Posts made by Nosho

@snoil said in Game Imbalance massively obvious:

@marineiguana if it’s so balanced, why do GenCon games have a bid system for the allies to get extra help?

The online version differs quite a bit from the board game, even with the Gencon setup. Differences such as no friendly AC and transport usage, having to assign casualties after each round of like-valued dice instead of the whole attacking round, not having variable defence profiles for a given combat phase, different time constraints, etc, all make it a bit harder to compare the 2 games.
The numbers don’t lie though. At high gold/plat level, there’s little to no difference in win rate between allies and axis, but at lower levels, it seems axis is winning more. I believe it has changed over the last few seasons too, where top players are figuring out better and better ways to play the allies, leading to many of them to believe that they are currently favoured at high level.

Cheers

@juliusborisovbeamdog Are you guys also working on making the game less of a burden on a Mac computer? I have a fairly recent and decently powerful Mac laptop and the game is maxing out my RAM and cooling fan, which seems ridiculous given the type of game this is.

@marineiguana said in New Season, has there been any change to dice in ranked games?:

2. Japan by doing Pearl, places 5 units out of position for a volatile battle moderate profit. These units are important for the India round 3 timing.

Interesting. I think I never attempt to get India by J3, which is probably a mistake. Not doing Pearl Light might help me achieve that goal. Do you usually get to India on J3 by building an IC in French Indochina or just by maximizing transports use?

Cheers

@brian-cannon Yes. I feel it should be done, unless there are juicier targets out there (Chinese fighter undefended, UK fleet spread out, etc)

@marineiguana said in New Season, has there been any change to dice in ranked games?:

Specific examples:

1. don’t attack E Canada, send all 6 units to sz7. By sending 5, you’re turning a 99% battle into a 90% battle with variations in the 90% where Germany loses a fighter.

2. Pearl is a risky battle. If you want to minimize risk, stop attacking it as Japan. I have.

3. Stack 5 fighters in reach of UK sea zone and surviving units in sz7 makes it difficult to create a navy. UK will feel strong pressure to use the bomber to trade sz7 instead of attempting to hit Germany’s med fleet round 1. Sounds like UK gets to hit med fleet for free in your games since Germany takes unnecessary risks in SZ7.

4. Germany’s med fleet is expendable. Treat it as dead, and a bonus if it survives round 1. It’s just like the Japan transport in sz61, bomber in Ukraine.

I agree with #3 and #4, but not #1 and #2.

Destroying the British dest in SZ10 is a 50/50 battle (with the potential to destroy an extra 7ipc), and if you fight this battle prior to the sz7 battle, it can help you keep subs alive (by selecting the cruiser prior to the subs as casualties), making it very hard for UK to build any fleet on turn 1. Against highly skilled players (which I know you are), I’ll take the risk with slightly worse odds if they are still favourable and have potentially high rewards.

Pearl is a risky battle, but again, with high rewards. I think sending 5 units there and making sure you select your fighter that is out of fuel as 1st casualty is key. You don’t want to have to bring your AC there.

Cheers.

@juliusborisovbeamdog said in New Season, has there been any change to dice in ranked games?:

We’re working on implementing the dice feedback we’ve received. It’s still WIP. Stay tuned.

Is there actually something wrong with the dice though?

@drdachel said in newbie with a bunch of questions:

• Halfway through the game, any time I wanted to do anything with fighters or bombers I had to scroll screen size all the way out so that those icons weren’t the fighter or bomber in order to select them and show where they could move to. Maybe this is graphic issue on my non gaming laptop??

So the UI is pretty glitchy and not always user friendly or even consistent. The trick to select units when the sea zone of territory is too cluttered for the proper unit to be simply clicked on, is to click on the sea zone or territory itself, and bottom left to expand the window detailing the content of the selected SZ or territory, and from there select the unit you want.

As far as the transport combat move, the transport needs to be loaded in order to show the enemy territories it can reach. If you haven’t loaded it yet but selected it, the sea zones you can reach in order to then load units for an attack elsewhere will light up in blue, but until the transport is loaded, you won’t see red territories light up.

