To show MysticalRommel that he really should consider using Inf, I’m taking on cystic crypt idea. I’ve compiled the combat stats, round per round, for two armies worth of 100 IPC each.

Here it is…

===============================================

Army1: 20 Arm = 100 IPC
Army2: 20 Inf + 8 Arm = 100 IPC

===============================================

Army1 attack Army2

R1
Army1: {20 * 3/6 = 10}
Army2: {[20 + 8] * 2/6 = 9.33}

R2
Army1: {11 * 3/6 = 5.5}
Army2: {[10 + 8] * 2/6 = 6}

R3
Army1: {5 * 3/6 = 2.5}
Army2: {[5 + 8] * 2/6 = 4.33}

R4
Army1: {1 * 3/6 = 0.5}
Army2: {[2 + 8] * 2/6 = 3.33}

Army2 wins with 2 Inf and 8 Arm left

Army2 attack Army1

R1
Army1: {20 * 1/6 = 3.33} + {8 * 3/6 = 4}
Army2: {20 * 2/6 = 6.67}

R2
Army1: {14 * 1/6 = 2.33} + {8 * 3/6 = 4}
Army2: {13 * 2/6 = 4.33}

R3
Army1: {9 * 1/6 = 1.5} + {8 * 3/6 = 4}
Army2: {7 * 2/6 = 2.33}

R4
Army1: {7 * 1/6 = 1.17} + {8 * 3/6 = 4}
Army2: {1 * 2/6 = 0.33}

Army2 wins with 7 Inf and 8 Arm left

===============================================

As you can see, even the impressive stack of 20 Arm is doing worse on attack than the Inf/Arm combo.

I found this link where the changes are listed. I’ll have to scroll down a bit.

Note that not all of the changes listed there are part of the 3rd edition rules. Some of them are additional options that the CD game offers (including some bugs)

According to your detailed description of the positions, Ger and SEu are empty. Is that normal ?
Also, regarding Japan, their IC production should be at 22 instead of 24.

Welcome aboard Darrigaaz.

PBEM stands for Play By EMail.
The section you saw on the forum is a place where you can find opponents and play A&A by posting your orders directly on the forum.

The 3rd edition rules come from the CD version. If I remember correctly the differences are:

• WCa is not connected to the ECa sea zone
• Submarines can submerge (escaping combat but staying in the same seazone).
• Naval Occupation (you can place newly purchased naval unit even if the sea zone is occupied by the ennemy)
• Aerial retreat (Air unit can retreat from an amphibious attack)

I usually don’t like the IPC victory. For the same reason laststrike mentioned, I feel it’s too much a “save by the bell” victory.
On the other hand Zero pointed out a good reason why it should be considered. It gives more options to the Axis wich results in more diversity in game development.
Unfortunately, because of the dynamics of the game, I think it favors more the gamble victory for the axis. And if Japan achieves to get the Axis to the magic 84 on his turn, only US can try to do something about it.

Maybe a solution would be to extend by a turn the period the Axis have to hold to the magic 84. Meaning if the Axis reach the magic 84 on Gn or Jn they would have to keep it until the end of USn+1 to win. An other solution would be to require that the Axis hold 1 of the Allies capital to be able to claim the IPC victory. Or maybe both but then it seems a bit too difficult for the Axis.

What do you think ?

Oups I forgot to log in :oops:

Hi there, I’d like to find people to play A&A. I’m willing to PBEM, TCP/IP game or if you’re in the same area we could play face to face

I never PBEM though but I look forward to learn how.

I used to play with my friends a while ago but they lost interest in the game. Since then I played once in a while over the internet with the CD game or playing against myself (noooooo…. I’m not crazy :wink: ).

Anyway if you’re interested just email me at carpentier_martin@hotmail.com I’ll be waiting.

Oh and by the way… this is my first post here !! :D