What's the consensus on a standard bid?


  • What’s nice is if you start with a 3 inf 3 arm build and don’t attack Ukraine, you have a fat stack of 7 tanks in Novo on round 2 ready to hit Ukraine, India, China, and Yakut  :mrgreen: Makes Japan walk on eggshells while also keeping the pressure on Ukraine. That’s been cute enough for me to stop doing the Ukraine attack for the moment.


  • @Cmdr:

    As I said, I, personally, don’t like the Ukraine battle.  But I also, personally, like to buy a fighter with Germany on G1 (instead of a carrier.)  So if Russia DOES hit Ukraine then I net 0 fighters for the game turn (+1 built, -1 destroyed.)  Not really a bad thing for me.  However Russia loses 3 tanks in Ukraine, period.  It’s the only way to get the German fighter there.  Why?  Because I guarantee my people will come down there and kick you out of Greece, thank you very much!

    So what does Russia gain?  It’s easy to tell what Russia loses:  3 Infantry, Artillery, 3 Armor (28 IPC.)

    Your assumption is not always correct.  I prefer to attack ukraine with only 2 russian tanks.

    that adds 1 more tank to west russia.  faster kill, less units risked in ukraine.  more germany key units lost. $3 income versus $2 (belo), Cacuasus safe®.

    Again, down to personal preference.


  • @axis_roll:

    Your assumption is not always correct.  I prefer to attack ukraine with only 2 russian tanks.

    that adds 1 more tank to west russia.  faster kill, less units risked in ukraine.  more germany key units lost. $3 income versus $2 (belo), Cacuasus safe®.

    Again, down to personal preference.

    The ukr attack with 2 tanks is almost standard by most LL players. But in reg dice it will fail much more often.
    And many reg dice players will only attack WRU in R1.
    In LL it fails only 9% or 10%.

    The sz 59 fails 1 on 6…:)
    That is with only DD ofc. This is sad when u stacked bury with 6 inf.

    Has anyone done a economical calc of the ukr attack?
    With 2 tanks, or 3 tanks, based on average dice?
    G and R losses etc.?
    Compare this with the Arch blitz…?


  • @Lucifer:

    The ukr attack with 2 tanks is almost standard by most LL players. But in reg dice it will fail much more often.
    And many reg dice players will only attack WRU in R1.

    That’s when you w/d your attacking units… if it’s not going well.

    @Lucifer:

    Has anyone done a economical calc of the ukr attack?
    With 2 tanks, or 3 tanks, based on average dice?
    G and R losses etc.?
    Compare this with the Arch blitz….?

    The issue here is how far to do you go… into G1 counter… into R2 counter to the counter…

    There’s many more factors at play in the ukraine battle OTHER than strictly economic measures.
    I don’t think this information is meaningless, but I think far too many players worry too much about the dollar cost trading that is happening in a battle.  The economics are not the end-all in A&A.


  • I have to agree with Axis_Roll (did I say that?).  You guys worry WAY too much about losing those Russian tanks.  If I’ve killed 3 German infantry (9 IPCs), 1 artillery (4 IPCs), 1 armor (5 IPCs), and 1 fighter (10 IPCs), then my WORST CASE SCENARIO is an even trade in units (28 IPCs for 28 IPCs) PLUS an IPC gain of 3 from taking the territory.  That does not take into account the units killed by my tanks when Germany re-takes the territory (IF Germany retakes the territory).  And if the battle goes badly, I can retreat, which, by the way, I don’t think I’ve EVER had to do on these boards (but which would be acceptable if I had to).

    Plus, putting Germany down that fighter has significant tactical implications for Germany on G1 especially and thereafter.  AES (or sz15) becomes a riskier battle without the extra fighter, and the Luftwaffe is not as big a threat to Allied shipping without the sixth fighter.  IMO Ender and his like-minded folk are overly concentrated on saving infantry instead of tactical position.  I think his game with CC against Mateo and me is a case in point – he’s preserved his troops all right, but his tactical position sucks.  I think even Ender would concede that.

    In short, attacking Ukraine is about TACTICS, not economy.  And as Axis_Roll said, economy isn’t all – tactics DO matter.  And taking Belo does very little tactically for the Allies as compared with taking Ukraine.  Exchanging 3 infantry for 3 infantry simply is inconsequential in the scheme of things.  I’m not saying this opening CAN’T work – I’m just saying it’s less than optimal IMO.


