Who makes out better with the bid?

[squirecam]

@Corbeau:

@squirecam:

This is where you lost me. You WANT USSR to attack UKR, but then you place an AA gun there, which should assure you that USSR does not attack UKR.

Now, if you placed an INF there, you have better odds of USSR doing what you want them to, and you still have an art left over for lybia.

Therefore, aren’t you better served with an inf placement rather than your AA ?

Quoting myself… Here we want Russian to either not do the Ukraine opening OR to commit 3 tanks to do it instead of it’s 2 fighters + 1 tank.

So no, infantry bid won’t ensure Russia commit 3 tanks if they still do it since they can use fighters without risks. Of course i’d rather keep Ukraine but i plan for the worst case scenario also, which infantry don’t allow me to do. I’m also using that AA gun to protect my 10 units stack G1 once i retake it. It have no value for Russia since i don’t need air units to do so.

USSR 3INF 1ART 3TANK 2FIG. Thats 21.

GER 3INF 1ART 1TANK 1FIG. Thats 15.

Add one German inf and it is 21-17. Take away a single USSR tank, and its 18-17.

I dont see why USSR would attack UKR and not bring its tanks. It really needs them to win.

[Corbeau Blanc]

If i go with raw dice numbers, adding an AA gun will result in Russia not sending fighters.

USSR 3INF 1ART 3TANK = 15
GER 3INF 1ART 1TANK 1FIG. = 15.

If Russia send fighters, normal scenario happens, i get AA shots on fighters and get back my AA gun the next turn with my 10 units stack and backed with a prepared tank push. I don’t lose that AA, it cannot be destroyed.

3 tanks is indeed the safe way to take ukraine. 2 tanks, yields a 85% chance to take land + 96% to kill fighter. One tank still gives slighty above 50% chance of winning and higher ones to kill fighter ( don’t have the numbers). Some players, do take chances when they can trade evenly and they are the same that inflicted me a defeat in that scenario

[squirecam]

@Corbeau:

If i go with raw dice numbers, adding an AA gun will result in Russia not sending fighters.

USSR 3INF 1ART 3TANK = 15
GER 3INF 1ART 1TANK 1FIG. = 15.

Some players, do take chances when they can trade evenly and they are the same that inflicted me a defeat in that scenario

Then this is the fault of a bad player. It is poor decision making to send in 3 tanks for a 15 v 15 UKR battle, and leave out your fighters.

Either you attack UKR or you dont.

But you DO NOT attack, using all your tanks, w/o your fighters

[Corbeau Blanc]

If you want the safest approach, it’s true, you send 3 tanks and 2 fighters. Then how my AA gun is not a good 7 and less ipc bid?

Will you still send thoses 2 russians fighters or you will not do Ukraine? Both scenarios are happy ones for me. Worst case, I’ll recapture my AA, kill thoses 3 tanks anyways and if my AA hit, then it’s beer time.

I don’t see 1 more german infantry offer me that much opportunities. 3 tanks, 2 fighters will still roll over Ukraine while the above force you to risk units you can’t afford to lose as Russian. My few experience doing that were succesful, russian fighters are too valuable to risk for most players.

[squirecam]

@Corbeau:

If you want the safest approach, it’s true, you send 3 tanks and 2 fighters. Then how my AA gun is not a good 7 and less ipc bid?

Will you still send thoses 2 russians fighters or you will not do Ukraine? Both scenarios are happy ones for me. Worst case, I’ll recapture my AA, kill thoses 3 tanks anyways and if my AA hit, then it’s beer time.

I don’t see 1 more german infantry offer me that much opportunities. 3 tanks, 2 fighters will still roll over Ukraine while the above force you to risk units you can’t afford to lose as Russian. My few experience doing that were succesful, russian fighters are too valuable to risk for most players.

1. Your AA bid leaves nothing for Africa. An inf/art bid does.

2. You said you thought attacking UKR was a worse move for USSR than not attacking. If so, then you want USSR to attack. An inf bid allows for the attack (at a greater cost to USSR). An AA bid doesnt.

[Corbeau Blanc]

So if i follow you, i am placing an AA bid to Ukraine to make sure Russia attack!?

How about i remove my Ukraine fighter from the game board for mechanical unreliability causes? Would that make sure Russia hit Ukraine?  :-o

[Guest]

@Mazer:

Use the bid on an AA gun?  No, seriously?

The only possible worse bid would be a sub that couldn’t defend itself against air attacks in a land-locked body of water, like say, maybe, a Caspian sub.

