that Germany has conquered London since it won the battle, even though no attacking land units that offloaded into London survived the assault?
- If so, Germany can take all of UK “unspent” IPCs?
- Unspent IPCs = all IPCs that the UK has (so all the “money” that UK has, including all IPC that the UK got in the last step during the last time it was UKs turn)?
- Can an enemy air unit alone conquer London in this situation? In other words: can air units conquer empty enemy territories without land troops supporting them? Can they attack them even if there are no units to attack? If so, is it just a matter of steps being able to take (e.g. 2 steps for a fighter to fly to London en 2 steps to land in a friendly zone)?
We would be really grafetul to get an answer. Thanks in advance!
-
@marcus711
Greetings.
The attacking force must have a ground unit present to take possession of the territory. -
@marcus711 If no attacking ground unit survives combat, the attacked territory does not fall. Therefore, the rest of your questions are moot.
It is for this reason that how-to guides for A&A will tell you that once you are down to your last land unit, you will need to decide how badly you want this territory you are attacking. Because you will need to start losing your air units if you want to take that territory - you will need to save your last ground unit to actually take it over.
My 2 IPCs,
-Midnight_Reaper
-
Only land units can take an area. Just lose planes! it pays off every way. Leave one land unit to take.
-
Thank you all for your answers. That makes it clear: only land units can actually conquer enemy territories.
So then it is possible to attack land units in enemy territory with only air force just to destroy the enemy troops but without actually conquering the territory?
-
right. you are correct
-
@marcus711 The hang up with that is that all hits must be accounted for. If you attack with 4 fighters against a defending stack of 6 infantry, you will (statistically) land 2 hits (3/6 x 4 = 2), killing 2 of the 6 infantry. And then the 6 infantry get their defending rolls (statistically) getting 2 hits as well (2/6 x 6 = 2), killing 2 fighters. You would trade 6 enemy IPCs (infantry cost x 2) for 20 of your IPCs (fighter cost of 10 IPCs x 2). I wouldn’t call that a good trade.
-Midnight_Reaper
Suggested Topics
