No it isn’t, 1 art + 1 inf has an attack of 4 and is cheaper then 1 tank + 1 inf which also has an attack of 4 Also, tanks mobility is useless when considering that an amphibious assaults usually take place either on islands or on territories adjacent to other enemy territories thus the tank will rarely use its mobility in an amphibious assault
@@jamicoope9268 It is, if only one unit dies you are left with 3 power instead of 2. It isn't more cost effective, but that's less important when space is limited
Yeah, tanks are good only because you have a limit that complexes can build, they help tac fighters, and can get to the front quicker, and react better.
@@jamicoope9268 depends on the goal and where you are landing. Landing somewhere with 1 infantry and no other land units adjacent? Tanks will be better because the next round they can blitz or at least have other options. Or if there are other land units adjacent, but they are one or two units tops and you want to hold your land with multiple pieces, then tanks are the way to go. If you are just wanting to take a piece of territory and you're pretty much thinking that you aren't going to hold it? Then artillery is the better choice. For me, I like keeping the territory I land in, especially if I'm playing the Japanese and I'm landing in Asia where (by that time) it is mop up duty and I want to rush and grab as much Russian territory that I can as well as put pressure on the UK. If the UK has to spend 18 IPCs (or more if they go with air power instead), then that means less IPCs are hitting Germany.
Two words: Meat armor. Buy a few strong units and surround them with cheap units. The cheap units absorb the damage while the strong units keep delivering the hits..
Man this was supper informative!! Thats why when playing USSR artillery is so effective daamn, i use to have no idea why that happens, i guees is only time and practice what makes you realize it whitout really knowing it until now. CC thanks for this videos series!! Wow
I was really surprised by some of things I found out making this video. Maybe I should have kept these juicy secrets to myself.. haha. Thank you my friend
Great video! One of the reasons a pair of infantry and artillery does well against a tank is that they can take 2 hits before they die, and have similar, though slightly higher, chance of hitting. I would agree it depends, if trying to push into China I would use artillery, yet need to defend India with only three units use tanks.
Great video. Thanks for making it. I think the presence of aircraft for the defense changes the outcome of the battle, significantly. I generally choose to prioritize the production of tanks while providing a sufficiently large number of infantry to absorb my enemy's first round of counterattacking hits. By the time my opponent can actually start destroying my tanks, he or she has already absorbed two full rounds from my tanks. The early stages of any battle are crucial to determining not only the odds of victory, but also the cost of victory. I also like choosing tanks because it makes my next move unpredictable. I can stack sets of 6 tanks in 3 border territories with one set of 12 tanks in a supporting territory that connects to all three border territories and force my opponent to try to defend 3 separate fronts, simultaneously. Should they miscalculate, I can exploit their weak link and quickly win a significant victory with relatively light losses. Again, the ability to inflict maximum damage in the first 2 rounds of fire, while taking most opposing hits on infantry can significantly change the outcome of a battle.
Hello Corporal Clegg, may I kindly suggest another video including mechanized infantry. How do they change things in the Global 1940 edition, as mechanized infantry makes artillery for an additional IPC as maneuverable as tanks. Btw: I do prefer 5 IPCs for tanks, though. It is your number crunching that confirmed me in my view 😉.
It does actually include tech units! Select the unit, e.g. submarine, and press on the settings symbol. It will give you the option to make the subs 'super submarines', as well as taking that unit last. Nothing for BBR though. Glad you liked the video!
Author of the toolkit here. Glad you enjoy it, I'm unfamiliar with BBR, but the calculator is 100% open source. github.com/Jmeyering/oddsengine Open up an issue on GitHub and I'll try to support versions of the game that the community wants.
And a different sort of flexibility in choice making...since you have more pieces to control. I think the case for artillery is stronger even than the video suggets.