Cheers

@major-moses Subs should be your main naval purchase as Japan. They are the cheapest and most effective unit to keep the USN at bay. It’s counter-intuitive the buy subs for defence, since they are actually terrible at defence during an actual combat, but them being so strong on offence can prevent your opponent from ever wanting to get within striking range. Remember that subs can’t be hit by air unless an enemy destroyer is present in the attack, and they can never hit air. A massive stack of subs could get wiped clean by a single destroyer accompanied by a lot of airpower, and even if they all roll a 1 on defence, all they’ll hit is the lone destroyer. On the other hand, a submarine stack can sink a great many fully loaded aircraft carriers if the enemy doesn’t have destroyers.

As the USN, you’ll usually want to be on the offence, so subs seem like the way to go, intuitively. However, you’ll have a hard time reaching the Japanese navy with those subs without being hit first. So as the USN, as a general rule, build ACs, fighters and a few destroyers. A few subs make for good fodder and are often extremely useful in some specific scenarios, but usually you’ll want to focus on air and destroyers.

Cheers

@aardvarkpepper said in What is going on with Infantry and arty paired to attack??:

@nosho said in What is going on with Infantry and arty paired to attack??:

The average value of thousands of rolls, for each units, averages 3.5, I’m not too sure what more you want.

The. Data.

Weird how people who claim PNRG is noticeably not random don’t need data to convince you, even though the burden of proof is on them, but me claiming the already know fact that PNRG is close-enough to perfect randomness for most practical purposes, including this game, need to show you data.

Last few games of inf/art rolls:

5
6
4
1
4
1
3
6
4
1
2
2
5
5
3
6
6
6
6
5
2
1
6
4
1
5
3
5
2
3
4
5
3
3
1
5
1
2
2
6
1
5
5
6
5
4
2
3
3
1
5
4
4
6
1
2
1
4
6
4
2
3
6
2
1
3
5
2
3
4
2
1
6
2
1
1
1
1
4
1
3
6
3
3
3
1
4
2
6
3
6
1
4
5
1
6
4
5
2
2
1
6
2
1
5
5
4
6
1
3
5
2
1
2
1
5
4
1
6
1
5
1
4
3
4
2
2
2
1
1
4
1
5
6
5
2
6
6
3
2
1
4
1
2
1
4
4
4
6
1
5
5
1
6
4
6
5
2
5
1
2
4
4
1
2
3
2
1
2
6
5
3
2
3
3
3
1
4
2
4
5
4
5
6
1
5
4
4
4
2
5
5
4
1
2
3
5
3
5
3
4
4
6
1
1
5
2
5
6
2
4
2
1
6
1
6
1
6
5
1
2
6
5
5
5
1
2
5
5
4
4
2
6
3
3
1
4
2
3
3
5
2
4
5
2
6
5
3
4
5
2
3
4
2
1
2
2
3
5
2
2
4
5
3
4
5
5
4
4
2
3
6
2
1
3
4
4
4
2
3
6
2
4
4
1
6
2
6
4
1
4
1
6
1
5
6
2
1
5
2
6
6
4
4
5
4
4
2
6
4
4
2
1
2
4
1
3
6
2
2
5
2
2
2
4
2
5
3
5
3
2
5
6
5
6
4
5
1
5
6
5
6
3
4
4
5
1
3
5
6
1
5
6
5
1
5
1
5
6
5
4
3
1
1
6
6
3
3
1
1
2
2
3
5
2
6
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
6
6
2
3
2
6
2
5
4
4
6
6
5
4
5
6
3
4
3
1
2
5
5
3
1
3
3
6
4
5
4
6
3
3
2
1
3
4
6
5
1
3
5
1
6
3
2
2
4
1
2
3
3
6
6
4
6
3
1
4
1
1
3
3
5
5
6
1
2
3
3
2
5
1
4
5
5
3
2
4
2
1
4
5
3
3
2
6
1
3
2
4
2
2
1
5
6
1
5
1
4
5
6
4
3
4
6
6
6
5
4
4
5
2
3
4
3
3
1
6
4
6
4
1
6
6
4
1
4
2
5
2
5
6
2
1
3
4
5
6
1
6
2
1
3
2
2
3
5
2
6
2
3
2
1
5
1
1
1
4
5
2
4
1
2
2
4
1
2
5
2
5
6
1
1
2
3
5
4
3
2
3
3
5
5
4
1
4
5
2
6
6
1
6
5
5
2
2
6
3
4
3
2
2
2
5
1
3
5
3
2
3
6
5
4
2
2
5
4
6
6
2
3
3
2
6
6
2
1
4
6
1
3
3
1
2
5
2
6
5
2
6
1
2
5
4
1
2
5
1
6
5
1
3
4
1
1
4
1
2
3
6
1
3
1
5
3
3
6
2
1
1
2
2
5
4
3
2
6
2
3
3
3
5
1
5
4
3
6
1
5
5
4
1
6
5
4
6
4
5
2
5
6
3
1
5
3
4
1
1
5
1
5
3
6
6
1
1
2
6
4
4
2
6
2
4
4
1
6
3
3
3
4
6
2
5
3
6
1
5
2
3
6
4
6
3
2
3
3
1
5
3
6
4
6
5
3
2
2
6
5
2
1
1
1
6
3
4
3
2
1
6
6
2
4
5
4
4
6
4
6
3
6
4
4
2
2
1
5
1
1
1
4
2
4
3
2
3
2
1
2
5
1
1
3
5
4
2
6
2
6
2
4
5
4
3
3
3
1
6
3
2
5
6
5
2
6
2
1
6
2
3
1
2
1
5
5
2
2
4
3
2
3
1
6
3
3
6
3
1
5
4
2
2
6
3
5
2
1
6
2
6
6
6
2
1
6
2
2
3
6
4
3
3
1
3
1
3
5
4
1
3
3
4
3
4
2
2
3
3
2
5
5
5
3
3
2
5
5
3
4
4
5
6
1
3
5
4
3
1
2
3
4
2
6
4
4
1
1
1
2
1
4
1
2
1
5
5
5
1
3
3
6
6
5
3
6
1
5
2
6
5
1
5
4
6
4
2
6
6
1
2
2
5
3
1
2
1
1
5
4
4
1
1
6
1
6
1
6
3
3
1
1
4
4
2
5
4
6
3
4
5
4
3
3
1
5
6
6
2
1
2
2
3
1
6
3
6
6
2
1
2
3
1
1
4
1
3
5
6
2
1
1
4
6
4
5
3
4
6
2
5
5
1
1
4
1
6
2
4
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
4
6
2
5
6
5
3
1
4
5
6
1
5
3
6
1
6
6
2
3
1
3
2
1
3
4
6
6
5
3
3
3
6
2
1
2
4
2
5
5
6
6
2
1
5
4
2
3
3
4
2
2
5
5
2
2
2
2
2
5
6
1
4
1
3
1
1
2
4
2
5
2
5
4
2
6
2
5
6
6
4
4
6
5
5
2
6
3
1
1
6
1
6
6
3
4
3
6
1
6
1
5
4
6
5
2
1
2
4
5
6
3
3
1
2
3
1
2
6
2
3
2
3
6
1
5
2
5
3
3
6
6
2
4
3
5
4
4
1
5
2
5
6
3
4
3
4
2
3
1
3
3
2
4
5
4
5
6
3
5
2
2
1
3
5
5
2
6
1
6
4
3
3
5
6
1
4
1
5
3
5
2
4
6
2
5
1
5
4
1
5
4
3
1
3
6
5
3
1
1
5
1
4
3
6
1
5
4
3
3
5
4
1
6
2
5
6
1
2
4
5
5
6
2
5
2
6
4
1
3
1
5
2
4
4
6
6
5
5
2
1
5
4
4
1
3
6
4
3
2
6
2
2
6
6
3
1
4
6
3
3
3
2
2
4
2
6
3
4
6
4
5
2
2
3
1
1
1
3
1
3
5
3
3
1
1
5
1
5
3
1
2
1
4
4
3
2
2
6
3
5
3
3
5
1
4
5
2
5
2
6
4
5
4
5
6
4
3
2
5
3
2
2
3
2
5
3
2
3
2
2
5
3
3
6
6
1
2
6
4
2
4
2
5
4
2
6
2
6
3
3
6

@aardvarkpepper said in What is going on with Infantry and arty paired to attack??:

So no program, no data, accepts no responsibility for doing any sort of work, just undermining others’ arguments with only “it must be right therefore it’s right”.

