Posts made by frood

Delete the “2.0” from that URL.

e-mail me (rempel at  gmail) if you want the code. I’m thinking I might be done with it.

I had a scheme whereby I would support unit-by-unit OOL but it was tied into my new (I thought improved) text-parsing input system and people just complained, so that kind of killed it for me. That’s the direction I wanted to go in, but the users didn’t like it, so not much point developing it further. I do it for fun, so if it’s not fun, why bother?

Is it working now?

I moved to a new host and there was an issue with PHP permissions.

I don’t understand that all, but thank you anyway. I am willing to make my PHP code for frood.net/aacalc/ available to anyone who wants to try to build a statistical engine for it like this.

Now, I think where it gets really tricky is with subs especially. There you have different numbers of hits against different types of units. Can you accommodate that?

@Cmdr:

Without Japan helping in Russia, Germany’s going to be hard pressed to earn 22 IPC against Russia and England.

How about
@Sensible:

Without US helping in Europe, Russia’s going to be hard pressed to keep Germany at bay.

or
@Another:

Without US helping in Europe, England’s going to be hard pressed to make any inroads on Germany.

You continue to amaze and surprise with your ability to apply logic on one side, and not equally on the other.

@Cmdr:

Meanwhile, you COULD run the battleship strategy. (There’s a submarine one, a carrier one, a fighter one, and a conglomerate one as well.

ORLY?

Are you telling me there’s a strategy in which I build all subs, one in which I build all carriers, one in which I build all Fighters?

And then there’s one in which you purchase a variety of units? Wait, stop, that makes my brain hurt. Isn’t it best to just choose one unit and only build that? Mixing different units, that just sounds like asking for trouble. Then you have to remember the differences, etc… I would only recommend that for ADVANCED players maybe.

:-P

I think Russia should try an All-Battleship strategy. How could it go wrong? I mean what with all the bombarding and repairing that battleships can do, it’s fool-proof!

Russia and England won’t be totalling 54 anymore if all America has been doing is building a navy of battleships.

Without US help, Japan and Germany will take away most of the UK’s land base pretty damn fast, long before the US is in a position to really threaten Japan. That tips the income balance in the Axis’ favour, and then Germany and Japan can focus their joint might against Russia, taking Caucasus early on.

Okay, so it bleeds off Japan’s efforts against Russia.

But you have also completely bled off US efforts against Germany.

So how much breathing room will Russia have from Germany to expend against Japan.

Whoopee.

Fundamentals: BB’s cost $24 each. That means you can’t afford a lot of them. That means your enemies will have way more units, and on land where it counts more, even if they have to expend some on navy to counteract your top-heavy BB fleet.

Great analysis, except for - what’s missing - hmm… oh yeah you don’t account for Japan doing anything for 7 ROUNDS!!!

Guess what - I could checkmate Garry Kasparov in 7 moves if I can work with the assumption that he doesn’t make any moves to counter mine.

Jennifer, you’re so wrong.

Tanks are still different for many reasons:

• the ability to blitz (as you noted)
• a range of 2 zones - compare the territories that an Art can potentially reach in combat or NCM from Eastern Europe to what a tank can reach. Range of 2 is different from blitzing.
• Punch of 3. Skew. When the supporting Inf is gone, you still have attack of 3, unlike Art which only have 2 on their own.

It is not as though in LL all your units die at once. Your fodder still dies first. Artillery boosts the attack strength of your fodder. This is relevant whether you are attacking 1 Inf 1 Art v. 1 Inf, or 10 Inf 10 Art v. 15 Inf. If your firepower comes from tanks, you can keep attacking better in later rounds of the battle once fodder is stripped away.

It’s just too simplistic to say that they are the same in punch (4) and therefore get the same # of hits in LL. That is only true for the first round of a battle.

And don’t underrate mobility. Why do you think fighters cost 10 IPCs? Because of all the places they can go, and the speed with which they can get there.

I’m already looking forward to the creative way you will find to miss my point here.

@Lucifer:

@Cmdr:

But in ADS your tanks hit 50% of the time while your artillery hit only 33% of the time.  Meanwhile, in LL those individual ratings are meaningless, only your over all punch.  Thus, the game is significantly DIFFERENT from ADS.  Which is the entire POINT of the evaluations to begin with.