The main reason tanks are good the reason is if you have an infantry and arty pair if you lose one you lose 2 fire power if you have a tank inf pair you only lose one fire power so the investment is worth it up front it might not look like it but it is worth it in the long run as long as you try not to lose your armor
(...not sure if anyone else has pointed this out already....) Note that an army of 10 infantry and 5 artillery has better odds than your option B of 7 of each, simulator gives around 62% chance for 10-5 to win, compared to 7/7 which is around 57%....even though the attack power is lower (10-5 is 5x1 + 10x2 = 25 compared to 7-7 which is 14x2 = 28)..... This seems to be a reasonably good "rule of thumb" that the number of infantry should be around 50% larger than the number of stronger units in an attacking stack to make it efficient - this would mean ideally having 9 infantry and 6 artillery for a 51 IPC cost - and gives close to 2/3 chance of winning. To make it 50 IPC, we swap an infantry for artillery. But...in terms of purchasing units, you probably want to go way over a 3 : 2 ratio of infantry : other because you generally need to use infantry for trading.... Another strategy for in terms of taking advantage of tank speed (and plane speed), is to "time" a big attack for the axis on Moscow by building mostly infantry in the early turns, and then have a round of mostly artillery (3+ turns away), then mostly tanks (2-3 turns away), then mostly planes (1 turn before the attack)....this gives your ultimate axis attack a surge that can be very hard for allies to stop, because your tanks + planes catch up to the infantry and land, making it seem like multiple turns of building are occurring close to the front line... Nice video - this is one scenario that in A&A calculations that you can do the underlying calculations exactly without too much trouble....I've put them below for convenience 1 tank vs 1 artillery Pr(tank survives) = 1/2 = 50% Pr(artillery survives) = 1/4 = 25% Pr(both die) = 1/4 = 25% 1 tank vs 1inf+1artillery Pr(tank survives) = 1/7 Pr(at least 1 artillery survives) = 11/14 Pr(everything dies) = 1/14
Thank you so much for the breakdown! Looking back I definitely could have explored more builds for 50IPCs. At the time of making this video I must have assumed that pairing inf and arty 1:1 was optimum. Now of course I can see why that's not true! Sorry it took me so long to reply, somehow your comment slipped past me.
In any of the Axis and Allies versions, I almost never buy tanks if they cost 6 bucks. They're simply too expensive. Only times I buy tanks when they cost 6, is if I have a factory about to be taken over by the enemy, that can only build 2 or 3 units. And if I got a good chance of holding it by building 2 or 3 tanks, instead of 2 or 3 infantry. Another time I'll buy tanks at a cost of 6, is if I'm handily winning and just swimming in money mid-late game. Tanks at a cost of 5 however are much more useful, and I'll often buy them when I need some speed and punching power amongst my infantry-artillery hordes.
I think the $5 tank 3-2-2 should be standard and the $6 tank 3-3-2 should be a technology development, free technology is a much more entertaining game, you need much more technology, each player filling out their own "research program"(charted 2-12) and each players rolls 2 dice to see what technology they get, not if they get. Toned down technology and no free upgrades. Also technology tokens can be bought, but they must roll the 6 and then rolling 2 dice to see what they got
Thank you for this video Corporal Clegg, I love your content, it's very informative and useful. I don't know if you are still producing videos, but might I suggest a planes vs tank one much like this? I feel that they both have very similar functions. They attack with three, and they have good mobility. Just a though! If you are still producing, keep up the good work!
The $6 tanks offer a great potential for mobile defences, possibly one tank, 4 or more infantry and 1 AA gun, this can be very irritating in Ukraine, someone has to take it and as defender you get to greatly influenced who will have to attack it. If it's ignored and these are Germany units, an advance to the Caucasus can become an option, oops, classic A&,A. I love the old Table Tactics expansion sets for A&A, their WW1 ( Central Powers) we'd use the cannons defend 4, attack 1 and cost $5, very annoying with 4 or more infantry +1 AA gun. The WW3 (New World Order had heavy tanks, and hover tanks, meck infantry and helicopters. . WW1 also had machine guns, attack 2, defend 3 and cost $5, also a very cool WW1 British tank, all players using same pieces.
Thank you for the comment! I still make vids, got a bunch planned, currently got one half done. I just haven't had the time recently to finish it. Comments like this keep me motivated though, so thanks! Tanks Vs fighters is a nice vid idea 👍
5 minutes in, easier to calculate out the odds of infantry + artillery versus 1 armor. This is because it is two versus 1, and because the combo gets a better probability (5 in 9) of scoring a hit in the first round. Actually it's 10 in 14 if we throw away the misses. In this case, we might lose the infantry or we might not, but we are still winners. The second round appears to be 25% probability of prevailing in the 1v1 duel that has a 4/14 of occurring. So the overall result should be 11/14 or 78.6%. For funzies we can repeat the exercise with 2 infantry versus 1 armor. They are the exact same cost, 6g. On the calculator I got 54.4%.
I've always thought transports can carry 2 non-mech type units (Inf, Arty, AA) and only 1 mech unit (tank, mech inf). I didn't think transports could carry a tank + another unit.
You are booth correct. Current version allows an infantry and a tank in a transport, but I have at home the MB acis and allies from 1988 and we sometimes play with the original rules (1 tank only per transport, no mixes).
