Japan's super economy -the end of the world?

[ItIsILeClerc]

@Zhukov44:

2 points to keep in mind re. bids

1.  A bid is a way to ensure that the game is considered fair by both sides.  Players like Cow want a minimum bid because at the end of the game they don’t want their opponent making excuses about how the Allies usually lose because they are the weaker side.

2.  Imbalance necessitating bids does not harm the overall quality of the game.  On the contrary, bids enhance the quality of the game.  A large Allied bid means that there will be dozens (if not hundreds) of options for the bid.  This leads to enhanced gaming variety, while a static game without bids is more likely to lead to a few winning strategies played over and over.  With Global (as it was in Revised and AA50), an unorthodox bid is frequently the fountainhead of a new strategy.

Fair enough Zhukov, I like this fresh perspecive.
Maybe both the Axis AND the allies should have a standard bid to enhance gaming variety.

I must admit playing with an average bid (+10) has had surprisingly minimal effects on my usual game-experience. For the few times I did play with it. In other words: it didn’t seem to hurt the Axis as much as I thought it would and I also didn’t have the feeling I (as allies) wouldn’t have been able to do what I did I if I would not have played that bid (sub in #98 and ART in Alex). Nor did I feel tremendously better equipped.

So I guess low to average bids are great to keep players satisfied without disrupting ‘intended gameplay’ too much…

[Cow]

13-14 is average to me.

16+ is the high end. Anything less than 12 is low. A 12 bid is the typical inf new guinea, inf africa, sub 98, less than that is weird.
~

I played enough opponents to know if you do not have a bid, you will 95% of the time lose.

I will J1 DOW. Round 3 I will have the same income as the allies. I will take Calcutta round 4-6 you cannot stop this, actually that is a lie, I have lost a 99.9% battle for calcutta and I sent everything for that… sort of like Germany attacking France round 1 and losing… there is like a 1% chance that happens… a bunch of other 1% bs things that can happen to you in this game… but if that is really the only way the allies can win, it is sad.

[Cow]

That is the core problem for the allies. The axis can make the allies income really fast.

The allies start out of position and most of their total unit value is in buildings like random air bases in iceland etc, you would much rather have the much cheaper bomber than an airbase in iceland to start with. So there is no unit advantage for the allies. You got no income advantage. You got no positioning advantage.

There is no advantage for you on the map anywhere except in the pacific. There is the only place you can go dollar for dollar with the axis and come out even or on top.

[gamerman01]

The Allies have their advantages.  It’s in the number of powers they have, the fact that there are backtoback turns, and the fact that these multiple powers are located in the same place, where they can work together.  The Axis only have Germany and Italy together for awhile, and ANZ/France can interrupt their combined moves.

Also, China’s ability to build unlimited in any territory, even newly taken ones, is potent.
Ability of UK to land air on territories the USA or China just took is also very powerful.  (Also, ANZ following up on USA/China/UK before Germany or Japan, although not Italy)

I think you have to know what you’re doing to win as Allies to be consistently successful - it just doesn’t take as much experience to win with the Axis.  If you know what you’re doing with the Allies, you do not need to get lucky to win, so I disagree with Cow on that point.

If you play G40 like previous games of A&A, you will have a very hard time winning with the Allies.  There are various situations where the Allies should voluntarily enter situations where they do not have >50% chance to win a battle, or have a negative net TUV expected result.  Their units, in general, are not as valuable as the Axis units.  If you are afraid to lose units as Allies, the Axis player can just go down their checklist and take out one Allied stronghold at a time using all of their power.  The Allies need to try throwing monkey wrenches in the gears, and sometimes those monkey wrenches will just get crushed with little to no effect.  In my experience so far, few players are able to grasp this concept.  The other thing is, the Axis already have all the powerful units in position, and you are in control of the game situation, the politics, and the game.  The Allied player has to react to you.  Taking the Axis fits much easier with previous A&A experience - learning the G40 Allies takes some time and experience, but with know-how, they do have a 50% chance of winning.  Maybe.  :-P

[Cow]

Yes the allies need to lose to win…. you see how flawed the allies is? You take battles you know you will lose and there is a higher probability you roll less than average hits compared to the axis probably of rolling more than average hits (more dice = more chances)…

Have one strong power is clearly better than multiple weak ones especially when it comes to attacking. It sucks having to do 3 attacks on one fleet, usa first, then uk, then anzac… I do this all the time too.

~

The lose to win strategy also only works if you have an income lead, because if you start losing higher net tuv units… you need something to make up for it like an income advantage.

[gamerman01]

It’s not just TUV, it’s position.  Most players will go out of their way to get a net positive TUV exchange, or to pick up a territory that’s worth a few IPC’s, but it often costs them more than they realize.  You can’t quantify everything, there are many qualitative factors.  The Allies have to get their hands dirty, they have to get involved.