What is the difference between a stack with 4 inf 4 art in ADS and a stack of 4 inf 4 art in LL?
What is the difference between a stack of 4 inf 4 tanks in ADS and 4 inf 4 tanks in LL?

Players don’t use different buying strats usually.

Shouldn’t the questions be:

In ADS, What is the difference between a stack with 4 inf 4 art and a stack of 4 inf 4 tanks?
In LL, What is the difference between a stack of 4 inf 4 art and 4 inf 4 tanks?

My brain hurts…

The allies can achieve atlantic fleet protection with much less investment than 2-3 extra battleships.

I’m not saying that BBs aren’t a kick-ass unit. It’s just that for $24, you can get even more ass-kicking done in other ways.

Well, try it in your next game, see how it works out.

It’s a case of Battleships being a silly thing to buy in bulk. Japan CAN deal with it, and in the meantime Germany has overrun Russia.

Nuff said.

The point is, for a naval slug-fest, subs are a better buy than BBs. Just run subs against BBs in AACalc at a 3:1 ratio (since you can afford 3 subs for 1 BB) and see what wins.

Yes, a BB can absorb a hit, and they attack at 4. Whoohoo.

3 Subs attack at 6, in opening fire. If they take a hit, they then have a punch of 4, same as the battleship, but still in OFS.

After a 2nd hit, the BB is dead.

The 3 sub force after 2 hits still has one surviving unit.

A further benefit is that the subs can submerge if they want. BB can absorb a hit, but has to stand and fight.

For the same price as your US fleet, Japan can build 19 subs. What do you think happens to your BB/AC/Ftr fleet when they are hit by 19 subs? They score six hits in opening fire (avg.), sending 3 of your capital ships to the ocean floor, leaving only two to to even fight back. Those plus the 4 Ftrs that were on the ACs take out maybe three subs.

The remaining 16 subs make short work of the remaining navy, and your fighters splash or land on some god-forsaken pacific island after taking out two more subs.

Japan loses 5 subs, US loses 3 BB 2 AC, and possibly 4 fighters if there was not an adjacent allied-controlled landing spot.

It would work with fewer than 19 subs, I imagine - this is a bit of overkill, but its the same commitment in terms of IPCs, only much more effective. And this is excluding the US and Jap starting navies, of which Japan’s is bigger.

And please, for 2 ACs to support 8 ftrs in an attack, you need a very specific arrangement. Japan is not going to leave its fleet in any sea-zone where you can pull off this stunt.

@Cmdr:

@Ender:

No one’s saying it’s the same game. But the important differences between Art and Arm are not greatly affected by the switch to LL. Cost / unit count per IPC remains the same, skew remains the same, mobility remainst the same, TRN capacity remains the same.

“Flowery logic”. Pah!

Really?  Cost/Unit Count is the same between Inf/Art and Inf/Arm?  You get a discount on your armor, or you just paying too much for your artillery?

Really?  Mobility remains the same?  Your armor cannot move two spaces?  Or you have trains to move your artillery around?

Re-read what I wrote. The DIFFERENCES between Art and Arm remain the same. Whether ADS or LL, your tanks are still more mobile, more expensive, etc.

I think I misspoke myself. If US starts buying a big pac navy, I buy subs with Japan. Lots and lots of subs. Whether US is building their fleet the smart way (subs, ACs, Ftrs) or some crazy way (all BBs), I’ll still stick with the smart way. The ultimate goal is to preserve cash for the land way, so I go with the most cost-effective naval unit, the sub.

@Cmdr:

Why are you giving them tools!?!?

So that they can work, silly. How else are the salt mines to be worked? Who shall erect the monuments to my greatness?

No one’s saying it’s the same game. But the important differences between Art and Arm are not greatly affected by the switch to LL. Cost / unit count per IPC remains the same, skew remains the same, mobility remainst the same, TRN capacity remains the same.

“Flowery logic”. Pah!

Children should be put to work, not idling away their days getting their heads stuffed full of fancy ideas. Books. Pah! Computers. Pah! A sturdy pick-axe should be the only tool they get or need!