Good post. I am curious if you would be willing to do a video on tanks vs fighters. Was thinking tanks are a overall better value over fighters specifically for russia defending moscow. Keen to hear your thoughts
Could be an interesting topic to cover, thanks for the suggestion. Here are my initial thoughts... 5 tanks ($30) attacking 3 fighters (also $30) have a 90% chance to win. 5 tanks also add more power than 3 fighters to an army group. Tanks can blitz, capture territory, and defend newly captured territory although this may leave them prone to counter attacks. Therefore fighters might be the better choice for hit and run style tactics e.g. Russia picking off small groups of German units. But another considerable weakness to fighters is their susceptibility to AA guns. Of course fighters can travel much further than tanks and also attack sea zones which may be a reason to prefer the fighter depending on the nation played. For a defensive game e.g. Russia it's nice to have a few fighters early on so you can strike back in places where the enemy is weak, but once the Germans are at the gates of Moscow it seems you're better off with tanks or, better yet, infantry. Thanks for watching my video 🙂
I normally only use artillery and infantry when I really need to defend and want to counter act. When I play Russia a build large amounts of infantry and artillery to defend and then use them to push forward if I win.
Infantry + Art 2 @ (2/6) or [2* 0.33 = .6666] Even if the defender hits, the attacker has again a third of a chance to hit. 1 @ (1/6) or [1* 0.33 = .33] .66 result from first round x .33 result from second round = 0.2178 total result If we subtract from 1 to get the % 1 - 0.2178 = 78.22% likely the attacker will hit on the first or second round. So the fact the attacker has an 80% chance of winning makes sense. Its much more unlikely the defender hits a 50% opportunity twice before the attacking odds
If I'm doing Amphibious landings, I'd take 1 infantry and 1 tank over the usual, one Arty, one Infantry. You've got one "bullet-stopper" (that just may roll that 1) to take the hit from the defender leaving you w/ that mighty Tank to do some actual damage. Too many times, I've rolled numerous hits only to find that I'm just chipping away at the expendable infantry, leaving the attacker w/ his heavy hitter units as the battle contiues. In the end, you find yourself losing battles w/ no real damage to the opponents forces. All you've taken away are a bunch of measily, replaceble infantry units. Pile on those Infantry. They protect your more efficient units, along w/ the potential for some lucky rolls themselves. Don't focus on percentages, or odds. Once you roll the dice you'll see how little these odds and percentages truly matter. They never do. It's a mixed bag of strategy and chaos. Anticipate chaos in every strategy, and find what works for you.
Very true. That's why I don't like using odds calcs during games. Anything can happen when you roll the dice. I still find it interesting to look at the mathematical odds though Thanks for the comment
In an amphibious assault a mix of tanks and artillery is probably the best, because the artillery doesnt start losing their extra attack power when the first infantry dies
But thats not how the combo works. Its two infantry and one artillery. Artillery is only worth it when it bolsters attacking infantry otherwise get a tank. The question is 2 tanks or 2 infantry with 1 artillery. 50 ups breakdown would not pick those buys presented at all. What if it is 4 tanks, 6 infantry, and 3 artillery?
You're right! I think I was just trying to keep things simple. But 10 inf and 5 arty give 62% odds against that enemy force, which is ~5% better than the 1-1 inf arty build. The build you suggested assumes tanks cost 5 so can't really compare to the others. But feel free to play around - you won't find a build of tanks that can beat arty 🙂
this is insightful but in all of these comparisons you forget to mention that you cant roll out as many cheap units at once since there is usually a cap on the amount of troops you can place
Unfortunately it's not that easy! I had to get a friend to help me figure these chances out as I'm pretty clueless myself. The equation is: (1−33%)^(2) 1 = 100% 33% = the chance an artillery will score a hit To the power of 2 because we have 2 units hitting @33% This gives us 0.45 = 45% which is the chance no hits will be scored, which means the chance at least one hit will be scored is 55% Hope that helped!
@@CorporalClegg Good presentation. Nice pictures and you covered every fundamentals about Tank vs Artillery. There is a small issue about your 7 IPCs combo vs 6 IPCs single Tank. IMO, even small is the difference, you have to compare on the same IPC basis. In that case, around 15% difference (7 vs 6) is still important. The trick when comparing 2 groups on same IPC basis, combos x 6 vs Tank x 7, so both have 42 IPCs. You get 12 hits @2 vs 7 hits @3. Then you sum pips and multiply by hits: 24 pips x 12 = 288 vs 21 pips x 7 = 147 This is the general formula for all kinds of mixed units group. When it is homogeneous you can squared the number of hits. (Read about Lanchester's law, if you wish to go deeper about this.) 2 x 144 = 288 vs 3 x 49 = 147. You clearly see that you packed more firepower with Infantry and Artillery combo. And it is a question of balancing all pros and cons, because Tank at 5 IPCs have too much firepower for the cost. While, Artillery and combos requires more planning and should be rewarded somehow. Hence, I also prefer the 6 IPCs Tank, for balancing roster. HTH
@@AugerChristian interesting, I feel the $5 classic A&A tank attack 3,def 2 & move 2 is fine as is, heavy tank development should be this newer $6, attack & defend 3, move 2. Would you think this a good house rule ?
