What is a balanced Revised Bid?

[Perry]

When AAR hit the market I think the general bid level trended around 3.
We’ve all seen bid levels creeping higher and higer up.

What is, today, a “Correct” / Balanced AAR bid, given equally skilled players?
We are of course talking about Fullplacement bids here.

As soon as we get some 10-15 votes we can start calculating averages, to get a ‘market’ bid level…

I’ll start things off, voting for ‘10’.

[Jennifer]

I am going to assume you do NOT mean FIDA bids since those are arbitrarily high. (Because the bids in non-FIDA bids are for the basic equipment you think you need to win, when you go FIDA you have to double that amount so you can still get the units you think you need to win.)

In that case, I think I need 8 or 9 IPC to win as the axis, that means I’ll vote for 9. (Since it is the higher of the two numbers.)

However, I should note, I don’t like my opponent having more than 7 IPC unless we play with a no navy bid rule.

[Woodstock]

May we use this poll for general discussion on bids aswell?
Because, I don’t think there shouldn’t be any bids at all.
The challenge for the Axis is to win with what they have got.
Agreed, I have only played 1 Revised game so far and lost with the Axis, but with Classic I have gotten my share of Axis victories…without bids or any other privileges.
Is Revised that much more in favor of the Allies, that the Axis actually need a bid to win?
So, I am going with 4 or less.

[Perry]

@Perry:

We are of course talking about Fullplacement bids here.

No, not FIDA. We’re talking fullplacement bids here.

[Guest]

@Perry:

@Perry:

We are of course talking about Fullplacement bids here.

No, not FIDA. We’re talking fullplacement bids here.

Pardon my lack of knowledge, but what precisely is a “FIDA Bid” and what is a “fullplacement bid”?  And what is the difference between the two?  I have not used bids, although I do use a fair number of house rules.

[Jennifer]

FIDA is a system that was devised by some of the gaming clubs, DAAK, AAMC, Flames of Europe and something starting with an I.

Anyway, basically, it states that 50% or more of the bid has to be retained as IPC to be spent after the game starts, the rest can be used for units placed immediately on the board.

All this does, in my opinion, is turn a 9 IPC bid for 3 infantry, for example, into an 18 IPC bid for 3 infantry and 9 IPC.

[Guest]

Thank you, Cmdr. Jennifer.

[axis_roll]

@Woodstock:

May we use this poll for general discussion on bids aswell?
Because, I don’t think there shouldn’t be any bids at all.
The challenge for the Axis is to win with what they have got.
Agreed, I have only played 1 Revised game so far and lost with the Axis, but with Classic I have gotten my share of Axis victories…without bids or any other privileges.
Is Revised that much more in favor of the Allies, that the Axis actually need a bid to win?
So, I am going with 4 or less.

Classic and Revised both favor the Allies.  Revised reversed much of the imbalance, but did not eliminate it.
A bid IS needed to even the game out, IMHO

[Woodstock]

Looking at the poll results so far, it seems you are not the only one.
But then I wonder…isn’t that the beauty of playing with the Axis? When you win with them, without bids or any advantages, then you feel good.
I will never forget the first time my Japanese guys were having sushi in the Kremlin.  :-D

[03321]

Woodstock.  There is no problem in playing the game without bids.  But the poll is for a bid that makes the game balanced, meaning both sides have as close to equal a chance as possible to win given equally skilled players (very important for tourneys, etc.).  You seem to agree that the axis is at a disadvantage because it is more fulfilling to win as the axis, so you’re really agreeing that a bid is needed to balance the game.  But again, for games where you’re just playing for fun, and not in a tournament or other group where your record matters, playing without a bid is fine if that’s what you want.

[Woodstock]

@03321:

Woodstock.  There is no problem in playing the game without bids.  But the poll is for a bid that makes the game balanced, meaning both sides have as close to equal a chance as possible to win given equally skilled players (very important for tourneys, etc.).  You seem to agree that the axis is at a disadvantage because it is more fulfilling to win as the axis, so you’re really agreeing that a bid is needed to balance the game.  But again, for games where you’re just playing for fun, and not in a tournament or other group where your record matters, playing without a bid is fine if that’s what you want.

Kick ass remark actually, thanks.
Indeed, with my statement, I am agreeing with a bid for the Axis.

But besides that, I still am interested in whether or not I am the only one who gets some satisfaction from winning without bids.
Unless that’s too off-topic.

[Zero Pilot]

My ftf gaming group doesn’t use bids so I’m used to whatever advantage/disadvantage that brings to the table for the respective sides. I’m not used to a bid though. The other day I played a pick-up 4 player game online where the axis had like an 8 bid. I was Russia and sure wasn’t used to that automatic 2nd transport in the Med. round 1.