  • I’m still pretty undecided about Ukraine lmao!

    All I can tell is that it’s pretty give and take. If you don’t attack Ukraine, then you have a significant number of tanks to threaten Japan with, making their advance slower. But if you attack Ukraine, then Germany is down some important gear before it’s retreated, which the Allies should be looking to do every time the opportunity pops up in a KGF.


  • @Gamer:

    I have to agree with Axis_Roll (did I say that?).

    Was it THAT painful? :cry: :cry:

  • 2007 AAR League

    @Gamer:

    I have to agree with Axis_Roll (did I say that?).  You guys worry WAY too much about losing those Russian tanks.  If I’ve killed 3 German infantry (9 IPCs), 1 artillery (4 IPCs), 1 armor (5 IPCs), and 1 fighter (10 IPCs), then my WORST CASE SCENARIO is an even trade in units (28 IPCs for 28 IPCs) PLUS an IPC gain of 3 from taking the territory.  That does not take into account the units killed by my tanks when Germany re-takes the territory (IF Germany retakes the territory).  And if the battle goes badly, I can retreat, which, by the way, I don’t think I’ve EVER had to do on these boards (but which would be acceptable if I had to).

    Plus, putting Germany down that fighter has significant tactical implications for Germany on G1 especially and thereafter.  AES (or sz15) becomes a riskier battle without the extra fighter, and the Luftwaffe is not as big a threat to Allied shipping without the sixth fighter.  IMO Ender and his like-minded folk are overly concentrated on saving infantry instead of tactical position.  I think his game with CC against Mateo and me is a case in point – he’s preserved his troops all right, but his tactical position sucks.  I think even Ender would concede that.

    In short, attacking Ukraine is about TACTICS, not economy.  And as Axis_Roll said, economy isn’t all – tactics DO matter.  And taking Belo does very little tactically for the Allies as compared with taking Ukraine.  Exchanging 3 infantry for 3 infantry simply is inconsequential in the scheme of things.  I’m not saying this opening CAN’T work – I’m just saying it’s less than optimal IMO.

    I’m willing to accept your points on Ukraine. However, Belo is not simply about killing the Inf for me. It really reduces the fodder that Germany has for a counterattack on WRus.

    My concern about losing the Russian tanks in Ukraine is that while yes it may be at worst an even trade, early on Germany can afford to trade better than Russia can. However, I’m starting to think that I’m not seeing the full picture there - Germany also has to dedicate production to keeping England and US at bay, so perhaps they come off worse in the trade.

    Now, with reference to our other game, I concede that my side’s tactical position sucks. I think Germany was doing as well as it could though - Japan had some unfortunate delays and setbacks though, and IMO should have built more TRNs, among other things, but no need to air dirty laundry here…

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Losing the fighter in Ukraine isn’t too much of an issue for me.  I plan for it to be dead, and I drool over the chance to kill off 75% of Russia’s starting armor!

    After all, my bid is normally in Libya, so if I just add a bomber and a fighter and ignore the DD in SZ 15, then I’ll still win probably anyway.  Meanwhile, if Russia’s down to 1 tank in Ukraine (a good possibility) I can kill it with my battleship (another good possibility.)


  • @Cmdr:

    Losing the fighter in Ukraine isn’t too much of an issue for me.  I plan for it to be dead, and I drool over the chance to kill off 75% of Russia’s starting armor!

    After all, my bid is normally in Libya, so if I just add a bomber and a fighter and ignore the DD in SZ 15, then I’ll still win probably anyway.  Meanwhile, if Russia’s down to 1 tank in Ukraine (a good possibility) I can kill it with my battleship (another good possibility.)

    You were probably a huge Infantry Push Mechanics player in second edition (aka Classic) if you played that a few years back.

    You are all about saving units and being ultra efficient.

    While that is a good principal to operate under, that type of player doesn’t often think outside the box and can be less apt to see and sieze uncoventional opportunities to win a game that skews a bit outside the ‘normal’ outcome.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Uh-huh.  That’s what Switch was counting on when he didn’t defend Caucasus properly and now Russia has no army. (neither does Germany, but that’s less of an issue for me after they failed a KJF then switched gears.)