No one buys artillery in our game unless they have a weird math. Tanks tend to be more focused (especially for Germany) due to their ability to move 2 spaces. The ability for 2 space is HUGE. Rolling 3s on both attack and defense isn't a bad perk either but it is the movement that makes them valuable as you ca quickly get them to a front. We have Anniversary (past versions) for reference.
I think artillery is largely useless. You have air units to attack territories. Infantry is cheaper and defends the same as artillery once you take the territory. Unless you are facing an AAA, artillery does not do much for you in a big battle. It adds more offense, but artillery are worse on defense. Therefore, tanks are better because they can defend better once you take the territory. Artillery is really just a gimmick they worked into the game. I generally never buy them. I just use the pieces they give you at the start. If I don’t have enough to buy an infantry, I would rather save the one or two IPC for the next turn. Spending more to get an artillery is also pointless most of the time.
Yea I just got my butt kicked by a German player who kept just buying arty and inf. I was thinking "man this guy don't know what hes doing!" Turns out I was more the fool!
Ya live n learn! I've found arty is really powerful to have as the USSR too. It can prevent the Germans from being able to push forward. Thanks for the comment!
Building only infantry is great defense and then suddenly building all artillery changes much planning, I was going to advance but...not with all that extra firepower. A favorite unit from "Tablet Tactics" " Central Powers" is a $5 Cannon, attacking 1, defend 4, move 1. Great deal on strong defensive units. Russia often would have a dozen or more, very intimidating knowing that even if you destroy it all, they cost less than half the fighters that also defend on a 4. We didn't give any attacking bonuses, seems like we could have. Same A&A expansion having Machine Gun unit $5, Att 2, def 3, move 2. They had a $5 Truck.att & def & move 2. We added noncombat abilities, can move 1, pick up any unit from a newly conquered territory and move it one away (resupplied) to relative safety. Combat move it could bring 1 infantry 2 spaces
Generally, Artillery should only be bought for Russia and Germany and mostly in the first few rounds. In Russia to create a threat that prevents Germany from moving too close, and In Germany before they are able to advance. If either Army has an opportunity to march on the opposing capital, then they should switch entirely to tanks because they can catch up. At 6 per tank, artillery are definitely better if advancing them isn’t an issue. At 5 per tank it is very close and very situational.
.... No wonder you lose(3 years late starting at 5min mark) ... Offense greater than 1 space is never needed. Tanks are garbage. Just buy infantry and win. Axis should win 100% of the time if you do so.
The tank is mobile, that's it's main asset. Also for sea transportation 1 inf+1 tank is better than 1 inf + 1 art.
No it isn’t,
1 art + 1 inf has an attack of 4 and is cheaper then 1 tank + 1 inf which also has an attack of 4
Also, tanks mobility is useless when considering that an amphibious assaults usually take place either on islands or on territories adjacent to other enemy territories thus the tank will rarely use its mobility in an amphibious assault
@@jamicoope9268 It is, if only one unit dies you are left with 3 power instead of 2. It isn't more cost effective, but that's less important when space is limited
Yeah, tanks are good only because you have a limit that complexes can build, they help tac fighters, and can get to the front quicker, and react better.
In G40 I loved the tank + mech inf combo.
@@jamicoope9268 depends on the goal and where you are landing. Landing somewhere with 1 infantry and no other land units adjacent? Tanks will be better because the next round they can blitz or at least have other options. Or if there are other land units adjacent, but they are one or two units tops and you want to hold your land with multiple pieces, then tanks are the way to go.
If you are just wanting to take a piece of territory and you're pretty much thinking that you aren't going to hold it? Then artillery is the better choice.
For me, I like keeping the territory I land in, especially if I'm playing the Japanese and I'm landing in Asia where (by that time) it is mop up duty and I want to rush and grab as much Russian territory that I can as well as put pressure on the UK. If the UK has to spend 18 IPCs (or more if they go with air power instead), then that means less IPCs are hitting Germany.
Two words: Meat armor.
Buy a few strong units and surround them with cheap units. The cheap units absorb the damage while the strong units keep delivering the hits..
Man this was supper informative!! Thats why when playing USSR artillery is so effective daamn, i use to have no idea why that happens, i guees is only time and practice what makes you realize it whitout really knowing it until now. CC thanks for this videos series!! Wow
I was really surprised by some of things I found out making this video. Maybe I should have kept these juicy secrets to myself.. haha.
