I’ve never used bidding in AAR, since it’s much more balanced than the original A&A, but I do see some potential bias in favor of the allies and I can see the value in a bidding system.
From what I’ve heard though, the bidding approaches that seem most popular don’t strike me as very well balanced. If I’m wrong about how people are bidding please let me know.
My current sense is that it’s usually some $ amount of troops placed by the axis at their discretion for either power at the start of the game, in locations already occupied by axis troops.
Two issues come to mind with this:
This leaves the axis the option to place units strategically in a way that changes the game dynamic greatly (e.g. japan with a 3rd transport that reach africa & india on turn 1). This type of flexibility shifts the entire strategic outlook for certain powers, and I don’t think the basic game setup is designed to absorb the shock. Certain bid placements completely change the game with widely varying results and effectiveness.
This leaves the axis player the option of setting up the game so that it’s pushed heavily towards german or japanese disproportionate strength. For instance, if I gave Japan $8 more to start the game, a KGF strategy would immediatly be recommended because I’ve made the axis stronger overall, but in an unbalanced way.
Instead, I think a more balanced bid system would make sense.
Have the axis get whatever bid seems needed, then take that $ amount, divide it by two and give half the money to each axis player to use on their turn 1 production (remainder goes to germany which has the bigger economy).
You could still bid as much as you like to make this an effective balancing for your game, but it would prevent either axis from gaining too disproportionately, or from changing the whole game setup initially. The same would be true if ever bidding help to the allies. Rather than that all going to russia and changing the strategic design of the game, a balanced distribution simply gives the allies a boost but still requires them to play the game with the same core challenges.
Is this ever used?
Most bidding goes to the Axis, as if the Allies were ever used effectively - and they can be - they could quite potentially crush Germany and in the process save Russia’s bacon before it was taken by the Japs. It seems the Axis needs help on many fronts, but usually the IPCs go towards men in Africa, so Germany can hit it hard, or to the European theatre, such as in Belo or the Ukraine.
Yeah, I suppose the bidding does skew things the game designer maybe never meant it to, but sometimes the bid can be quite helpful.
If you really want to see how effective an Axis bid is, it seems in the latest tourney, ALL the Axis players won, which is maybe saying something about the bid.
yup, i’m not opposed to bidding, just thinking about the pros and cons of different methods.
re: the tourney, if ALL axis players won, maybe people were bidding too much to play allies, no?
yup, i’m not opposed to bidding, just thinking about the pros and cons of different methods.
re: the tourney, if ALL axis players won, maybe people were bidding too much to play allies, no?
I’m not sure I understand what you mean, but I don’t think anyone technically “bids” to have the Allies. People sometimes bid high because they hope they can get the Axis with that high bid and use it wisely and put it to go use, say 2-3 inf to Ukraine or 2-3 inf to Libya or even something in Asia/Pacific theatre. But I don’t think people - well, I sure don’t want to always play the Allies :-P :-D - always bid high just to want to play the Allies. But some do. Most don’t, I think.
clumsy way of saying it on my part – i meant the bid amount allowed to the axis in return for you getting to play allies.
@The:
I’m not sure I understand what you mean, but I don’t think anyone technically “bids” to have the Allies. People sometimes bid high because they hope they can get the Axis with that high bid and use it wisely and put it to go use, say 2-3 inf to Ukraine or 2-3 inf to Libya or even something in Asia/Pacific theatre. But I don’t think people - well, I sure don’t want to always play the Allies :-P :-D - always bid high just to want to play the Allies. But some do. Most don’t, I think.
I would never bid higher than 7 in a perfect world. It’s too advantage for axis having a new trannie. But I bid 9 technically to have allies, because if I bid 7 a get axis 90% of times, and I don’t want play the same side again and again.
If you bid low, you are more likely to play the Axis, if you bid high you are more likely to play the Allies. To me, the side I’m playing matters as least as much as 1-2 IPC going one way or the other, so it is something I take into account when placing my bid.
I would never bid higher than 7 in a perfect world. It’s too advantage for axis having a new trannie. But I bid 9 technically to have allies, because if I bid 7 a get axis 90% of times, and I don’t want play the same side again and again.
