Thanks so much for the input everyone.
First game with a bid
-
Just spitballing here, but I’m seeing some pretty large bids for the allies.
Has anyone tried, and thus can tell me the merits and demerits of, the following bids:
(A) Strategic Bomber for Russia.- Thoughts: Gives Russia the ability to fly back and forth as needed on the East, West and China fronts.
(B) Fighter for China (technically they start the game with 1, but it IS a valid unit for them, so you COULD bid another one.) - Thoughts: Sure would annoy the crud out of Japan as it seems, or at least used to be, a primary goal for Japan is to kill that pesky Chinese fighter. Not to mention, with 2 fighters comes economy of infantry units since you can send 2 inf, fig against two places instead of sending 3 or 4 infantry after one and 2 infantry, fighter after another.
© Submarines for SZ 98 - Thoughts: More punch for Taranto attack + CRD against Italy for a while at least. Double annoyance factors.
(D) 4 or 5 infantry for France - Thoughts: Seriously, if I have to spell it out then maybe you need to go back to classic. lol. More dead Germans, more dead important Germans, more live Frenchmen so less income for Germany, slowed down advance against Russia (cause they focus harder on Paris and thus not on Normandy/Vichy France for a round) but then, it’s a thrown away bid since it dies round 1.
(E) 2 or 3 mechanized units in the Soviet Far East (1 or 2 armor, a mech infantry) etc. - Thoughts: Just again, to annoy and harass Japan some. Slower the march back to Moscow, the more Russia earns, the more they earn, the harder it is for Italy/Germany.
Keep in mind, I’ve basically be out of the community for a few months, things change so…
- Thoughts: Gives Russia the ability to fly back and forth as needed on the East, West and China fronts.
-
not bad ideas jen.
-
not bad ideas jen.Â
I’ve used the Russian bomber before against the Japanese transports in previous editions of the game. Harder now that you can’t just fly out to the Sea of Japan and sink them because of scrambles, range, etc. But I could see you still being able to do it near Kamtchka (the sea zone north of the Sea of Japan) and still being able to bring it back into attack range of the Germans by the end of the next round.
-
I’ve tried 2 inf on Yunnan, no luck. not enough to make any difference whatsoever. Perhaps 3 or 4 would be a game changer.
-
With how many times I’ve seen Yunnan either fail miserably, or been a complete route, I don’t think it would ever be my first choice.
Szechwan for artillery or another fighter, or even a tank (though with TripleA I don’t think it will LET you put a tank there) would be interesting. Slow down the Japanese, and even if all you do is buy India another round, it could compound itself greatly against Japan.
-
Armor and bomber bids for China are legal in league play? What the hell, China cannot make those units!
-
Why in the world would you give a bomber to China?
-
Why in the world would you give a bomber to China?
No idea, I suggested one for Russia, not China.
@Cow:
Armor and bomber bids for China are legal in league play? What the hell, China cannot make those units!
4)…A bid will be used to determine which player will be Axis and which will be Allies.
@Cmdr:
4c - You must place as much of your bid on the board before the start of Germany’s first turn.� � Any remainder may be retained for use at the end of your turn.� � This provision supercedes any previous ruling.
I’m not sure exactly what this means. � Can you re-word or clarify please?
Is it just saying that you must place your bid on the board at the start of the game and any extra is banked as IPC’s to the power of your choice?
Are there any restrictions on the bid?
In AA50 league I have asked and the moderators have agreed that they need to spell out the details of the bid rules anew this year, because they’ve carried forward old Revised bid rules from year to year so many years that players don’t know what the rules are anymore.
The rule should answer questions such as, can I place a Japanese bomber on Berlin to start the game?@Cmdr:
4c - Any IPC gained by your bid must be spent on units to be placed on the game board prior to the start of the game. � You may retain no more than 2 IPC for purchases later in the game. � You must inform, in your bid placement phase, which power(s) are to receive the IPC for use. � You do not need to retain any IPC for use later, but it is a limited option.
@Cmdr:
Because of bidding rules a lot of us have grown accustomed to over several years, could you please clarify any placement rules - for example, can the Germans put a sub in an empty sea zone?
In other words, do you have to place boats in zones you already have a starting boat in, or a ground or air unit in a territory you control at the beginning of the game?
Thank you for being responsive to my other input!
Good idea.
Any units you purchase with your bid amount are to be placed in any territory you control at the start of the game. � If you purchase a naval vessel, it may only be placed in sea zones where you currently have a naval vessel.