Thank you my friend
Great video! One of the reasons a pair of infantry and artillery does well against a tank is that they can take 2 hits before they die, and have similar, though slightly higher, chance of hitting. I would agree it depends, if trying to push into China I would use artillery, yet need to defend India with only three units use tanks.
For sure those 2 hits make a massive difference. 80% though? Crazy. Glad you liked the video!
Love the two quotes at the end! Hadn't heard the Napoleon one before.
That poor chap had to conquer Europe without tanks or fighters 😂. Only infantry, artillery and cavalry.
Great video. Thanks for making it. I think the presence of aircraft for the defense changes the outcome of the battle, significantly. I generally choose to prioritize the production of tanks while providing a sufficiently large number of infantry to absorb my enemy's first round of counterattacking hits. By the time my opponent can actually start destroying my tanks, he or she has already absorbed two full rounds from my tanks. The early stages of any battle are crucial to determining not only the odds of victory, but also the cost of victory.
I also like choosing tanks because it makes my next move unpredictable. I can stack sets of 6 tanks in 3 border territories with one set of 12 tanks in a supporting territory that connects to all three border territories and force my opponent to try to defend 3 separate fronts, simultaneously. Should they miscalculate, I can exploit their weak link and quickly win a significant victory with relatively light losses. Again, the ability to inflict maximum damage in the first 2 rounds of fire, while taking most opposing hits on infantry can significantly change the outcome of a battle.
I love that quote from napoleon, do you think a more modern accurate version of that quote would be "God favors the side with the best airforce"?
4:33 I already guessed about 80%, it is 2 rolling at 2 vs 1 at three. People seem to not think about units as (1) HP. It is the obvious answer
Great video Corporal. Fine production value and great information...
Thank you General!
Hello Corporal Clegg, may I kindly suggest another video including mechanized infantry. How do they change things in the Global 1940 edition, as mechanized infantry makes artillery for an additional IPC as maneuverable as tanks.
Btw: I do prefer 5 IPCs for tanks, though. It is your number crunching that confirmed me in my view 😉.
Nice use of the A&A calculator. I wish it could be updated for technologies and a BBR option. Interesting video.
It does actually include tech units! Select the unit, e.g. submarine, and press on the settings symbol. It will give you the option to make the subs 'super submarines', as well as taking that unit last. Nothing for BBR though.
Glad you liked the video!
@@CorporalClegg Yeah...was thinking BBR techs...
Author of the toolkit here.
Glad you enjoy it, I'm unfamiliar with BBR, but the calculator is 100% open source.
github.com/Jmeyering/oddsengine
Open up an issue on GitHub and I'll try to support versions of the game that the community wants.
@@jmeyering11 I like your calculator, but is there a way to have Battleship/Cruiser bombardments? Or am I missing that feature somewhere?
haha i love the quotes at the end, and also very good analysis, I believe you covered everything wow
Thanks buddy!
The better thing about infantry artillery is that you also have more units to eat hits.
Very true!
And a different sort of flexibility in choice making...since you have more pieces to control. I think the case for artillery is stronger even than the video suggets.
The main reason tanks are good the reason is if you have an infantry and arty pair if you lose one you lose 2 fire power if you have a tank inf pair you only lose one fire power so the investment is worth it up front it might not look like it but it is worth it in the long run as long as you try not to lose your armor
Love these videos. Would love to see more on the strategy of Axis&Allies.
Cheers Justin! More videos like this coming in the future. I don't really do strategy videos myself but there are plenty of other channels that do
@@CorporalClegg not like this, and the couple others. Informitive, and good quality.
I did have a video planned for general tips aimed at newer players. But no grand strategy for any particular power
Great job! Very informative.
Cheers Captain!
(...not sure if anyone else has pointed this out already....) Note that an army of 10 infantry and 5 artillery has better odds than your option B of 7 of each, simulator gives around 62% chance for 10-5 to win, compared to 7/7 which is around 57%....even though the attack power is lower (10-5 is 5x1 + 10x2 = 25 compared to 7-7 which is 14x2 = 28).....
This seems to be a reasonably good "rule of thumb" that the number of infantry should be around 50% larger than the number of stronger units in an attacking stack to make it efficient - this would mean ideally having 9 infantry and 6 artillery for a 51 IPC cost - and gives close to 2/3 chance of winning. To make it 50 IPC, we swap an infantry for artillery.
But...in terms of purchasing units, you probably want to go way over a 3 : 2 ratio of infantry : other because you generally need to use infantry for trading....