Well from my perspective I think the perfect bid is Axis 3. Just to add another dude in Libya and only that because if Anglo-Egypt round 1 goes sour for Germany the rest of the game is an uphill struggle for the Axis. Nobody wants to play a game that’s largely decided by round 2. In fact, just add the dude to the initial setup and do away with bidding altogether. ~ZP

[Jennifer]

Interesting off shoots:

I have played games with most likely outcomes on Round 1 and starting in Round 2 - can be fun.

I have also played games where you don’t bid for extra units, you bid for reduced units for the allies (Allies chose what units are removed.)  This, so far, seems to be close to 11 IPC worth of units lost and is almost always the submarine in SZ 52 and an infantry in W. Canada.

[Woodstock]

@Zero:

My ftf gaming group doesn’t use bids so I’m used to whatever advantage/disadvantage that brings to the table for the respective sides. I’m not used to a bid though. The other day I played a pick-up 4 player game online where the axis had like an 8 bid. I was Russia and sure wasn’t used to that automatic 2nd transport in the Med. round 1.

Well from my perspective I think the perfect bid is Axis 3. Just to add another dude in Libya and only that because if Anglo-Egypt round 1 goes sour for Germany the rest of the game is an uphill struggle for the Axis. Nobody wants to play a game that’s largely decided by round 2. In fact, just add the dude to the initial setup and do away with bidding altogether. ~ZP

Very well put. I do like that thought of extra dude in Libya. Just to even out the odds on that first roll a bit indeed.
But for the rest, I defi see the challenge with the Axis as they are.
In round 1 both Japan and Germany seem to be in the better position then the Allies, and it’s then where you have to make the most out of it.

[Jennifer]

Speaking of an extra “dude” for Germany.  If you put him in Ukraine you shift the odds of that battle into Germany’s favor which should result in having an extra fighter for Egypt.  That’s significantly more impact on the Egypt battle than an extra infantry in Libya.

Just my personal opinion on it.  I have not run the numbers recently, I just remember that the Infantry in Ukraine really made an attack on Ukraine a sour proposition for Russia.  Can’t remember if Russia still has odds to win or not, I think they can “win” but won’t get the land or something and have a good chance of losing one of their fighters in the conflict.

Check it out for yourselves, as I said, I did not run the numbers, I don’t plan to do so now.

http://frood.net/aacalc/?mustland=0&abortratio=0&saveunits=0&strafeunits=0&Clear=Clear+units%2FOOLs&techs=on&aInf=2&aArt=&aArm=&aFig=&aJFig=&aBom=&aHBom=&aTra=&aSub=&aSSub=&aDes=&aCar=&aBat=&adBat=&dInf=1&dArt=&dArm=&dFig=&dJFig=&dBom=&dHBom=&dTra=&dSub=&dSSub=&dDes=&dCar=&dBat=&ddBat=&ool_att=Bat-Inf-Art-Arm-Tra-Sub-SSub-Fig-JFig-Des-Bom-HBom-Car-dBat&ool_def=Bat-Inf-Art-Arm-Tra-Sub-SSub-Bom-HBom-Des-Fig-JFig-Car-dBat&rounds=&reps=10000&luck=pure&ruleset=LHTR&gameid=&password=&turnid=&territory=&round=1&pbem=

[03321]

Actually having an inf in Lib makes taking Egypt more likely than having a fig to send from Ukraine if you send Germany’s bomber + 1inf/1tank from Seur to Egypt in both cases (96% vs. 92%), even though you have more of a chance to kill off everything in Egypt with the fig.  And if you’re thinking ahead to UK’s possible Egypt counter, the chances of Germany having 2 tanks or more to hold Egypt with is 87% with 1 more inf vs. 70% with 1 more fig.  Of course in the long term you can take Egypt back again on G2, and having the extra fighter is certainly a plus.

As for Ukraine, 1 extra inf makes the attack a 74% chance for Russia to take with at least 1 tank, 88% to clear with at least 1 fig, vs. the normal 89% chance to take with 1 tank+ and 96% to clear with 1fig+.  In this case, if Russia attacks and wins (still decently likely), Germany’s Egypt attack with 2inf/2arm/bom will have an 84% chance to take, but only 62% to have 2 tanks+.

[Funcioneta]

@Cmdr:

What if you lost both USA’s aa guns?  :-D

[Jennifer]

@Funcioneta:

@Cmdr:

What if you lost both USA’s aa guns?  :-D

AA Guns and Industrial Complexes are not units, that’s why they are white and not a country color. :P

[Funcioneta]

ICs and aa guns are units. In fact, both prevent blitz with tanks because they are units. They are white because you can capture them.

[Perry]

Please keep yourself On-Topic. Couldn’t care less about why ICs are colored white :-D

With 22 Votes counted, we’ve got a weighted bidding average of 7,9

I would have thought that bids should have gone higher, given a balanced game of Revised

Oh well, the Voting continues  :-)