League General Discussion Thread

[Stucifer]

Please take advantage of us! 😉

@surfer incentive to complete 3 games 🤓

[simon33]

@Arthur-Bomber-Harris said in League General Discussion Thread:

@simon33 you don’t have to discuss NG infantry. Just deny the placement if they want to put a troop there and hadn’t requested that exception prior to bidding. Rules are clearly posted on the forum and their job to know they have to ask for exceptions.

Guess so but if they then don’t want to play is it a loss? We would need @gamerman01 for that one.

[Arthur Bomber Harris]

If nobody has made a move in the game, it would be a bit rude to claim a win for a League match. Call it a “no-contest” and move on to an opponent who is capable of reading the rules.

I have certainly had many times where my opponent pointed out rules that I did not fully understand. Sometimes they showed me the statement in the rulebook. Sometimes it was ambiguous and a mod had to make a determination. In all cases, I was able to resolve the interpretation differences and continue playing the match (like most grown-ups are capable of).

[simon33]

@Arthur-Bomber-Harris Guess that’s a reasonable viewpoint. It would make me frustrated to go through the whole bidding process and then not actually have a game though.

[Arthur Bomber Harris]

@simon33 Not as frustrating as getting diced on G1 and giving up since you failed a 99% roll on Paris!

Hopefully the unsolvable disagreement over NG is also a 1%-frequency event. I don’t see anyone in the League playoffs who did a NG bid, but haven’t searched through every single match.

[simon33]

@Arthur-Bomber-Harris And those scenarios have certainly happened to me.

[gamerman01]

Allowing bid units to blank territories or zones is a whole new frontier we don’t want to broach.

New Guinea is an exception that many players like, and allow, but if you have one exception, people will want more.
New Guinea has to be agreed by both players and should be done before bidding, otherwise you would probably need to bid over, yes.

I would suggest that players who want the New Guinea bid in play should be the ones stating that before bidding starts, because they are wanting something beyond default league rules.

In the event that you bid against such player and then find out he’s placing an infantry in New Guinea, you would then have to re-bid if you don’t accept it, and you can point out to him that it is not standard.

If you are in a playoff game and hypothetically the New Guinea player will not budge, he would forfeit the game because he refuses to play by league rules. Of course sporting and reasonable adults would work it out with zero animosity, but the answer is ultimately you have to play by the rules, this is how we prevent tug-of-wars

In regular season play, you would simply not start the game.

[simon33]

Thanks for the discussion guys. It has always irked me slightly about the NG bid but never seemed worth having too much of an argument about.

[gamerman01]

The last game I played, I decided to just go ahead and list out all the things I’d place with the bid, and my opponent liked the idea and did the same. With this method, you would know about a New Guinea bid before agreeing to a number

[simon33]

@gamerman01 said in League General Discussion Thread:

The last game I played, I decided to just go ahead and list out all the things I’d place with the bid, and my opponent liked the idea and did the same. With this method, you would know about a New Guinea bid before agreeing to a number

I think that is reasonable for a playoff game but a pain for a regular season match. YMMV.

[Booper]

@Arthur-Bomber-Harris said in League General Discussion Thread:

@simon33 Not as frustrating as getting diced on G1 and giving up since you failed a 99% roll on Paris!

Hopefully the unsolvable disagreement over NG is also a 1%-frequency event. I don’t see anyone in the League playoffs who did a NG bid, but haven’t searched through every single match.

I think most players could find an alternate placement for those 3 IPCs. Otherwise, you could rewind the bid 1 turn, and have the other player take Allies.

[gamerman01]

OK, this is actually going to be pretty great.

There is now a pinned thread for
PTV
BM4
OOB

Threads devoted to those versions. Talk about characteristics of the version, strategies, your regular season games, and hopefully the PLAYOFFS!

I would think we will enjoy more discussion about each version separately, and also this general discussion thread can be much cleaner and everyone will just be so much happier

ENJOY!

[surfer]

@Stucifer I will plan on it. Although PTV has just that much more to react to with the additional scramble rules. There is definitely a learning curve. You might take me down the first several games.

[gamerman01]

2025 League rules have been updated from 2024.

There are only a couple sentence structure corrections, and proper links provided for the rankings, and that the BM and PTV rules are now located in their respective discussion threads and not on a dedicated pinned thread where it used to be.

Just remembered, the one change being made is @Arthur-Bomber-Harris proposal that the past year champion and runner up are automatic 1 and 2 seeds for the playoff, assuming of course they enter. After that, lifetime ELO score at 12/31.

Thanks, @Arthur-Bomber-Harris , that is a great idea.

[Martin]

@simon33 I would never allow for that bid and never have. It is like a bid-multiplier, and I wouldn’t accept that.

[crockett36]

@simon33 said in League General Discussion Thread:

Since its the time in the year for reviewing rules, can I suggest we change this one to allow land units on empty territories, really only an issue for New Guinea.

• The nation placing a unit in a territory or sea zone must have started with a unit in said territory or sea zone prior to placing the bid.

Reason for change is that pretty much every player accepts the bid and so does Triple-A. So why not make the standard rules what is normally practiced?

Let me jump on this post. Thank you, Simon. Is there a reason we don’t take January to adjust the rules for OOB slightly? People say it’s stale or boring, so why not change it? I’ve said this before (International Federation of Axis & Allies Players) but since we are the aforementioned, may I suggest the rule of 3. Per year only one rulebook change, one adjustment to bid, one adjustment to a unit. You don’t have to make all three changes, but you can.

I would personally suggest the top 3-5 players in the OOB bracket make the adjustments. I would also ask that they come up with an option bid number and placement. That can serve as an optional guardrail or a base for other players. Lastly, I would suggest they have one of the tripleA guys in the discussion.

[crockett36]

Might I also suggest an in-person Axis & Allies gathering to bring us all together? It could be exotic or in Dan’s Jensen’s hometown. Or perhaps mostly based around the person who can or is able to host it? Or just swarm onto a local, smaller con like Totalcon up here in New England? We can invite Larry and make it a thing.

[crockett36]

@crockett36

To broaden the post, why not take January to adjust any of the various game?

[Daaras]

@crockett36 Stucifer is actually coming to visit my brother and I in february and we are going to be rolling many many dice.

I would love an in person get together. The question is where?

[crockett36]

@Daaras and again, I’m aiming for less tournaments more gathering so the games would be fun not necessarily Extremely competitive walk away with a trophy.