Game Play - Strategy & Dice frustration

[[cK] Hesh]

How do you break up the monotony of the game when it feels bias and formulaic? I've played a good 2 dozen ranked matches now and I've lost the vast majority of them playing as Allies. The dice are less then stellar for me, but mostly on the defense. As Russia, Germany rolls over my army with impunity. As UK, I can barely move out and lose my Navy. As the US, it takes forever to do anything meaningfully. Much of it due to dice rolls against me, and mostly on the defense.

I know dice are a contention of dislike. In the same token, skill gets brought up and I'd like to know what qualifies as skill verse dice results in another's favor? Some times the dice results make sense, other times the rolls are just absurd to call it BS. How do you guys deal with it when strategy is on a slippery slop to winning and 1 or 2 losses can mean the whole game?

[ReoHays]

This is the main difference between top players and the rest of us. They take the bad and play so it does not hurt them as much.
I was just out of the top 10 for Gold and I thought I had this game won. I had 17 subs against 2 DD 3 Carriers and 6 planes. The plan was to wipe the fleet and invade the Philippians. The US just put a factory there and I wiped most of there fleet the turn before. But my 17 subs got 1 hit and they got 9 hits... This left them with another destroyer and 6 planes. My 8 subs missed and he got 6 hits. left me with 2 subs and my invasion force. Now he can wipe out my invasion force and leave me with no TP's and his 2 TP's and 4 men and 6 planes can take J's capital. Yea, I coulda, shoulda, but didn't.
I should learn something from this loss, but... Thats why I am not a top player.

[VaBhodi]

Originally posted by cK Hesh:

How do you break up the monotony of the game when it feels bias and formulaic? I've played a good 2 dozen ranked matches now and I've lost the vast majority of them playing as Allies. The dice are less then stellar for me, but mostly on the defense. As Russia, Germany rolls over my army with impunity. As UK, I can barely move out and lose my Navy. As the US, it takes forever to do anything meaningfully. Much of it due to dice rolls against me, and mostly on the defense.

I know dice are a contention of dislike. In the same token, skill gets brought up and I'd like to know what qualifies as skill verse dice results in another's favor? Some times the dice results make sense, other times the rolls are just absurd to call it BS. How do you guys deal with it when strategy is on a slippery slop to winning and 1 or 2 losses can mean the whole game?

This is why I don't play #META, and if we cross swords with even dice, we're going double digit rounds.......

[Ris Dnalor]

Originally posted by cK Hesh:

... what qualifies as skill verse dice results in another's favor?

Skill vs. dice? That's learning how to mitigate the influence of dice in the game by active understanding and controlling the risks that you are taking in the game.

My advice...

Find and use a dice calculator, if you're not already- you'll need one that doesn't just give odds of winning, but one that gives you the odds for every possible outcome. Sometimes a 99% chance of winning, doesn't leave you with enough units left which makes the win worthless.

Join the Discord and ask questions there and read the many discussions on strategy.

Watch the strategy videos on youtube.

Watch what your opponents do and learn from them things to do, and things not to do.

Dice do not matter for ranking, because everyone experiences the same dice. The higher ranked players just limit how badly the dice can hurt them through their strategy.

If you're in the mindset of improving your game, try not to worry about losses. In the grand scheme of things, playing against people who are more skilled than you is part of learning, and in that case most people end up losing a whole bunch of games while learning.

[VaBhodi]

Originally posted by Ris Dnalor:

Originally posted by cK Hesh:

... what qualifies as skill verse dice results in another's favor?
Skill vs. dice? That's learning how to mitigate the influence of dice in the game by active understanding and controlling the risks that you are taking in the game.

THIS.

Every Loss is a lesson. Usually can be broken down to a large mistake move or a sum of small moves.

This game is all about risk management.

[bearfieldlee]

Actually, 1942 second edition is not the best version of the game in my opinion. In Anniversary edition for example, Britain is much more viable as a long term strategic player as opposed to being relegated to minor nuisance like in this version.
Hell, even in the basic 1941 edition (2012), Germany is capable of maintaining a fleet for a little while. These variances and others lead to more interesting and unpredictable games.

[Juggernaut]

Originally posted by cK Hesh:

How do you break up the monotony of the game when it feels bias and formulaic?