Snort.  OK, +1 karma to you for that, considering where you are coming from :-)

[Guest]

Ukraine Heavy attack (3 INF, 1 ART, 3 ARM, 2 FIG)

Option 1:
AA Bid to Ukraine ($5 of the bid)
92% Russian win, with an average of 2 ARM, 2 FIG left

Option 2:
INF bid to Ukraine (only $3 of the bid)
86% Russian win, with an average of 2 ARM, 2 FIG

Net result:
For $2 less, I decrease the Russian win percentage by 6% by buying an INF instead of an AA; AND as Germany do not have to risk my FIGs to AA when I want to liberate it on G2.

WIN/WIN/WIN (cheaper/better odds/less future risk) for Germany to NOT buy an AA, but to place an INF instead.

[Jennifer]

@Mazer:

Come to think of it, from Paper #07:

Appendix D: What Do You Mean You Can’t Destroy the AA Gun?  Your Guys Can’t Find Any Rocks?

Whatever happened to sweet, scorched earth?

In the old versions of AA, you couldn’t have multiple AA guns in the same territory.  That meant that if Germany lost Western Europe, the Germans would have their own AA gun firing at them on the retake.  We didn’t like that.

We liked destroying things as soon as they were going to fall into enemy hands.  Putting an AA gun on a defenseless transport was the only legal way to do it.

In AA4, you can just move the gun back to your capital with any other guns, so it’s less of a big deal.  But why can’t you just blow up your own stuff?  You can’t just push it into the ocean?  I mean, you have guns and bombs and stuff, why not just stomp on the AA guns with both feet, like a monkey?

Caspian Sub scientists have been working around the clock to answer this question and they have made a tremendous discovery: the gray plastic pieces are completely indestructible.  You will notice that an IC is never destroyed, AA guns are not destroyed, and plastic chips are simply recycled between you and your enemy.  We do not know what goes into the gray plastic, but be warned that the gray plastic is EXTREMELY DANGEROUS.  Apparently it is made of the same substance they use to make the black boxes in airplanes, only it’s gray.  The only way to put an AA gun out of commission is to hide it under the ocean.  And notice that even that doesn’t destroy it; it simply cannot hit planes anymore.  If possible, build your own units out of this substance.

---

Okay, Mazer’s getting good karma for that.  It was cute and made me smile!

[Jennifer]

@ncscswitch:

Ukraine Heavy attack (3 INF, 1 ART, 3 ARM, 2 FIG)

Option 1:
AA Bid to Ukraine ($5 of the bid)
92% Russian win, with an average of 2 ARM, 2 FIG left

Option 2:
INF bid to Ukraine (only $3 of the bid)
86% Russian win, with an average of 2 ARM, 2 FIG

Net result:
For $2 less, I decrease the Russian win percentage by 6% by buying an INF instead of an AA; AND as Germany do not have to risk my FIGs to AA when I want to liberate it on G2.

WIN/WIN/WIN (cheaper/better odds/less future risk) for Germany to NOT buy an AA, but to place an INF instead.

We need an option 3 with an armor bid to Ukraine. (Artillery would be same as infantry, except the threat of more firepower on counter attack if not destroyed.  However, the AA Gun costs 5 IPC, the Armor costs 5 IPC and the Armor defends better.)

Just a thought.

[Guest]

Believe it or not, an ARM Bid yields the same median results as an INF bid…

86% Russia win with 2 ARM, 2 FIG left.

[Jennifer]

Wow.  I’da thought the +17/18% increase in the chance of getting a hit over the infantry would make it significantly better.

[Guest]

There are differences in the above and below median ranges, but they are minimal; negligible with the additional cost factored in.

[Jennifer]

@ncscswitch:

There are differences in the above and below median ranges, but they are minimal; negligible with the additional cost factored in.

Makes me wonder if a psychological component could be brought to play there with the armor vs infantry.  Then again, 50/50 isn’t too hot in my opinion, better - for me - to bid 2 infantry in Ukraine and tip the scales more.

[a44bigdog]

Personally I like to give the bid to Japan as a transport in sz37

I think a Mediterranean transport sucks too much of Germany’s resources into Africa and doesn’t generally survive long enough to be of much use against Russia. As far as troops to Germany those are of use so long as they are on the board. I don’t think Russia attacking Ukraine is a bad thing for Germany and as far as Africa is concerned killing the tank and fighter in Egypt is the priority.

Japan still buys 3 transports for Japan to have 4 dedicated to Japan on round 2. The bid transport is therefore able to earlier start clearing islands and pick off English IPCs.

[Jennifer]

SZ 37 is not a help in taking Hawaii, a44.  The idea of the transport for Japan, IMHO, is to take out a third American fighter.  Otherwise, I’d rather have ground forces in Asia for Japan (or Africa/Europe for Germany.)