Axis vs. Allies Records (League and Tournament - 137 games) - updated 7/12

[DarthMaximus]

To help with the balance issue I just did a quick count of the records.  Just so happens we are close to 100 games completed.

Here’s where we stand (as of 6/2):

Tournament
NO - Yes
Tech - No
Bid - None (sides chosen at random)

Allies lead 15-12 (Win % - 55%)

League
NO - Yes
Tech - Optional
Bid - Yes, for Axis (avg bid seems to be about 1-2 ipc)

Axis lead 42-30 (Win % - 58%)

Overall

Axis lead 54 - 45 (Win % - 54%)

I’m not seeing a huge adv for one side or another.  It is possible the bids might slightly skew the Axis win % in the League, but there is definitely room for players to decrease their bid.

Edit: Updated thru 7/12 (137 games).

Thru 7/12:

Tournament (wins)
Allies - 15
Axis - 14

Allies Win % - 51.7%
Axis Win % - 48.3%

League (wins)
Allies - 48
Axis - 60

Allies Win % - 44.4%
Axis Win % - 55.6%

Overall (wins)

Allies - 63
Axis - 74

Allies Win % - 46%
Axis Win % - 54%

Note:
Since I last did the count on 6/2, in the League the Allies and Axis went 18-18 against each other.

[TimTheEnchanter]

I guess I need to go look at the tournament forum and figure out how the allies won a majority of games.

The league numbers are more what I expected overall.

[DarthMaximus]

I’m guessing it would be bad G1 Egy turns?  Or UK BB lives in sz 2?

We should get some good strats and play out of the Semi-Finals and then the Final.  Hopefully no rd 1 dice jobs.

[Lucifer]

With “decent” players, and “effecient” strats, axis are favored. This “fact” could change, but very unlikely. When playing against good players, if axis fail to expand quickly, allies could/should win, but for the overall stats, Egy G1 is a win 4 of 5, and this is only one of several important aspect of the game balance issue. I’m not saying you can’t play, and I’m not saying saying allies can’t win, cause it’s not true, but for game balance purpose regardless of playing skills/experience, axis are favored!!!
Let there be no doubt. How high is the axis bias, it’s hard to say, as so much is dependent on the first rnd dice, but for more than 50% of all games, assuming decent players, equal amount of mistakes, the axis will win more than 50% in no tech +NOs games. It’s even possible that the allied bid needed for balance is less than $6 ipc, but AA50 is much more dependent on the dice outcomes in rnd1 than Revised.

[squirecam]

@Subotai:

With “decent” players, and “effecient” strats, axis are favored. This “fact” could change, but very unlikely. When playing against good players, if axis fail to expand quickly, allies could/should win, but for the overall stats, Egy G1 is a win 4 of 5, and this is only one of several important aspect of the game balance issue. I’m not saying you can’t play, and I’m not saying saying allies can’t win, cause it’s not true, but for game balance purpose regardless of playing skills/experience, axis are favored!!!
Let there be no doubt. How high is the axis bias, it’s hard to say, as so much is dependent on the first rnd dice, but for more than 50% of all games, assuming decent players, equal amount of mistakes, the axis will win more than 50% in no tech +NOs games. It’s even possible that the allied bid needed for balance is less than $6 ipc, but AA50 is much more dependent on the dice outcomes in rnd1 than Revised.

You say the axis will win, and they are, but they are getting a bid as well.

I dont doubt that the axis are better off with NO’s (at least early in the game when it matters more).

But I still wonder what effect the dice are having.

The better way is to have 100 “without NO” games to compare it to.

[Imperious Leader]

54% is just about perfect balance as can be. Probably nothing needs to be done, but perhaps just letting China play before japan would fix it perfectly.

[Lucifer]

I’ll invite you all to the new TripleA unstable 1.0.3.3. The worst thing that could happen is that I become a better (allied) player. Maybe I lose the 1 out of 5 games I lose Egy G1, who knows? I play against anyone, I’m axis with no bids, +NOs, no tech, dice. No other optional rules. I prefer LL, but this is about the original design, and AA50 was designed and playtested with regular dice not LL, so dice it is. Live games are different from PBF/PBM games, I’m not waiting 10 mins (or longer) for every move. If your brains can’t think quick enough, you can’t think at all.