Another strategy for in terms of taking advantage of tank speed (and plane speed), is to "time" a big attack for the axis on Moscow by building mostly infantry in the early turns, and then have a round of mostly artillery (3+ turns away), then mostly tanks (2-3 turns away), then mostly planes (1 turn before the attack)....this gives your ultimate axis attack a surge that can be very hard for allies to stop, because your tanks + planes catch up to the infantry and land, making it seem like multiple turns of building are occurring close to the front line...
Nice video - this is one scenario that in A&A calculations that you can do the underlying calculations exactly without too much trouble....I've put them below for convenience
1 tank vs 1 artillery
Pr(tank survives) = 1/2 = 50%
Pr(artillery survives) = 1/4 = 25%
Pr(both die) = 1/4 = 25%
1 tank vs 1inf+1artillery
Pr(tank survives) = 1/7
Pr(at least 1 artillery survives) = 11/14
Pr(everything dies) = 1/14
Thank you so much for the breakdown! Looking back I definitely could have explored more builds for 50IPCs. At the time of making this video I must have assumed that pairing inf and arty 1:1 was optimum. Now of course I can see why that's not true!
Sorry it took me so long to reply, somehow your comment slipped past me.
My big question was the amphibious assault because it also gets infantry support but this is a great video
»How many tank divisions has got the Pope?« once Stalin asked. That should answer the question 😂.
In any of the Axis and Allies versions, I almost never buy tanks if they cost 6 bucks. They're simply too expensive. Only times I buy tanks when they cost 6, is if I have a factory about to be taken over by the enemy, that can only build 2 or 3 units. And if I got a good chance of holding it by building 2 or 3 tanks, instead of 2 or 3 infantry. Another time I'll buy tanks at a cost of 6, is if I'm handily winning and just swimming in money mid-late game.
Tanks at a cost of 5 however are much more useful, and I'll often buy them when I need some speed and punching power amongst my infantry-artillery hordes.
I think the $5 tank 3-2-2 should be standard and the $6 tank 3-3-2 should be a technology development, free technology is a much more entertaining game, you need much more technology, each player filling out their own "research program"(charted 2-12) and each players rolls 2 dice to see what technology they get, not if they get. Toned down technology and no free upgrades. Also technology tokens can be bought, but they must roll the 6 and then rolling 2 dice to see what they got
Bro you need to make some more A&A videos! These are awesome!
I'm super glad you enjoy my content! Thanks buddy!
Basically it's versatility versus efficiency.
Thank you for this video Corporal Clegg, I love your content, it's very informative and useful. I don't know if you are still producing videos, but might I suggest a planes vs tank one much like this? I feel that they both have very similar functions. They attack with three, and they have good mobility. Just a though! If you are still producing, keep up the good work!
The $6 tanks offer a great potential for mobile defences, possibly one tank, 4 or more infantry and 1 AA gun, this can be very irritating in Ukraine, someone has to take it and as defender you get to greatly influenced who will have to attack it. If it's ignored and these are Germany units, an advance to the Caucasus can become an option, oops, classic A&,A. I love the old Table Tactics expansion sets for A&A, their WW1 ( Central Powers) we'd use the cannons defend 4, attack 1 and cost $5, very annoying with 4 or more infantry +1 AA gun. The WW3 (New World Order had heavy tanks, and hover tanks, meck infantry and helicopters. . WW1 also had machine guns, attack 2, defend 3 and cost $5, also a very cool WW1 British tank, all players using same pieces.
Thank you for the comment! I still make vids, got a bunch planned, currently got one half done. I just haven't had the time recently to finish it. Comments like this keep me motivated though, so thanks!
Tanks Vs fighters is a nice vid idea 👍
Great video. Well done, Corporal.
Great video!
Very good video nice break down
Thanks LT!
5 minutes in, easier to calculate out the odds of infantry + artillery versus 1 armor. This is because it is two versus 1, and because the combo gets a better probability (5 in 9) of scoring a hit in the first round. Actually it's 10 in 14 if we throw away the misses. In this case, we might lose the infantry or we might not, but we are still winners. The second round appears to be 25% probability of prevailing in the 1v1 duel that has a 4/14 of occurring. So the overall result should be 11/14 or 78.6%.
For funzies we can repeat the exercise with 2 infantry versus 1 armor. They are the exact same cost, 6g. On the calculator I got 54.4%.
with 50 IPC's, I would buy 10 inf / 5 art to do battle - much better odds, 75% opposed to 57% -- 2 or 3 inf to 1 artillery gives you best results.
Yup all land units value depends on the availibilty of ablative infantry.
I've always thought transports can carry 2 non-mech type units (Inf, Arty, AA) and only 1 mech unit (tank, mech inf). I didn't think transports could carry a tank + another unit.
