1942.2 Strategy Guide Introduction: Feedback Appreciated

[Black_Elk]

Yeah sure, sounds good. Might as well keep it all strung together. :-D

[Black_Elk]

Strategic factory spam. Just another quick thought on Industrial Complexes…  Especially in the deep endgame, after Moscow falls, 2v2 Anglo-Americans vs Axis, it might be prudent to consider spamming production on all your 2 ipc or greater territories. Doing this before they are contested. In a 4 power match up, when the surviving nations “go monster” like Super G or Super J vs Super USA/UK, a rapid production expansion can sometimes clinch it in a game played to concession where balance of power is still roughly equal. I’ve seen this done by both sides. Usually if Axis control the center, Vologda and Kazakh can support factories, also the halo of factories around sz 16 to get the drop on the med. Also by Japan on the money islands to lock them down.

For Allies usually it is the periphery where this occurs, in Africa or again on the money islands of the south Pacific (if the IJN can’t control them) even out of the way territories like Brazil and E. Canada can lock the Axis off the Atlantic for good, especially if you’re ahead in the naval game. Dropping factories in all secure territories for your side first can put a whole region out of contention and make it harder for the opponent to get in position against you.

It pays to be the side that expands first, provided the facilities can’t be immediately threatened. You could try a move like this at any point, though it becomes more significant after Moscow falls. If you expand production too broadly too early it can be problems for center control, giving up the edge in Russia. Early on I like to expand production only gradually, and only with Japan. Unless Allies make a breakthrough in the south Pacific, or want to try an Africa gamble. But after Moscow falls the money game changes. All surviving nations will usually have more cash to toss around, and the ability to spam infantry or tanks out of spammed factories can help to make the naval transport game less significant, and allow you to control the board just with your air forces and ground alone.

It can also demoralize the enemy to see you doing this all around the board rapidly, placing limits on the potential target areas the enemy can reach “in time” and put those ipcs on lock down for the duration. Just with a modest investment in inf over a couple rounds after the factory is in place. Or as a spawn point for subs/air to control the sea. This can be an effective way to back down and intrasigent opponent when you know you’ll be playing a really long game regardless.
:-D

Happy Memorial day.

[mstctp]

epic post and tons of good info there. played 3 games so far and this gave me quite good insight mixed with my past experience in those previous games.

[Black_Elk]

Thanks man! I actually had a lot of fun writing this one, so I’m glad to see its still proving useful.
:-)

Io Saturnalia, and best games to all!

[kpb66]

The defensive value of infantry is clear for the cost, but their attack value should not be underestimated either. If you consider that 4 infantry attacking together are at basically the same odds (during a single round of combat) as a bomber, you can see that their attack value for the cost is decent as well. 4 infantry on attack can also be better than a bomber in some cases, because you not only have the same chance statistically to roll a single hit in the first round of combat, but there is a chance you might even roll more than one hit. You get 4 shots after all.
Though I realize this article was written a few years ago, I do question quoted paragraph.

I’m wondering if the author meant to state 6 infantry and not 4 in comparison to its “to hit” odds with bomber.

To get at least a “one” with 4 dice, the probability is 1 - (5/6)^4, no? If this is the case, the probability is: ~52%

On the other hand, the bomber’s chance to hit is 4/6 or ~67%.

Assuming my math is correct as it’s been a long time since I’ve taken a stats/prob course, this is not exactly “basically the same odds”.

On the other hand, with 6 inf, based on my math above, the odds are: 1 - (5/6)^6 = ~67%.

Bear in mind that my calculations are based on “at least one” one whereas the paragraph is based on a single hit. The odds for that is even worse than what I’ve shown (38% I think).

I’m enjoying this article but am very confused about this paragraph. If I’m wrong, please correct me. However, wrong or right, it may be better to modify this paragraph to actually display the odds values instead of implying that they’re basically the same odds.

Regardless, I do see what the author is getting at in explaining that, for the buck, the infantry is a great unit.

Also, I appreciate the work that went in to doing this.