Compare it to chess, there are time limits. In real WW2 there was the time elements, if you waited too long, the enemy got stronger b/c you didn’t make any decisions. I’m not expecting “lightning AA50” in the same sense as lightning chess though.

[Lucifer]

@squirecam:

The better way is to have 100 “without NO” games to compare it to.

Without NOs allies are favored. How much I’m not sure, I think for all 4 main setups, 41-42, +/- NOs, that AA50 is close to, or better balanced than Revised, meaning, any unit bid should probably be $9 or less.

I don’t have much experience with no NO games , although, I will win more than 50% of such games, as allies.  AA50 is so much more different than Revised, that any unit bids will affect the game more, and in other ways than Revised. But even in Revised, a very high bid will result in close to 100% axis victories, if the bid is too high. I have actually lost 2 games as allies w/o NOs in 41, and I also won more than I lost overall. But I doubt very much that I will lose more games from now, if the premise is 41, no NOs, no tech, and I’m allies. Maybe very bad dice will be a factor, but with NOs, LL will favore axis, and why shouldn’t this also be true in no NO games.

[squirecam]

@Subotai:

@squirecam:

The better way is to have 100 “without NO” games to compare it to.

Without NOs allies are favored. How much I’m not sure, I think for all 4 main setups, 41-42, +/- NOs, that AA50 is close to, or better balanced than Revised, meaning, any unit bid should probably be $9 or less.

I agree that in 1941 or 1942 games, without NO’s, the allies are favored. This is not only due to setup/VC changes, but the overpowered bombing campaign.

What I would like to know, though, is by what %.

I also want to know if the CAP escort rule makes a difference in the basic game (i.e. no tech and no NO’s).

It is my guesstimate that the CAP rule alone should result in a more “even” 1942 game (without NO). But this is just based upon my play results.

I just wish we had 100 games of no NO’s to compare these results to.

[General_D.Fox]

I’m pretty sure not a lot of people use the CAP rule, SC. I haven’t heard of anyone or haven’t seen anyone use it, and I’ve only been approached about using it once. You might want to post a poll or something and get everyone’s opinion or similar thoughts.

[Lucifer]

@squirecam:

I just wish we had 100 games of no NO’s to compare these results to.

That would give us some info, but remember that you also said that in Revised, axis would win about 40% with no bids, that is only true if AAR is played with less than decent players, and/or inefficient game strats.
You would lose more than 90% against me, probably between 95% and 99% of all games. And this is not b/c I’m a better player than you, it’s b/c AAR is not balanced, not at all with efficient players, but I should add that the playing balance of Revised is not too bad, with $8-$9 unit bid the best player will often win.

Most AA50 games I’ve played, have been with NOs, so I’m not sure about 41 -NOs, I guess that I could possible lose some games from now, either b/c of mistakes, and/or bad dice, but even if the bid level of AA50 41 -NO will be lower than in Revised, I doubt that I will lose (as allies) more than 5% of such (AA50 41 -NOs, no other rules) games.

[axis_roll]

@The:

I’m pretty sure not a lot of people use the CAP rule, SC. I haven’t heard of anyone or haven’t seen anyone use it, and I’ve only been approached about using it once. You might want to post a poll or something and get everyone’s opinion or similar thoughts.

We use the CAP ftr escort rule (modified to not allow the aa shots to hit the ftrs) as a standard in our ftf group and I’ve played one online game with them as well.

I think a poll is a good idea.

[Funcioneta]

@Subotai:

But even in Revised, a very high bid will result in close to 100% axis victories, if the bid is too high

Agreed. I guess 16 (2 trannies sz5 or sz14) is enough to make allies really sweat. But I think even 12 is a too gross advantage (2 guys to lyb and 2 guys to ukr … ugh!)

[squirecam]

@Subotai:

@squirecam:

I just wish we had 100 games of no NO’s to compare these results to.

That would give us some info, but remember that you also said that in Revised, axis would win about 40% with no bids, that is only true if AAR is played with less than decent players, and/or inefficient game strats.
You would lose more than 90% against me, probably between 95% and 99% of all games. And this is not b/c I’m a better player than you, it’s b/c AAR is not balanced, not at all with efficient players, but I should add that the playing balance of Revised is not too bad, with $8-$9 unit bid the best player will often win.