A tansport can carry 1 of any land unit +1 inf
You are booth correct. Current version allows an infantry and a tank in a transport, but I have at home the MB acis and allies from 1988 and we sometimes play with the original rules (1 tank only per transport, no mixes).
Good post. I am curious if you would be willing to do a video on tanks vs fighters. Was thinking tanks are a overall better value over fighters specifically for russia defending moscow. Keen to hear your thoughts
Could be an interesting topic to cover, thanks for the suggestion. Here are my initial thoughts...
5 tanks ($30) attacking 3 fighters (also $30) have a 90% chance to win. 5 tanks also add more power than 3 fighters to an army group.
Tanks can blitz, capture territory, and defend newly captured territory although this may leave them prone to counter attacks. Therefore fighters might be the better choice for hit and run style tactics e.g. Russia picking off small groups of German units. But another considerable weakness to fighters is their susceptibility to AA guns.
Of course fighters can travel much further than tanks and also attack sea zones which may be a reason to prefer the fighter depending on the nation played. For a defensive game e.g. Russia it's nice to have a few fighters early on so you can strike back in places where the enemy is weak, but once the Germans are at the gates of Moscow it seems you're better off with tanks or, better yet, infantry.
Thanks for watching my video 🙂
I normally only use artillery and infantry when I really need to defend and want to counter act. When I play Russia a build large amounts of infantry and artillery to defend and then use them to push forward if I win.
Infantry + Art
2 @ (2/6) or [2* 0.33 = .6666]
Even if the defender hits, the attacker has again a third of a chance to hit.
1 @ (1/6) or [1* 0.33 = .33]
.66 result from first round x .33 result from second round = 0.2178 total result
If we subtract from 1 to get the %
1 - 0.2178 = 78.22% likely the attacker will hit on the first or second round.
So the fact the attacker has an 80% chance of winning makes sense.
Its much more unlikely the defender hits a 50% opportunity twice before the attacking odds
If I'm doing Amphibious landings, I'd take 1 infantry and 1 tank over the usual, one Arty, one Infantry. You've got one "bullet-stopper" (that just may roll that 1) to take the hit from the defender leaving you w/ that mighty Tank to do some actual damage.
Too many times, I've rolled numerous hits only to find that I'm just chipping away at the expendable infantry, leaving the attacker w/ his heavy hitter units as the battle contiues.
In the end, you find yourself losing battles w/ no real damage to the opponents forces. All you've taken away are a bunch of measily, replaceble infantry units. Pile on those Infantry. They protect your more efficient units, along w/ the potential for some lucky rolls themselves.
Don't focus on percentages, or odds. Once you roll the dice you'll see how little these odds and percentages truly matter. They never do. It's a mixed bag of strategy and chaos. Anticipate chaos in every strategy, and find what works for you.
Very true. That's why I don't like using odds calcs during games. Anything can happen when you roll the dice.
I still find it interesting to look at the mathematical odds though
Thanks for the comment
In an amphibious assault a mix of tanks and artillery is probably the best, because the artillery doesnt start losing their extra attack power when the first infantry dies
You can actually write a tiny code and try all the possible combinations.
Great vid bro
I love these videos
But thats not how the combo works. Its two infantry and one artillery. Artillery is only worth it when it bolsters attacking infantry otherwise get a tank. The question is 2 tanks or 2 infantry with 1 artillery. 50 ups breakdown would not pick those buys presented at all.
What if it is 4 tanks, 6 infantry, and 3 artillery?
You're right! I think I was just trying to keep things simple. But 10 inf and 5 arty give 62% odds against that enemy force, which is ~5% better than the 1-1 inf arty build.
The build you suggested assumes tanks cost 5 so can't really compare to the others. But feel free to play around - you won't find a build of tanks that can beat arty 🙂
In G40 for Germany tanks are farmore important as you need to push fast against Russia. That way you can have Moscow turn 5
this is insightful but in all of these comparisons you forget to mention that you cant roll out as many cheap units at once since there is usually a cap on the amount of troops you can place
How is it 55% for the pair? Shouldn't it be 66%?
Unfortunately it's not that easy! I had to get a friend to help me figure these chances out as I'm pretty clueless myself.
The equation is:
(1−33%)^(2)
1 = 100%
33% = the chance an artillery will score a hit
To the power of 2 because we have 2 units hitting @33%
This gives us 0.45 = 45% which is the chance no hits will be scored, which means the chance at least one hit will be scored is 55%
Hope that helped!
@@CorporalClegg
Good presentation. Nice pictures and you covered every fundamentals about Tank vs Artillery.
There is a small issue about your 7 IPCs combo vs 6 IPCs single Tank.
