Best posts made by VictoryFirst

@The_Good_Captain

Hehe sorry for pinging you 😀 I might have to start an “Extreme Moments in A&A History” scrap-book myself too if these rolls continue like this lol.

This game moved to this thread: https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/3951/2-victoryfirst-allies-vs-panzerstahl-helm-axis-g40-house-rules-expansion-by-the-captain?_=1729078463546

@The_Good_Captain

Lol, I accidentally posted to our old thread. Ignore these posts, I am going to try to post to the TripleA forum.

I agree with TGC

In my experience if the TUV of Germany is higher than that of the Allies at the end of G1, Germany is VERY likely to win the game. I have never seen a game so far where this was true and Germany lost.

The only times where Germany lost where if this TUV difference was much more in favor of the Alllies.

@Ragnell804

I accidentally rolled two dice, so we are going to ignore the last roll, the ‘1’, so no hit there.

Would you like to submerge or return fire?

@King_Of_Tanks @The_Good_Captain
Yeah I think it’s a version thingy. I just replayed the EF from your game on the version I have and it’s working fine, no armistice popping up.

@The_Good_Captain Still please send your module just to be sure, thanks.

Sadly once a game is started, any changes made to the code won’t be applied until you start a new game. So I suggest you just click on “No Actions” until the condition are actually met and download the latest version after the game is finished.

Net pieces / TUV Round 1

–
Atlantic: -1.66 / -4.66
Eastern Front: -1.22 / +2.57
Total: -2.88 / -2.09

I accidentally swapped a plus and a minus in Ukraine. That’s why the numbers were so low for Germany, I was already wondering 😂

Net TUV Round 1

EF: -7.31
Atlantic/WA: -18.89
Africa/Med: -0.44
Total: -26.64

Net TUV Round 2

EF: -12.74
Atlantic/WA: -4.19
Africa/Med: -27.59
Total: -44.52

Net TUV Round 3

EF: -2.68
Atlantic/WA: -4.19
Africa/Med: -24.13
Total: -31.00

Net TUV round 4

EF: +2.43
Atlantic/WA: +10.89
Africa/Med: -22.61
Total: -9.29

Net TUV Round 5

EF: -14.73
Atlantic/WA: +10.89
Africa/Med: -24.13
Germany: -13.98
Total: -41.95
Total without Germany: -27.97

Net TUV Round 6

EF: -14.73
Atlantic/WA: +10.89
Africa/Med: -24.13
Germany: -13.98
Moscow: +19.22
Total: -22.73

Overall TUV swing throughout the entire game
EF: +11
Atlantic/WA: +64
Africa/Med: +2
Germany: -33
Total: +44
Total (without combined attack on Germany): +77
(Moscow: -82)

@The_Good_Captain Yeah I don’t think that the fighter spam strategy will work all of the time, only when the Germans get bad dice in the Atlantic. Otherwise there will be subs floating around harassing the convoy centers, really taking a toll on the Allied economy.

The four carriers strat is interesting but I am not quite sure if it’s that more efficient than purchasing three UK fighters instead, which also gives you the option to attack Berlin. On top of that, logistics don’t really matter if Norway and Finland are taken. If you have a steady supply line, it doesn’t matter if it takes two turns or three turns to reach your target because there will be units coming each turn. However having said that, there might be some min-maxing going here where those carriers actually do allow 4 extra fighters to reach Moscow in time. Going to take a look at that.

Anyway I think a couple more games will provide some answers.

Ok I see the US fighters from turn 4 could never have reached Moscow without the carriers, so that is net +1 fighter.

Overall TUV swing through entire game
EF: +30
Altantic/WA: +50
Africa/Med: +37
Total: +117
(Moscow Battle: +98)

So to elaborate on what I was calculating here:

“Net TUV swing” is the difference between the Average TUV swing and the Actual TUV swing of each battle. So, a completely average game should have this number as close to 0 as possible. It is more or less equivalent to the Net Pieces that TGC calculated but with the IPC-value of each piece factored in (so -1.00 Net Pieces could mean one 3-IPC infantry or one 15-IPC bomber lost, this would be respectively around -3.00 and -15.00 with Net TUV swing).
So, the battles in the Atlantic generally have more extreme numbers because the naval units are far more expensive than land units.

“Overall TUV swing throughout the entire game” is just a sum of the TUV swings of each battle. This number doesn’t really have an average but it should be compared to other games. It gives a sense for how many IPC worth of units the Germans killed versus how many they lost themselves, or in other words, how much they “gained”.

The names of the calculations might be a bit confusing though, I would rather see the second calculation be called “Net TUV swing”, the first one perhaps “TUV Swing Differential”?

@DoManMacgee said in VF (Germany) vs. DoMan (Allies) | Original Europe, Game 1:

Previously you said subs would always prefer to submerge but I have a suspicion this scenario may be an exception given the closer odds on this fight.