Examples:
Germany may place ground units in Holland since it is a territory they control at the start of the game.
Japan may place a submarine (or any other naval vessel) in SZ 33 (Caroline Islands) because they already have ships in that sea zone - at the start of the game.
America bids 36 IPC and wins, they may place an aircraft carrier and 2 fighters in SZ 10.Where does it limit you to what your country may, or may not build? �
Hey, if you assumed China couldn’t build an armored unit with bidded units, that’s on your head. :P � It was probably a safe assumption since you can’t even put a Chinese armored unit on board in TripleA (a major flaw in my mind) but I see nothing in the league rules that says you may not place such a unit on the board.
Unless I missed a passage in the rulebook saying that under no circumstances may China own these types of units. Â In which case, then no, you may not even bid them into existence.
Page 10 of the Second Edition Pacific 1940 Rule Book:
China may spend IPCs only to purchase infantry units and does not use industrial complexes.
same page:
At the beginning of the game, China has a United States fighter unit located on the map. This represents the American volunteer group the Flying Tigers. This fighter is considered part of the Chinese forces for purposes of movement and combat. It cannot leave the territories that China is restricted to, even to attack and return. If it is destroyed, the US player cannot replace this fighter unt for China.
In my opinion, this means you can bid American units into China as volunteers that, for the purposes of movement and combat, are considered part of the Chinese forces.
Since China may not occupy waters, of course, and start with none on the board, you may not bid any naval units for China, so no Aircraft Carriers or Battleships or anything for them (although you may bid said units for France…)
-
I wish the league rules were less of a dictatorship and more of a community thing. At least no one is putting a bomber in amur and cheesing sz 20 and at least a cruiser stands a good chance at a mutual destruction.
Remind me to cheese China bids in league games. Slap an AA gun on yunnan round 1. An 11 bid is super good, 1 aa gun and 2 inf on yunnan round 1. Super cheesy.
Someday you guys will learn how one sided putting a bid on one territory can be.
~Well if people want to play me they have to play 1 unit per territory or give me the allies at 11 so I can cheese hard.
~I used to recommend artillery for amur and attacking Korea before they included Korea as part of the Mongolia pact. That was some good cheese. The yunnan cheese is super good too. You can lockdown the Burma road and effectively secure +6 NO you would not normally get in a normal game and thus prevent Japan from taking India for a long time.
-
To be honest I never read the league rules. I usually say 1 unit per territory and if they do not like it, then no game. I do not mind someone getting armor units for China as a bid, it is just weird.
-
I wouldn’t say they are a dictatorship. We did have a discussion in October and November before the official first day of league play.
However, interpreting every rule thereafter cannot always be put up to a community vote. When it can, like increasing the amount of times you can play the same person, or increasing the size of the play offs, basically anytime it does not penalize players for their previous actions or give them unfair advantage with a change, I try to let everyone input their thoughts.
That said, AA Guns, Air Bases, Naval Bases and Industrial Complexes (both major and minor) would be instances of non-legal bids for China. Although, China may control AB/NBs I believe, so I could be dissuaded there, just not sure who in their right mind would try to do so and as for AA Guns, I am open to being persuaded about those as well. Complexes, of course, are strictly forbidden per Page 10 of the Pacific manual for 1940 Second Edition so even if I wanted to let them be bid in for China they would have to be removed immediately since China cannot own them.
Yea, attacking Amur was always a favorite move for Russia. Glad it was included, however. I never liked that Russia could invade with impunity, but Japan couldn’t. A far better rule would be to close off the Soviet Far East and force all invasions to come in from the South (through India/Middle East or China) and just give Russia 6 IPC a round for the Far East.
-
You may only bid 1 unit per territory, so the Cheese that you are talking about is illegal. The bomber with Russia is legal, but super gay… A player that is willing to put his 12 bid into a russian bomber to try a risky attack on a cruiser transport is someone that I don’t want to play against, to be honest.
Standard bids are 10-12. I won’t bid less than 12 for allies, but many games go at 11. 12 usually see’s 2 subs for UK. One in 98 and one in 110. 11 bid is a sub in 98, and the other 5 IPC’s are usually spent in Africa.
-
@Cow:
To be honest I never read the league rules. I usually say 1 unit per territory and if they do not like it, then no game. I do not mind someone getting armor units for China as a bid, it is just weird.