Most AA50 games I’ve played, have been with NOs, so I’m not sure about 41 -NOs, I guess that I could possible lose some games from now, either b/c of mistakes, and/or bad dice, but even if the bid level of AA50 41 -NO will be lower than in Revised, I doubt that I will lose (as allies) more than 5% of such (AA50 41 -NOs, no other rules) games.

In AAR, the axis can win 40% without a bid. It just comes down to first round dice results in the applicable bid territories (Egypt, UKR, Belo, etc).

As for obj/no obj, that is an issue. But the bigger concern is the allied bombing strategy. I dont think the no-obj game is as unbalanced with the CAP rule.

It looks as if Origins/Gencon tournaments WILL use the CAP rule. So that should give out some good playtest results.

[Lucifer]

@squirecam:

In AAR, the axis can win 40% without a bid.

No, not against me, and I’m not a top player. So axis will not win 40% of all no bid games against decent (!) players. I think you could win 5% of all no bid games against me, or any decent, average player.
I assume no tech games. If you really think that axis can/will win 40% with no bids, it’s b/c the allied player is inferior, or a n00b! And that is not a question of balance, you make it a question of the allied player not trying/wanting to win.

If you claim the bid level should/could be $6 instead of $8 or $9, I can see your argument, but this about a NO BID GAME!

Plz stop lying… :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[squirecam]

@Subotai:

@squirecam:

In AAR, the axis can win 40% without a bid.

No, not against me, and I’m not a top player. So axis will not win 40% of all no bid games against decent (!) players. I think you could win 5% of all no bid games against me, or any decent, average player.
I assume no tech games. If you really think that axis can/will win 40% with no bids, it’s b/c the allied player is inferior, or a n00b! And that is not a question of balance, you make it a question of the allied player not trying/wanting to win.

If you claim the bid level should/could be $6 instead of $8 or $9, I can see your argument, but this about a NO BID GAME!

Plz stop lying… :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

If you can understand that a “proper” bid could be $6, then you should understand exactly where that bid can be placed.

If so, you know exactly what the general odds are for a first round attack against that bid-enhanced territory or by Germany (in Africa).

Tranlation: The $6 2 Inf bid doesnt do that much. It makes a first round atack against a terriitory a bit harder, or an attack by germany a bit easier. But that’s it.

The dice can do the exact same thing, given several R1 variations. The bid units may be useful (or the dice swings make them unnecessary).

In any event, believe what you want.

[Lucifer]

@ Squire, you’re delusional if you think you can win more than 5%-10% of all AAR no bid games against me. I’m talking about reality, not theory! But stay in your delusions if it makes you happy… :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[axis_roll]

@Subotai:

@ Squire, you’re delusional if you think you can win more than 5%-10% of all AAR no bid games against me. I’m talking about reality, not theory! But stay in your delusions if it makes you happy… :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

I don’t know, 5-10% seems a little low to me (Meaning the axis probably have a better chance than 10%)  , DICE do happen, and amongst players of comparable skill level, most players felt that DICE would determine the game more than player skill.

I know, I conducted a poll asking this question a while back on three different A&A sites.

I think this was the point that Squire was trying to make.

[Funcioneta]

In fact, 5% of victories seems nearer to AA50, 1941 scenario (allies) than Revised (axis). At least to me. I also think 40 % of axis victories with axis, no bid, in Revised. The arguments given by squirecam are solid

[Funcioneta]

@Subotai:

@ Squire, you’re delusional if you think you can win more than 5%-10% of all AAR no bid games against me. I’m talking about reality, not theory! But stay in your delusions if it makes you happy… :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Wait, wait! Are you saying normal A&A or A&A using the house rule known as LL? If using LL, it could be different, because the triple (nor, wrus, ukr) is much more easy, and also the doubles or even Egypt counter, UK attack on z5 etc …

LL alters game dinamic in a radical way (under LHR 2.0., much more than using no-tech house rule). If that’s your argument to say axis can only win Revised 5 % of times, is invalid, because you are using a house rule (well, 2 if playing without tech, but that affect much less)