Also in this case if your DD missed I would have submerged, since that is part of my strategy (in my opinion the most annoying thing you can do with the German subs is continously submerging, harassing the convoy centers and forcing the Allies to do something about it).

And to rephrase what I said above: I think capturing the convoy centers is worth more than killing the Allied naval units, mostly because in the latter case there is some risk involved.

@dawgoneit

Great to see it works! Turn info is not necessary, I like just posting the save file and the combat hit differential summary if any.

@AndrewAAGamer

I can follow and agree with your reasoning everywhere, except here.

@AndrewAAGamer said in AndrewAAgamer (Allies) vs. Germany (Ragnell804):

Thus, without those 6 extra units there would be only 7 German units on the board which means the Allies would have won.

That’s a massive assumption. Why so certain of this? Ragnell pointed out he adapted his German strategy to this game, knowing the Allies had an “outlier” on Omaha Beach. Therefore because of his experience, he knew the Germans could afford to be more aggressive than usual and still prevent the Allied win, resulting in the low Axis piece count in the end.

If this outlier didn’t happen, the Axis would have played more defensively, trading space for time and keeping the option open of making an attack on one of the victory cities with the goal of contesting it on the very last turn with decent chances, which is part of the reason why I think this game is imbalanced in favor of the Axis.

So therefore I think it’s wrong to say D-Day is balanced after just one game. I’ll believe you once you’ve played at least 10 games and managed to win 3 or more as the Allies. I am happy to present myself as an opponent.

OK, that’s fine with me. I’ll start a new OOB game in a second.

@DoManMacgee

Actually this time it is intentional. I am trying both moves to see if taking Gibraltar is really necessary. Just testing some stuff out.

@AndrewAAGamer

How are you going to test for Bad Dice and Very Bad Dice during games? Are you going to artificially shape the combat results so that they match the areas in the Bell Curve? How will you factor in the strategic importance of a battle? Some battles are more game deciding than others and dice results should weigh differently depending on that.

Not sure what you exactly wanted to calculate at the end of your post, but the percentages of a Bad Dice/Very Bad Dice result in any of the four areas isn’t calculated by multiplying it by four, but rather by calculating the chance that it doesn’t happen and raising it to the fourth power.

Bad Dice for Allies in one area = 23.25%
No Bad Dice for Allies in one area = 100% - 23.25% = 76.25%
No Bad Dice for Allies in all four areas= (76.25)^4 = 34.70%
Bad Dice for Allies in at least one area = 100% - 34.70% = 65,30%

With the same logic for Very Bad Dice
Very Bad Dice for Allies in at least one area = 8.70%

Still I don’t understand how one game is going to be more representative than ten however if it suits your needs that is fine with me.

@AndrewAAGamer said in AndrewAAgamer (Allies) vs. Germany (Ragnell804):

Odds of at least 1 area area with Bad dice

65.30%

Odds of at least 2 areas with Bad dice

This is slightly more complicated to do. We have to add up percentages of all different possibilities that include this result. Let’s write some of them out. We have four areas, EG - CAEN - St. Lo - Cherbourg. A 1 means bad dice in the area, a 0 means no bad dice. Let’s look at bad dice in two areas first.
EG - CAEN - St. Lo - Cherbourg
1 - 1 - 0 - 0 = 23% * 23% * 77% * 77% = 3.13%
1 - 0 - 1 - 0 = 23% * 77% * 23% * 77% = same calculation = 3.13%
1 - 0 - 0 - 1 = …
0 - 1 - 1 -0 = …
0 - 1 - 0 - 1 = …
0 - 0 - 1 - 1 = …
As you can see, we just have the same calculation 6 times. The 6 comes from the total number of combinations of two numbers out of a total of four numbers. This can be calculated directly on a calculator using the Combination Formula, which is defined as follows.

Most calculators have a built-in function to calculate this (i.e. you can type in 4C2 instead of the longer expression on the right side)

And not to forget, we also have to include the possibilities that have bad dice in three or four areas, because those are also included from the wording “at least two areas”.
I am not going to write out the combinations for that, now we can simply use the Combination Formula.
4C3 = 4 and 4C4 = 1 (and 4C2 = 6)

The entire calculation is as follows.

(23% * 23% * 77% * 77%) * 4C2 + (23% * 23% * 23% * 77%)*4C3 + (23%^4)*4C4 = 22.84%

Odds of at least 1 area with Very Bad dice

8.70%

Odds of at least 2 areas of Very Bad dice

Same logic, however the percentages change to 2.25% and 97.75%
(2.25% * 2.25% * 97.75% * 97.75%) * 6 + (2.25% * 2.25% * 2.25% * 97.75%) * 4 + (2.25%^4)*1= 0.3%

You can even create a general formula for this if you want, however for now this will do I think.