Thanks to everyone for clearing that up. :)
No bid, what would you do?
-
I’d have to say the biggest change would be a 1 round delay by Germany. You’d have to shuffle more troops to Africa by transport then normally or you’d loose Ukraine without as many casualties.
Dunno. I’d still probably go IC with Japan with an added transport and some troops. You need that complex to start hitting asia hard.
-
If I can;t have 3 TRN as Japan to empty the immediate islands and Japan, I want to do that FIRST. Existing troops, arelady ready to be moved.
The IC is 1 turn delayed troops.
So I want those Oki, Wake, Phil, Japan troops in Asia NOW. They will hit Asia as I drop the IC (in J2), providing security for my new IC, and then advancing forward, backed up by ARM/ART from my new IC.
With $1 to Japan, I can get 3 TRN AND an IC. Without the $1, I go 4 TRN, INF, and wait on the IC.
As for slowing in eastern Europe… that really depends on Russia.
As for slowign in Africa… hell no! I am still slamming Egypt G1, countering UK’s liberation in G2, then dropping forces in Libya to block the Americans in G3 forward while that G2 wave grabs 3 IPC a round until I am +9 in Africa. -
And to clarify…
When i said “4 TRN” on that last post, I mean 1 existing, 3 purchased, and the remainder ($6) for 2 INF.
-
Personally, I’ve never played with bids, and every time the Axis give a pretty good fight, and have won many times. The times i’ve played w/ my friends, it’s been about 50/50 between Allies and Axis victories. I thought that with bids, the only difference that would happen would be in the german/russian front. It had never occured to be to get 3Trannies + an IC. I just’ hadn’t thought of it.
Does anyone else place any other use to the axis with the bid other than a) units in ukraine, b) unit(s) in Libya c) units in WRussia d) 1ipc Japan… ?
-
Ihave used a Belorussian bid placement (1 INF) to force Russia south in a few games… let’s me have pretty free run over karelia and Archangel, and still trade Ukraine.
-
Is there anything anyone might do differently during a game if they don’t play with bids? My friends and I don’t play with it, and things turn out pretty well sometimes. Would you approach the way you play a game differently if you had no bid? I know that would mean taking Egypt would be slightly harder, but what else or how else would you come at it?
I will use my Secret Techniques if I am playing Axis in a game without bids.
Secret Technique Number One! Free beer!
Secret Technique Number Two! Rent a movie the other players haven’t seen yet and play it during the game!
Secret Technique Number Three! Bribe the hot girl across the street to undress in sight of a window that players can look through during the game!
Secret Technique Number Four! Free food! (Players think less efficiently on a full stomach.)
Secret Technique Number Five! If doom is imminent, summon a Cat of Instant Destruction with a well-placed tank miniature that has been hollowed out and filled with catnip!
There are more Secret Techniques that I use, but they are Really Secret. Also, very shameful.
–
Or I might go for high-risk maneuvers if out of the box rules are being used. Long range aircraft for invasion of London first turn! Rocket research for Germany! Three transports in the Baltic first turn! Two Mediterranean transports first turn! Tank dash to Moscow! etc. etc. etc., I have a lot of 'em.
-
Personally, I’ve never played with bids, and every time the Axis give a pretty good fight, and have won many times. The times i’ve played w/ my friends, it’s been about 50/50 between Allies and Axis victories. I thought that with bids, the only difference that would happen would be in the german/russian front. It had never occured to be to get 3Trannies + an IC. I just’ hadn’t thought of it.
Does anyone else place any other use to the axis with the bid other than a) units in ukraine, b) unit(s) in Libya c) units in WRussia d) 1ipc Japan… ?
Well, depends on the rules. There’s the famous “I’m gonna pop a transport in the Baltic, go for Long Range Aircraft, and sack London on the first turn WITHOUT losing my entire airforce ho ho!” Then there’s the less famous “I’m gonna pop a transport in the Mediterranean so I can threaten a rush on the Caucasus, and move infantry from S. Europe to the front instantly with a battleship support shot”. Or the German sub in the Atlantic, Japanese infantry at French Indochina, etc. etc.
-
I would like to humbly submit that Japan needs more then 4 transports.
You need at least 5 transports. 4 to clear Japan every round and 1 to pick up island stragglers.
Optimally, 6-8 transports would be much better for Japan. Allows you to shuffle troops from Japan to Africa every round. THat’s a huge advantage since it takes the Allies, usually, 3 rounds to get troops to Egypt. 1 From England/America to Algeria. 1 from Algeria to Libya. 1 From Libya to Egypt. Japan can go Japan to India. India to Egypt with BB and Fighter support from SZ 34.
I don’t know. Just the way I view it. I’d also say you need 2 ICs, FIC/India or FIC/Manch. I’m torn on which setup is best.
-
I’d also say you need 2 ICs, FIC/India or FIC/Manch. I’m torn on which setup is best.
I doubt that you need 2 ICs at all. But if you MUST go 2 ICs, India is the clear winner over Manchuria. You can get units to Manchuria every turn with Japanese transports. But you cannot move units to India every turn with Japanese transports unless you set up an expensive transport chain.
-
Just build and walk… more effective in the long run, and keeps your rear areas well shielded just in case the Allie sbreak through one of your front line territories.
-
2 ICs is 14 units a round. That equals or exceeds Russia + England’s builds and it’s ever so much easier to crush Russia.
Though, the Indian IC can be too far forward and easily threatenable by American units coming through Africa. The Manchurian IC can dump into Sink with the FIC IC though.
Suggested Topics