    I was an Infantry Push Mechanic in Classic, I’ll admit it.  It was about the only way to win your games.  Now I’m more of a fighter push mechanic girl.  I like fighters.  I don’t like loosing them, but sometimes you have to realize that losing your fighters, while bad for you, can make it too expensive for your opponent to attack or recover from.

    It’s not abnormal for opponents to see me with 9 Japanese Fighters and 8-12 German fighters in a game.  Gives me a LOT of mobile punch without risking my tanks.


  • @Cmdr:

    Uh-huh.  That’s what Switch was counting on when he didn’t defend Caucasus properly and now Russia has no army. (neither does Germany, but that’s less of an issue for me after they failed a KJF then switched gears.)

    I was an Infantry Push Mechanic in Classic, I’ll admit it.  It was about the only way to win your games.  Now I’m more of a fighter push mechanic girl.  I like fighters.  I don’t like loosing them, but sometimes you have to realize that losing your fighters, while bad for you, can make it too expensive for your opponent to attack or recover from.

    It’s not abnormal for opponents to see me with 9 Japanese Fighters and 8-12 German fighters in a game.  Gives me a LOT of mobile punch without risking my tanks.

    A girl after my own heart.  I thnk ftrs are VERY important piece in Revised, at $10 you CAN afford to sacrifice them too.

    I especially like them as US since it helps them get into the war quickly since they have so far to go ….


  • Well, what Jen failed to mention is that she magically made 4 of my INF disappear in Round 3 of combat that she now has to roll for, and then my extra units for Round 4 that are still alive also…

    Russia may be losing a lot of forces, but Germany has last 4 FIGs, 13 INF, and 1 ARM so far, with 5 more that Russia plans on killing since I still have INF screen to roll, and at least another round with my FIGs and ARM…

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Yup, fixed the missing dudes, lost a tank. :(

    But Russia’s effectively out of the game for a round or two while they rebuild.  Cost me half my air force though, not entirely happy about that.  And I suppose England and Russia can liberate Caucasus easy enough removing half my surviving tanks.

    But I guarantee you one thing!  Germany never expected a full frontal body blow by Germany in this game!


  • You STILL have dice to roll…

    Going in to Round 5 it is:
    Germany:  3 ARM
    Russia:  1 INF, 1 ARM, 2 FIGs.

    Actually, we thought JWW would talk you out of the Caucuses attack.
    And it is looking like he should have…

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    @ncscswitch:

    You STILL have dice to roll…

    Going in to Round 5 it is:
    Germany:  3 ARM
    Russia:  1 INF, 1 ARM, 2 FIGs.

    Actually, we thought JWW would talk you out of the Caucuses attack.
    And it is looking like he should have…

    Yea, I mean, I only had a 75% chance to win that with 5 Armor and a fighter!

    For the love of mike.


  • @Cmdr:

    Losing the fighter in Ukraine isn’t too much of an issue for me.  I plan for it to be dead, and I drool over the chance to kill off 75% of Russia’s starting armor!

    After all, my bid is normally in Libya, so if I just add a bomber and a fighter and ignore the DD in SZ 15, then I’ll still win probably anyway.  Meanwhile, if Russia’s down to 1 tank in Ukraine (a good possibility) I can kill it with my battleship (another good possibility.)

    If you attack Ukraine with that BB, then you better pray your bid in Egypt is enough to take it, 'cause if you DON’T take Egypt, your little Med. fleet is dead on UK1, sweetheart! :wink:

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Yea, but I’m not overly worried about Fighter, Bomber, 2 Infantry, Artillery, Armor vs Infantry, Armor, Fighter.  I don’t expect to HOLD it, but I’ll probably get it.


  • @axis_roll:

    @Gamer:

    I have to agree with Axis_Roll (did I say that?).

    Was it THAT painful? :cry: :cry:

    Naah, just kidding! :-D


  • @Gamer:

    @axis_roll:

    @Gamer:

    I have to agree with Axis_Roll (did I say that?).

    Was it THAT painful? :cry: :cry:

    Naah, just kidding! :-D

    thank goodness, I was starting to get a complex……

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

84

Online

17.4k

Users

40.0k

Topics

1.7m

Posts