Agree with @Ris Dnalor on all points, but I also think that your question is not developed enough to provide a good answer. It's unclear whether you are a beginner asking for a rundown of the basics or a vet looking for some ideas. You have left out a lot of strategy discussion and specific problems you are having, like late game, allied logistics, axis pressure, etc. Allies have the edge in this iteration of 1942 SE. What little I can offer based on how your question is worded is that you seem to be focusing a lot on dice and battles (ie "the German army rolls over mine with impunity"). My suggestion would be that you focus on income. Playing to win in this game usually requires you to make the right purchases at the right time and use the exact right number of units in each place on the board so you can maximize your income.

I could be totally wrong to assume this applies to you, but usually when I see people talking about the "dice preventing me from moving out," it makes me think that they are playing overly conservatively a lot more often than they should. This may help visualize it in a very general sense:
Poor players play with no regard for risk or resource management; they buy tanks (and other expensive attacking pieces) and rush to take terrible trades, hoping to catch their opponent off guard.
Mediocre players play super safe, buying only infantry and stacking (hoping for a 100% battle in their favour), letting their opponent make big income gains across the map.
Good players play the board state and their opponent, adjusting their purchasing patterns to hit a timing attack (VC victory or early moscow capture) or to secure a massive income advantage and slowly choke their opponent out.
All three of these assessments come down to how well an individual manages risk, not dice. It may seem like semantics, but if you are really managing risk well, you are already planning for poor results.

The typical terrible result that would really make me consider an allied opener unwinnable would be like ~3 inf in WR, failed Ukraine, maybe a successful German 4-1-1 mixed with some other poor results too. If slightly below average results are making you feel like you cant move out, then probably you are not increasing your risk tolerance to match the board state. If I am playing against a player on an even board, I am unlikely to take major battles at less than 95%. When I am losing and have less than a 30% to win, 40% on a major stack starts looking reallll tasty. These are two extremes, but you can see where I'm going. I am also far more likely to employ riskier strategies after a poor opener, such as heavy air purchasing + SBR.

Hope this helps.

[$N4K3 <O> <O>]

Try low luck. 40% of players want it ranked. Most of those who don't want it ranked have never even tried it (lol.. even the biggest advocates for standard dice have never even tried low luck which is a joke on top of a joke). Low luck is ---BY FAR--- more strategic. Players will say "you have to account for the swing in standard luck" but that's honestly a joke. While in standard luck 1 infantry can beat 50 billion fighters there is no accounting for swings, only accounting for the less probable of the probable. It's a joke. In low luck there are very simple rules which allow you to look into moves 2 or 3 FULL TURNS ahead with more predictability than "accounting for the swing" on even one standard luck MOVE (a single larger battle). It's a bit tricky to get used to but once you do, you'll never look back. (I rarely can look 3 turns ahead and haven't been able to fully just yet but I'm still improving (more like 2.5 turns when it gets that complex), still 2 turns is pretty typical and the ability so do so puts standard dice to shame)

[montrealsteak]

As Allies you have options to not feel monotonous.

The easiest US strat at lower to mid level is heavy US bombers. Build up to 6 or 8 us bombers and take Berlin IC to -20 every round. Use some of your US fleet to help protect your UK fleet if needed and trade all available provinces with UK. Search this forum for Cow’s bomber strat to get good instruction.

Eventually learn the med shuck and be prepared to transition to Finland shuck around round 4 or 5. This will help you get to gold.

Watch YouTube vids when you can to get the details. Quintin’s med shuck vid is a classic.

[VaBhodi]

Originally posted by cK Hesh:

How do you break up the monotony of the game when it feels bias and formulaic?

Don't play #META.Problem solved.

[moore_winford]

Don't complain about the dice it does nothing. You just have to expect the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ and move on. But try new stragety and keep playing. One thing i read from one of these top players is that they only have 3 or 4 games going at one time and it has help me from not making blunders but the dice still suck

[[cK] Hesh]

Thanks for the replies. I've read through them all. Quite an assortment of replies. When I created the post, I was feeling annoyed with the same pattern I've been experiencing. In my case I playing Russia. In my experience, the vast majority of the games, Germany focuses on Russia. Karelia is a forgone conclusion. Only on a swing dice roll will Russia maintain it throwing in the kitchen sink for maximum defense. Even then it's a huge drain for Russia. While by turn 2, Germany just builds Tanks. Mean while, as Russia, I need to control Western Russia as a buffer for the capital and as a staging point for Caucasus to sent units up to Karelia and outwards to the West. I would like to defend against Japans encroachment but Germany takes up all of the resources to defend against while struggling from low IPC and the ability to move out after taking a beating.