IMO, even small is the difference, you have to compare on the same IPC basis. In that case, around 15% difference (7 vs 6) is still important.
The trick when comparing 2 groups on same IPC basis, combos x 6 vs Tank x 7, so both have 42 IPCs.
You get 12 hits @2 vs 7 hits @3. Then you sum pips and multiply by hits:
24 pips x 12 = 288 vs 21 pips x 7 = 147
This is the general formula for all kinds of mixed units group.
When it is homogeneous you can squared the number of hits. (Read about Lanchester's law, if you wish to go deeper about this.)
2 x 144 = 288 vs 3 x 49 = 147.
You clearly see that you packed more firepower with Infantry and Artillery combo.
And it is a question of balancing all pros and cons, because Tank at 5 IPCs have too much firepower for the cost.
While, Artillery and combos requires more planning and should be rewarded somehow. Hence, I also prefer the 6 IPCs Tank, for balancing roster.
HTH
@@AugerChristian interesting, I feel the $5 classic A&A tank attack 3,def 2 & move 2 is fine as is, heavy tank development should be this newer $6, attack & defend 3, move 2. Would you think this a good house rule ?
No one buys artillery in our game unless they have a weird math. Tanks tend to be more focused (especially for Germany) due to their ability to move 2 spaces. The ability for 2 space is HUGE. Rolling 3s on both attack and defense isn't a bad perk either but it is the movement that makes them valuable as you ca quickly get them to a front. We have Anniversary (past versions) for reference.
maybe they should make "Heavy Tanks"
I think artillery is largely useless. You have air units to attack territories. Infantry is cheaper and defends the same as artillery once you take the territory. Unless you are facing an AAA, artillery does not do much for you in a big battle. It adds more offense, but artillery are worse on defense. Therefore, tanks are better because they can defend better once you take the territory. Artillery is really just a gimmick they worked into the game. I generally never buy them. I just use the pieces they give you at the start. If I don’t have enough to buy an infantry, I would rather save the one or two IPC for the next turn. Spending more to get an artillery is also pointless most of the time.
1:18 I pick D, 6 inf+5 art+2 tanks
"God favors the side with superior artillery" - Napoleon Bonaparte
Yea I just got my butt kicked by a German player who kept just buying arty and inf. I was thinking "man this guy don't know what hes doing!" Turns out I was more the fool!
Ya live n learn! I've found arty is really powerful to have as the USSR too. It can prevent the Germans from being able to push forward. Thanks for the comment!
Yea spamming infantry and some artillery to back them up when pushing forward, tho very simple, is the best strategy in Axis and Allies.
Building only infantry is great defense and then suddenly building all artillery changes much planning, I was going to advance but...not with all that extra firepower. A favorite unit from "Tablet Tactics" " Central Powers" is a $5 Cannon, attacking 1, defend 4, move 1. Great deal on strong defensive units. Russia often would have a dozen or more, very intimidating knowing that even if you destroy it all, they cost less than half the fighters that also defend on a 4. We didn't give any attacking bonuses, seems like we could have. Same A&A expansion having Machine Gun unit $5, Att 2, def 3, move 2. They had a $5 Truck.att & def & move 2. We added noncombat abilities, can move 1, pick up any unit from a newly conquered territory and move it one away (resupplied) to relative safety. Combat move it could bring 1 infantry 2 spaces
Arty beats tank in this game just like in real life!
Drones?
Generally, Artillery should only be bought for Russia and Germany and mostly in the first few rounds. In Russia to create a threat that prevents Germany from moving too close, and In Germany before they are able to advance. If either Army has an opportunity to march on the opposing capital, then they should switch entirely to tanks because they can catch up.
At 6 per tank, artillery are definitely better if advancing them isn’t an issue. At 5 per tank it is very close and very situational.
Of course you want at least a 2:1 ratio of infantry to artillery. Once artillery lose their bonus to infantry attack power, tanks are just superior.
You really struck Silver with this Informative video, would've been Paydirt Gold✨ if you could've added mech infantry to the mix in your Equation!!!👍
Thank you! What would you have included about mech?
@@CorporalClegg Just the option of the mobility factor with the tank...
@@nolimit7959 Fair point!
what type of board are you using? the latest one doesn't have Italy
It's Axis&Allies Anniversary Edition
@@CorporalClegg thanks lad, quite expensive though.
10×Inf + 5×Art would have been a better build than 7/7.
Superior Firepower Doctrine
Wow I picked A woops
.... No wonder you lose(3 years late starting at 5min mark) ... Offense greater than 1 space is never needed. Tanks are garbage. Just buy infantry and win. Axis should win 100% of the time if you do so.