My Favorite Bid!

new G40 game kublakhan Vs. feckingwrecked

@windowwasher I’m getting my PC fixed but then I’ll have to download Triple A, thanks again for the advice. I just tested out bids by myself with allies at +30 on the Europe map. The difference was huge, they put a fighter in Scotland and a destroyer in the 110 fleet I believe-with the French cruiser. They also put a sub in the med for Taranto and a tank for Tobruk. The Axis definitely is limited in what they can do the first turn and they don’t have near total domination of the sea right away.

@seancb said in [House Rules] Should allies receive a bid?:

one more thing, I’ll take a 16 bid

We actually have 1 game completed (if you concede it). Looking forward to another…waiting in the lobby right now.

@barney:

“Bids and Scramble”
sounds like a good name for a board game   :lol:

IDK “Chutes and Ladders” just came to mind lol

I’ve noticed one response to a common variation of a J2. Situation:

Strategy:
USA DD to SZ43 (Off Borneo)
UK DD to SZ37
UK land on Sumatra
Anzac land on Java

Result:
Allies are secure on Sumatra and Java through turn 2. Some possibility of convoying off income but unlikely to get it all and some of the fleet might be exposed if they try to convoy both. Every bit as important: Japan doesn’t get the money on turn 2 which slows them down a fair bit.

Just tried this against one player and he avoided the DOW J2.

Downside: Losing two DDs. Doesn’t seem like a big problem. The UK one can be replaced turn 3 with the one starting off South Africa.

@oysteilo:

@ShadowHAwk:

Try adding some chinese inf. If you can add only 1 unit add it to the burma road. It will take away at least 2 more ��� units.
Try adding extra units in UK in defence of the standard attacks that germany does, a fighter in schotland would be painfull, a destroyer near the cruiser off gibraltar.

How about a inf for china, 1 fighter in schotland and a sub in the med for a 19 bid.
The attacks germany can do against your fleet off schotland becomes pretty interesting that figher will take 1 or 2 airunits with him at least.

If you place a fighter in scotland I assume you are more or less “forced” to scramble all 5 planes (Scotland and United Kingdom) if Germany attacks both fleets?

I would assume the goal would be for Germany to make a choice on which fleet to kill, and for the UK to have decent odds to do some damage in one of the battles, if Germany tries for it all.  If I were to get an 18 bid, I might try a destroyer in 110 and a fighter in scotland.  If I could place 2 units in a single territory, then a 20 bid would be 2 fighters for scotland.

@AndrewAAGamer:

Our gaming group has come to the conclusion that some bid is needed to balance the game for the Allies.  In reading through the posts it seems to me that the general consensus is that the Allies need a bid of about 9-12.

My questions are:

Is a bid of 9-12 the current and reasonable amount?  As we will not want to bid for a particular side, we will set a certain bid point for each game and then let people choose which side they want to be as some Players enjoy playing particular Powers.  So what is a fair bid?

My group usually goes 10-15, some where in the ball park of 8 to 14 is what everyone does.

Is this bid added as starting income to be spent on Turn 1?

What Siparo said.

Is this bid added as units and money such as the Revised FIDA bid?

Never played revised, and what is FIDA?  Another government agency?

Is this bid added as units on the board with remainders as starting money?

Siparo doesn’t do it, but my group allows it.

For any units placed on the board are there any restrictions?  For example:
     a) Must have a unit already in the territory / sea zone?
     b) May not place more than X number of units?

My group has 3 rules:
1.  Must be one unit per territory/seazone.
2.  Can only be placed in a territory/seazone where you already have units occupying it.
3.  Can only be a unit that power has access to (china can be inf and art only).

I would appreciate your kind thoughts and comments.  Thank you…

knp7765

Axis and allies has changed over the decades I have been playing. Probably 30 years. But one thing has not, the basics. And it makes sense since they are trying to stay true to what happened, in the sense of what the situation really was at a given point in time. Thereby, the fact remains that the real action is in Europe and whoever wins Europe wins the war.

Britain and Russia cannot, unless playing a weak German player hold off the Germans long enough for Japan to be neutralize much less defeated. And if they could, then the resources spent on neutralizing Japan only means the allies would have won much earlier if those resources were spent in Europe.

Now before everyone goes crazy on me and makes arguments that you just can’t completely and totally ignore Japan and give me all kinds of examples on how the old KGF strategy would not work in the newest editions, understand, I am not arguing a complete ignore of Japan, only enough resources to help Anzac, India, and China slow them down. Essentially, defensive in the Pacific and the offensive in Europe.

That part of the game has not changed EXCEPT, that with the Victory cities only requiring Japan to hold 6 of them, forces the US to go offensive in the Pacific.

That is why I do not like it. It forces in unrealistic and ineffective strategy.