That isn’t “the world of rational people”, as you put it. That is the world of rationalizing people, though.

The average value of thousands of rolls, for each units, averages 3.5, I’m not too sure what more you want.

@aardvarkpepper said in What is going on with Infantry and arty paired to attack??:

But for purposes of discussion you understand absent such proofs you’re asking others to take you at your word.

Indeed, that is the expectation here, but we’ve beaten that dead horse plenty in another thread. Just like with anything else in the world of rational people, the burden of proof always lies with the person making claims going against the currently accepted/demonstrated knowledge, wisdom, or theories (in this case, the claim is that PNRG is departing from randomness in noticeable, predictable and persistent patterns).

@aardvarkpepper Recording the hits from my own games, of which I have hundreds. The PNRG is decent, our human brains aren’t in the face of randomness.

How many data points do you have? After a few hundreds of games, I’m at an average of 2 hits per 3 rolls by an Inf paired with an Art.

@brian-cannon Where have they said there was a problem with the actual dice generator? All I’ve seen is them acknowledging that players are complaining about dice.

@chaosido Did you want to move them during the combat movement phase in order to avoid having to stay and fight? If yes, mark the sz as friendly, and move them during the non-combat phase. Cheers.

@brian-cannon said in First time Playing in over 2 months:

@nosho Taken from Developers Notes:

DICE & AXIS & ALLIES
There’s been a ton of discussion in our community around dice rolls. We’ve heard you, and we understand that the randomness of the dice just doesn’t feel right.

Our goal is for the combat to feel satisfying and strategic while staying true to the element of chance at the heart of the board game. So, based on community feedback, our development team is working on a “Stabilized Dice” option for the game.

What does Stabilized Dice Mean?

Stabilized Dice will still be random, but will control for extreme outcomes, and should feel more natural as a result. Our objective is to allow player strategy to play a larger part in the overall game by reducing the chances that dice can swing a whole game in a single roll.

Under Construction

We’re currently in the testing phase for this new dice option, but we’re looking forward to releasing the new dice mode in a future update!

“Doesn’t feel right” doesn’t mean “not random”. True randomness doesn’t feel random to humans, that’s just the way it is. The stabilized dice is just a way to take out a few of the extreme results so that people assuming the dice aren’t random aren’t complaining nearly as much about them.

@aardvarkpepper said in First time Playing in over 2 months:

@nosho said in First time Playing in over 2 months:

. PNRG is a valid approximation of randomness, that has also been proven repeatedly.

hasn’t.

Is your GPS working? Then PNRG is working.

@brian-cannon said in First time Playing in over 2 months:

Hell man dont you see the developers now admitting after denying till they were blue in the face that there is a problem with the dice??

No I have not seen that. I have seen them introduce a PNRG that takes away a little bit of the extreme results out of the output, but that by no means means there was an issue with the dice. Randomness does not look random to human brains, that is just a proven fact. PNRG is a valid approximation of randomness, that has also been proven repeatedly. There are a lot of problems with A&A 1942 Online, but I don’t think the dice’s randomness is one of them.

@brian-cannon I’ve played 300 games so far, and have assessed the dice to be indistinguishable from random. But your anecdotes and mine are meaningless, since modern PNRG, until proven otherwise, is widely considered to be practically equivalent to true randomness. If your GPS works it’s because modern PNRG doesn’t deviate significantly from randomness. I recently had 6 games in a row with WAY worse bad beats than the openings you just described (for example, losing 5 out of 6 bombers in SBRs, with the surviving bomber scoring a meager one), and all it’s telling me is that, yup, these things are bound to happen sometimes.

@brian-cannon So are you saying the dice are programmed to be bad against you specifically?