Can’t access it now, but TripleA tabulates total units and value.
Well when you do, mind posting the economics for every A&A?
I remember seeing somewhere that the Axis had around 1386 IPCs total or somthing
And the allies had 1988 IPCs
Recalling from memory here:
Allies start with 263 units
Axis start with 196 unitsTotal Production of allies was:
176 IPCs
and the Axis had 66
We will see if my math is equal when I finish it tonight, do you remember if facilities were included?
@Young:
I remember seeing somewhere that the Axis had around 1386 IPCs total or somthing
And the allies had 1988 IPCs
Recalling from memory here:
Allies start with 263 units
Axis start with 196 unitsTotal Production of allies was:
176 IPCs
and the Axis had 66We will see if my math is equal when I finish it tonight, do you remember if facilities were included?
I would imagine so.
Still, kinda strange how people say its always the Allies catching up. Even when its the allies with more units.
-Territory’s
-IPCs (almost 3-fold)
-Nations etc
Germany: 87 @ 528
USSR: 71 @ 363 (lotsa infantry)
Japan: 94 @ 677
USA: 54 @487 (heavily inflated by facilities, especially in the Pacific)
China: 18 @ 61
UK (total, for some reason AAA does not divide the units properly amongst Europe & Pacific): 91 @ 755
Italy: 46 @ 304
ANZAC: 23 @ 182
France: 32 @ 227 (too bad it’s possible they could be left with seven or eight by the time it’s their turn)
Axis: 227 @ 1499
Allies: 289 @ 2072
This includes facilities.
Um, i may sound stupid but.
Mind telling me what the X @ X is. (which ones IPCs or whatever)
And a question. Which version is that chart from? (alpha +3, +2 etc)
Germany: 87 @ 528
USSR: 71 @ 363 (lotsa infantry)
Japan: 94 @ 677
USA: 54 @487 (heavily inflated by facilities, especially in the Pacific)
China: 18 @ 61
UK (total, for some reason AAA does not divide the units properly amongst Europe & Pacific): 91 @ 755
Italy: 46 @ 304
ANZAC: 23 @ 182
France: 32 @ 227 (too bad it’s possible they could be left with seven or eight by the time it’s their turn)Axis: 227 @ 1499
Allies: 289 @ 2072This includes facilities.
I’ve got the US, ANZAC, China and France right, but I’ll have to double check my math again for the rest.
Young Grasshopper,
I don’t think you can count the “peace” NOs for Germany and Japan since they are in opposition to their wartime NOs and thus they could never collect both at the same time.
GERMANY:
Peacetime : $5 when not at war with the Soviet Union - represents trade of wheat and oil from the USSR.
War time: $5 each for German control of Leningrad, Moscow and Stalingrad. $5 for Axis control of the Caucasus. These are ALL in the Soviet Union. Germany must be at war with the Soviet Union to obtain them. Thus they could not collect the “peace with Russia” NO so it shouldn’t be included.
Germany should be 9 NOs for $36.
JAPAN:
Peacetime: $10 for not occupying French Indo China, not being at war with the United States and not declaring an unprovoked DOW against the UK and/or ANZAC.
War time: $5 for Axis control of Midway, Wake, Guam, Gilbert and Solomon Islands. $5 each for Axis control of Honolulu and San Francisco. These NOs mean Japan HAS to be at war with the United States. Thus they can not collect on the French Indo China NO.
Japan should be 6 NOs for $30.
ALSO a few corrections:
ANZAC has 8 infantry, not 7.
Italy has 1 Battleship for $20, making their total $304
UK has 7 fighters, not 6
Japan has 37 infantry, not 36
USSR has 6 AA guns, not 4
I would imagine so.
Still, kinda strange how people say its always the Allies catching up. Even when its the allies with more units.
-Territory’s
-IPCs (almost 3-fold)
-Nations etc
It might make more sense if you look at it this way. For totals I have included fighting units, facilities and all for each country.
Total Units: Axis = 227, Allies = 289
Total IPC value: Axis = 1499, Allies = 2072
So it would appear that the Allies would outmatch the Axis. However, look at the territories controlled by each side.
Total Territories: Axis = 35, Allies = 175
This comes down to an average of units per territory: Axis = 6.49, Allies = 1.65
Or an average of IPC value of units per territory: Axis = 42.83, Allies = 11.84
You could even cut it down to territories with an IPC value, but it just gets worse for the Allies.
Total Territories with an IPC value: Axis = 26, Allies = 96
Average Units per territory: Axis = 8.73, Allies = 3.01
Average IPC value of units: Axis = 57.65, Allies = 21.58
So you see, while the Allies do actually start out with more units and more IPC value of units, they have much more territory to protect and are way spread out. The Axis on the other hand has all of their units concentrated in smaller areas for much more of a punch on attacks. So I guess the idea of the Allies having to “catch up” to the Axis would be their ability to concentrate their forces and get more of a punch against the Axis before they manage to capture too much.
I would imagine so.
Still, kinda strange how people say its always the Allies catching up. Even when its the allies with more units.
-Territory’s
-IPCs (almost 3-fold)
-Nations etcIt might make more sense if you look at it this way. For totals I have included fighting units, facilities and all for each country.
Total Units: Axis = 227, Allies = 289
Total IPC value: Axis = 1499, Allies = 2072
So it would appear that the Allies would outmatch the Axis. However, look at the territories controlled by each side.
Total Territories: Axis = 35, Allies = 175
This comes down to an average of units per territory: Axis = 6.49, Allies = 1.65
Or an average of IPC value of units per territory: Axis = 42.83, Allies = 11.84
You could even cut it down to territories with an IPC value, but it just gets worse for the Allies.
Total Territories with an IPC value: Axis = 26, Allies = 96
Average Units per territory: Axis = 8.73, Allies = 3.01
Average IPC value of units: Axis = 57.65, Allies = 21.58So you see, while the Allies do actually start out with more units and more IPC value of units, they have much more territory to protect and are way spread out. The Axis on the other hand has all of their units concentrated in smaller areas for much more of a punch on attacks. So I guess the idea of the Allies having to “catch up” to the Axis would be their ability to concentrate their forces and get more of a punch against the Axis before they manage to capture too much.
Awesome.
Do you know the average number of units on occupied territory’s during start up?
A.K.A, territory’s that don’t have any units on them from the start should’t be counted in the average number of units per territory.
Ah, I get what you are saying. No, I don’t have those numbers because I didn’t think of that. I would have to check out the whole setup again. In that case, it might go a little better for the Allies because they have a LOT of empty territories. The Axis have very few, I think just 2 or 3 of the Japanese islands.