Interesting philosophy. It’s not currently a regulation, but I have no problem including it next in next year’s league. Or, perhaps, limit the amount of value of bidded units in any one territory or sea zone to be 8 IPC or less (which is probably 2 ground units, or 1 naval unit.) Be an interesting discussion for when that time comes.
As for China having the potential of non-typical units, my problem is this: How do I justify not allowing it halfway through the season? It isn’t a matter of making the league more accessible like allowing you to play past opponents more often, or increasing the number of those allowed in the playoffs, we’re actually changing a rule of the game. Since, as far as I can tell, there is precedent for China to have units it cannot build, there is no current restriction on them having them - just not being able to build them after the game has started - then I feel I cannot change it now. Be more than glad to include it as a regulation for 2014, however, assuming the community decides that during the discussion of the rules coming up. It’s just never been an issue before now.
Hearing a lot of caterwauling over Russia putting planes in Yunnan prior to a Japan attack there. Uhm, how about you don’t attack Russia with Germany round 1? There, no Russian reinforcements for the Red Chinese and any bid placed there, in anticipation of Russian assistance, is wasted. Not to mention, Germany gets a round of extra money for not being at war with Russia and can line up her own attacks better. Call me crazy, but it just may work….
Lastly, I would hate to see someone in the league pick and choose opponents because they want them to play the game their way. It feels, to me, to be unsportsmanlike.
-
@Cmdr:
As for China having the potential of non-typical units, my problem is this: How do I justify not allowing it halfway through the season? It isn’t a matter of making the league more accessible like allowing you to play past opponents more often, or increasing the number of those allowed in the playoffs, we’re actually changing a rule of the game. Since, as far as I can tell, there is precedent for China to have units it cannot build, there is no current restriction on them having them - just not being able to build them after the game has started - then I feel I cannot change it now. Be more than glad to include it as a regulation for 2014, however, assuming the community decides that during the discussion of the rules coming up. It’s just never been an issue before now.
Hearing a lot of caterwauling over Russia putting planes in Yunnan prior to a Japan attack there. Uhm, how about you don’t attack Russia with Germany round 1? There, no Russian reinforcements for the Red Chinese and any bid placed there, in anticipation of Russian assistance, is wasted. Not to mention, Germany gets a round of extra money for not being at war with Russia and can line up her own attacks better. Call me crazy, but it just may work….
Lastly, I would hate to see someone in the league pick and choose opponents because they want them to play the game their way. It feels, to me, to be unsportsmanlike.
Jenn,
Sino-Russian politics operate independently of the Europe map. Germany doesn’t need to attack Russia for them to declare war on Japan.
Also, is there an example of a game where Chinese units were bid other than inf and art? If there isn’t, I don’t see why changing it now would have any retroactive implications.
-Zigg
-
Yea, I had forgotten Russia was unique and could declare on Japan whenever. Had that corrected already.
As for China, I think it’s a nut to leave alone now and look into limiting it later. ATM, it’s legal to put any ground or air unit you want on China as part of the bid, for league. I see no harm coming from it, and I don’t see any benefit from putting an armor unit or an AA Gun (although the later would be a LOT of fun!) in China.
The current arguments are all along the lines of impact on Yunnan - so far. Complete with the ones complaining of allowing more than one bid unit in a territory. Honestly, if I wanted to be all Empresslike and declare by fiat what I want, I’d say “no units to be allowed to be bid for China or placed in China” and be done with it.
I do have to say, at least the provision is there to say you must own the territory to put bid units there! Otherwise, there would be a valid argument in allowing America to put bid units in Szechwan and thus, force Japan to attack America early, if they wanted to take Szechwan.
-
You may only bid 1 unit per territory
League on this forum does not have this rule.
-
Haven´t really played much with bids and when I have, I have never had more than 10 IPCs to spend.
Now I am about to play a game as the Allies and with 20 IPCs to spend thanks to a most generous Axis bid.
Would it be legal to place a UK minor IC in Egypt? (Triple A allows it)
I am not saying the IPCs can´t be spent more wisely, but I like the idea of a minor IC in Egypt from round 1 and I still got enough IPCs left for a sub or dd in SZ 98…
-
a minor IC is legal. Unless your opponent opposes it, I suppose.
-
An IC in egypt is legal, and if your opponent allows is, then you can do that as your bid. But its not always the smartest decision for a bid.
-
I’d be curious about a minor in Egypt paired with successful Taranto. Egypt would be pretty hard to get without Germany sending considerable resources.
Suggested Topics