Then why not bid 8? Then you can play both the Axis and the Allies from time to time, and if you win the bid, you can profit from the unbalancing extra Axis transport ;)
Because I discovered that even bidding 8, the ratio was getting 2 games as axis for 1 as allies :-D. If I want allies, the minimal bid is 9
A trannie for Germany is nice, but a trannie for Japan leads to some habilities that many would label as … unnatural (said with Palpatine’s voice :mrgreen:)
Sorry for the Star Wars cameo :-D
Because I discovered that even bidding 8, the ratio was getting 2 games as axis for 1 as allies :-D. If I want allies, the minimal bid is 9
A trannie for Germany is nice, but a trannie for Japan leads to some habilities that many would label as … unnatural (said with Palpatine’s voice :mrgreen:)
Sorry for the Star Wars cameo :-D
:lol: :lol: :-D :-D Heheheh, + 1 Karma Func, that was priceless.
How exactly does the bidding work for most people as far as the process of bidding goes. How do you make sure the opponent doesn’t get the chance to see your bid and than decide on theirs?
Kind of a newbie question to be asking but the bidding system is new to me. I’m thinking of how people work it out for games played on TripleA or even on these forums.
(Sorry that this is off topic and a hijack of sorts.)
Bungaroo, check out:
http://frood.nfshost.com/aacalc/makegame/
Enter a game id (whatever), enter two existing email addresses in Player1 / Player2.
Enter a bid value in ipc for ‘yourself’
In the Textbox, enter a description of the bid (for example: 1 inf , 1 arm to LIB)
Press ‘Submit’
Now Player2 get an email with a link to a webpage, whereupon he has to enter his counterbid.
When both player has submitted a bid, the winner gets declared through email. The webpage resolves ties through a random choice, and declare the winner as usual
How exactly does the bidding work for most people as far as the process of bidding goes. How do you make sure the opponent doesn’t get the chance to see your bid and than decide on theirs?
In addition to Perry’s post about “blind bidding” (both people submit bid without seeing the other persons bid and lower bid gets Axis) there are also alternative bidding methods that can be used. Most, if not all, on-line clubs use some form of blind bidding (FIDA bid see below).
But if you’re looking for variety you can use an auction bid where you go back and forth multiple times until one side finally gives up (great for FTF games). Ie, Player A bids 15 for Axis, Player B bids 11, Player A Bids 9, Player B bids 7, and Player A then says, fine you get Axis with 7.
There is also bidding with declared placement, which is similar to auction (go back and forth) but you openly state what you are going to place. This allows for slightly higher bids and more variety. For example If someone bids 18, you’d probably say no way, fearing they’ll just place 6 inf on Ukr or something, but with declared placement they may say I bid 18 for 1 bomber to Ger and 1 inf to Lib, and in this case you may grant the 18 bid, or a 13 bid for a 1 ftr + 1 inf, etc. Good for giving naval or airforce boost to G or J.
On this site, we use blind bidding with full placement. So a 3 inf bid means you can put all three inf anywhere including all on the same territory.
Most other sites use a FIDA (the first letter of the names of the other PBEM clubs) bid. Where you can only use half the bid for units, but the other half is cash. These tend to be higher then a full placement bid.
I believe the TripleA Ladder uses a 9 bid with a limit of 1 unit per territory and each player plays each side when agreeing to a game.
Thank you both!
Here’s another complete system; very easy to use. If you have seen the game show “Name that Tune” then you’ll get the concept immediately.
Caspian Sub Bid Rules
1. Roll for high roll to see who gets the first bid.
2. Conduct the bid like “Name that Tune”. The player with the first bid says “I can win with the Axis and X IPCs.”, where X is the number of IPCs the bidder receives to play the Axis. You are always bidding to play as the Axis.
3. The other player either lets the first player have the bid or counters with a bid that is smaller than the first bid such as, “I can win with the Axis and X-2 IPCs.” This is a bid-down system.
4. Keep going until a bid is accepted. If the bid ‘goes negative’, then the bid becomes “I will take the Axis and give the Allies X IPCs.” Counter-bids then become higher values given to the Allies.
5. Once the bid is accepted there is a pre-game bid placement turn. Whoever is getting the IPCs may buy units to place on the board.
a) Unit costs are normal
b) Land units can be placed in any territory a power controls
c) Naval units can be placed with other naval units or in territories adjacent to a power’s land
d) There is a limit of 1 bid piece per territory
e) Powers cannot put their units in another power’s territory (i.e. no German pieces start in Japanese territory)
f) IPCs do not have to be spent on units. IPCs not spent on units can be given to any of the team’s powers.
6. Play starts as normal with the Soviets.