[taamvan]

I can only suppose the explanation is that 1+1+1+1 does not equal 4, when you are rolling dice.  As you have laid out, the odds are different, and the fact that you have “hit points” makes combat more than just a simple calculation.    Sometimes 2 infantry vs 1 infantry seems like “even odds” but having 2 hits means you have an additional chance to roll a 1 on the second round even if your opponent hits the first round, there is not just 1 roll going on, its multiple rounds of rolling and some special rules also come into effect esp. for sea combat so its not a simple arithmetic calculation of the odds

[Cow]

Is there a less wordy version of this and you got various openers?

[Cow]

I am surprised playbooks haven’t been made for the other versions of axis and allies. I could easily do one for each edition. I choose not to because it would kind of ruin the game for newcomers when they hop on the forum and see optimal starting moves for their first few games.

[taamvan]

Could, but most people don’t read and what they do read, is hard to apply without experience.

Probably more fun to teach them by beating them up over and over.

[Black_Elk]

Good call kpb66. The bomber inf comparison was probably a little misleading there. Most of these entries were just me riffing on stuff in the middle of the night. So I’d chalk it up to sleep deprivation or maybe my head was been drifting into LL territory unintentionally haha. I think the general point I was trying to make was that, at a similar cost, the force with more hp can sometimes be better than the one with a stronger attack power. Though the numbers there aren’t identical, so it might not be the best example.

Sometimes takes me a while to check up on things these days, so I’d definitely encourage anyone if you see an error, or have a good example or just want to add or simplify some of these explanations, feel free to edit the doc. I think these things always turn out better as collaborative efforts. I was treating the thread as a draft, and hoping that the doc might serve as the final, but should edit both so its not confusing.

For now I just nixed the whole bomber digression in the thread , since it probably distracts from the explanation of attack power anyway, and the importance of HP is touched on in the discussion about art/tanks that follow, so probably won’t be missed. Thanks for the feedback and the heads up.

Also as Cow and others probably noticed, I’m a complete rambler. Even after trimming it down, it’s still pretty wordy haha.

I think a playbook for 42.2 would be killer. Main problem I see is just the painfully large bid, which might make it harder to pin down. But maybe one for the tournament update would be novel? I really haven’t played many games using the latest set up proposed by Larry/Greg

[taamvan]

I have!

Will report back after gencon.

[baron Münchhausen]

@taamvan:

I can only suppose the explanation is that 1+1+1+1 does not equal 4, when you are rolling dice.   As you have laid out, the odds are different, and the fact that you have “hit points” makes combat more than just a simple calculation.     Sometimes 2 infantry vs 1 infantry seems like “even odds” but having 2 hits means you have an additional chance to roll a 1 on the second round even if your opponent hits the first round, there is not just 1 roll going on, its multiple rounds of rolling and some special rules also come into effect esp. for sea combat so its not a simple arithmetic calculation of the odds

It is a mini-case on which I would use the Lanchester’s law with Stack formula, to see the difference:

1 StB: 4/6 is .667 odds* 1 hit = 4/6 or 0.667 or 4 meta-power points
Punch: A4 +1 hit = 5 points

4 Infs @1: 4/6 points is .667 odds* 4 hits = 16/6 or 2.667 or 16 meta-power points
Punch: A4 + 4 hits = 8 points

1 Infs @2: 2/6 is 0.333 odds* 1 hit = 2/6 or 2 meta-power points
Punch: D2 + 1 hit = 3 points

2 Infs @1: 2/6 points is .333 odds* 2 hits = 4/6 or 0.667 or 4 meta-power points
Punch: A2 + 2 hits = 4 points

Now, I know you cannot say that 1 StB is 4 times weaker than 4 Infs or 1 Inf @2 is twice weaker than 2 Infs @1.

I would like to explore this little case, to see if there is much more to discover with Stack formula or even Enigma (Vann) Formula, outside toying with HR units.
Can it provides useful infos (or better than Punch formulas?), since this formula is known as sound and correct from maths POV?

[Wolfshanze]

Lanchester’s law is outdated, you’d be better off applying the VANN FORMULA!

[baron Münchhausen]

Yeah,
but there was a secret derivative formula between Lanchester’s law formula and Vann formula.

But until now, no one break the code. Even Vann hidden it so well, he cannot found it…