That’s what’s amazing about G40.  You can’t boil it down to a formula, and you can’t always successfully play the economic advantage game just because you’re ahead of the other side by 20 IPC’s per turn.  That’s nothing compared to position and the sheer volume of units currently on the board.  The way you talk, I’m not sure you even get that, Cow

[Cow]

Total units is important. It is the one advantage the allies truly have. Having to split their power into multiple countries is a disadvantage, especially when it comes to attacking.

Yes it is lots of blocking here n there with destroyers moving around and praying.

What happens when Germany bombers enter the pacific? No more blocking Japan.

[Cow]

Point is you need USA to be heavily invested into the pacific in order to have these options.

Hence Pacific every game coming out from experienced allies players.

[Cow]

Another common thing is for the allies to frontload everything for a round. So Japan has to choose between one or two attacks.

Again this is all Pacific. Europe is much more linear and the allies suck in Europe. The only reason Pacific goes well is because you have Siberia and a richer USA compared to playing Pacific 1940 by itself.

Europe on the other hand is typically where allies lose the game lately.
~

Games typically are a race. You race the pacific and getting Japan out of the game against a Europe VC win.

[ItIsILeClerc]

I agree with Gamerman’s previous comments. What more is there to say.

For example TUV and economic difference are important but not the holy grail. Obviously, because you can make 40IPCs/turn more than the axis and have 100 units more with the allies but this means nothing if you kill both Germany and Italy with it while Japan grabs its 6th VC (Hawaii/Sydney).

I suspect Cow is playing psychological warfare with us, to make potential opponents so afraid to play his axis that they already lost the game before it has even started :wink:.
As is said in the novels of the wonderful sci-fi saga ‘Dune’, by Frank Herbert: ‘fear is the mindkiller (…).’

[Cow]

If you are too afraid to play me just admit it. It is okay. I am still willing to give you 42 ipc worth of bid units. The full package baby.

All you can eat.

[Cow]

I want you to beat me. I want to be humbled. I want to be silenced. You can forever quote me and post a link to the game you beat me in.

If I win. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdFJ13MTZX8

You cannot beat me.

[Cow]

Tell you what if 5 inf central, 1 armor egypt, 1 sub sz 98, 1 inf new guinea, 1 bomber archangel is not to your liking…

Then you can have allies at 18 ipc 1 unit per territory.

[Cow]

I put my game where my mouth is. I made the playbook, so everyone can see everything I do before I do it, 2 years later STILL CANNOT BE STOPPED. I am like a rock and I cannot be moved.

My league games, I play for speed to crank out the wins, it is not optimized, it is all in. You want me to bust out my A game? The unstoppable Cow? I do not even lose when I do all in “for fun” strategies.

When is the last time I lost with the axis? A year ago? PLEASE DEFEAT ME. I CHALLENGE YOU. I want to lose. The possibility of my defeat makes me want to play. Give my axis a challenge. Do it please. Do it.

~

Remember the name, Cow, the dice god.

Playing on the forum with triple a is your best shot at winning, because live over the triple a lobby, you will lose. Low luck you will lose. Every time I get the axis in my hands it is ridiculous.

[ItIsILeClerc]

Yeah I hear you Cow, it’s OK.

You need a strong, seasoned allied player that has the time to play a couple of games with you. And the will to face your psycho-warfare ;-). Why don’t you challenge Boldfresh or ErwinRommel again? I see they already have experience in defeating you so that would be a good opportunity to loose again or get even  8-).

Apart from being strong or not (I leave that to others to judge), I am no longer taking every challenge like I would have a year ago. 1-2 years ago I would definately have challenged you with devilish pleasure. But I told you the whole story already and am not going to repeat all that  :-).

[Cow]

I beat boldfresh 3/4 times.

I have not seen rommel around. I thought I was the allies for these losses…

[Cow]

I do not remember games I played 2 years ago.

[ItIsILeClerc]

@Cow:

I do not remember games I played 2 years ago.

That’s where Gamerman01’s spreadsheet with the league standings comes in handy!
As far as I can see from that sheet, you defeated boldfresh as allies 1nce but lost as axis 1nce too. Quite surprising, given your statements in this thread :evil:.

To avoid any misunderstandings: the reason why I bring up Boldfresh/Erwin Rommel is because they are the ones that have already defeated you playing Axis (although ~1 year ago) and you said you are craving for a loss playing axis.

Maybe you should look out for another player with a preference to play allies as Gamerman01 is currently unavailable. If you make the allied side of such a challenge attractive enough (that you are still comfortable enough with), who knows who will sign in.

And if I am not mistaken, Cyanight said he wanted to play allies against you. There’s ofc no telling of his ability to defeat you since he hasn’t played any league games yet but that’s yours to try ;-).

[Cow]

Undefeated for over a year. If you want to play a serious game, I will give 17 bid out to anyone. Over 50 games at least triple a lobby as axis. Forum players are the same people. About to rake in some wins just rushing for vcs.

[gamerman01]

Maybe you need to play against yourself.  Then one of you has to lose, and you get a challenge, o great one