I could talk about my experiences as UK or US for the Allies, and either Axis powers. As I originally mentioned, dice rolls are a key component to the game. While statistics can make people feel good about their odds, even decision making, to me they don't matter and shouldn't. I've taken risks and been punished for them. Yet, if you don't take risk to bleed your opponent or to collect IPCs, you'll lose to from an overwhelming build up of quality units and cannon fodder (sorry Infantry). I've played enough of the actual board game and computer game to experience all sorts of outcomes.

So my post comes down to damage control. Can you reverse a trend in the current game as an Allied power when things are going bad for you while Axis closes in? This is an open ended question for any given round. Is it a matter of pulling in and playing defensive to build back up to push out again? it's a delicate balance to control land for IPCs while trying to maintain an army from being picked apart. Yeah, playing Allies requires teamwork and actually leaving post-it notes on the board to coordinate (which people rarely want to engage with me). The 1st round or two is tough. You have the need to want to push back, to do something. Yet, I see more of building back up and out, as US in the Atlantic, more impactful. Ultimately, it's a race against time for the Allies to counter Axis's offense.

[Father of WAR]

as allies, i often lose russia on the same turn conquer japan. so if russia ties up german forces it has done its job.

[VaBhodi]

Hesh, I used to beat my head against the wall with the #META USSR open which, if you didn't get diced in Ukraine and lose you would lose your USSR tanks and nueter yourself as an offensive power by the end of G1. WHY !?!?!?!?

I saw Snake Plissken and MRAF's "WR Jam" ...West Russia Jam.

I came up with my own variant: WR JAM , UK RAF. Where UK saves boats and buys air for the first several Rounds. Usually have enough fighters in WR to give Germany pause just as USA is coming online to get past Germ planes and land in Finland (Scandinavia preferably owned by USSR for the extra 3 every turn.)

I would challenge you to take lessons from losses (as you learned with Karelia), and come up with something that stymies the #META players, because you varied from the script.

Sometimes, it works out :) Most times they get reckless. That's where the dice decide. Not on some script I'm expected to play like just another bot. "Frak that.

[VaBhodi]

Originally posted by Father of WAR:

as allies, i often lose russia on the same turn conquer japan. so if russia ties up german forces it has done its job.

I'm assuming you are a KJF type. I have similar experience with KGF.

USSR need to hold off Germany until UK and USA can take over the Western Front and USSR can push Japan back into the ocean from where they came.

If Japan is occupied with UK and USA in the Pacific, USSR MUST hold the Western Front.

Seems like an inverse, proportional equation.

[Juggernaut]

Originally posted by cK Hesh:

So my post comes down to damage control. Can you reverse a trend in the current game as an Allied power when things are going bad for you while Axis closes in?

Reversing a negative trend means winning a losing game against a player of equal skill, if you're playing on the ranked ladder. This is a tall order, but my advice would be to start buying air. Not only does it provide a more solid defense of Moscow in the short term, it opens up risky plays that can turn the tide in your favour. For ex, when you have 8-12 fighters with UK and some armour, you can open up a trading path with US in say, Khaz, and hit J reinforcements behind it with 1-2 arm and a ton of fighters. You can also strafe adjacent units with pure air. I'm not saying buy only air when you're losing, but after the inf has been purchased to maintain your trades/income, put all the rest towards that. When games go late the number of units on the board makes misplays catastrophic. Heavy air games are some of the most confusing to play, as every stack across the board has to be calced every turn or the risk of your opponent making a mistake skyrockets.

The problem with increasing the risk threshold is that you are either going to stabilize the game, or lose even harder. My argument would be that you have a better chance when you are taking odds in the short term to try and stabilize the game than if you were to try and play out an infantry stacking slog against a player who is better positioned than yourself. If Allies haven't broken Karelia yet on like round 6 of a KGF, germany is sitting on 45 income and my opponent is continuing to buy pure inf.... I'm going to win that game almost 100%.