What is the most unusual/annoying/strange allied bid

Any player can concede for any reason; you just have to learn who throws a hissy fit and who doesn’t.  I’ve had an Allied player forfeit on me after UK ROUND ONE.  Yep, a scramble didn’t go his way, and a couple of bad rolls in the Med and claimed there was “no way back”.  Meh, a win’s a win, but I’m still in it for the long haul with expectations of an epic game.

In general, a sucessful Sealion doesn’t an Axis victory make.  I’ve lost as the Axis after a sucessful Sealion; the Russian player knew what to do and put immense pressure on a front stripped-bare for landing units.  If Japan gets some bad luck and isn’t threatening victory, it’s bad.

That said, i’ve won plenty of times after a good Sealion, so it’s not an unheard of response.

@knp7765:

So you are suggesting that the British player loses his capital so that he can sink the German navy? Seems kind of far fetched to me. Yeah, I guess if the German navy were taken out, it would help the US Navy later on and they could liberate London possibly. In the mean time, Germany got to plunder the British treasury and run hog wild on Russia while Italy gets strong in the Med and Africa since the UK can no longer replace their losses there. I suppose India could send stuff over to face Italy, but what if they are being pressured by Japan?

Yes, but Germany spent 2 rounds of income on a fleet so they essentially lose their ground units, probably some air units, the French treasury and whatever ground they have left would be sitting on London, assuming this worked/works.

So what’s holding back the Russians at that point?  They can DOW the round London falls.  (great, now I have that Fergie song in my head!  Bastages!!!)

@Young:

I don’t play TripleA, but I imagine one can’t change the initial setup. However, in our table top games, players like to rotate different sides and nations fairly so everyone gets a chance to play something different. To achieve this, I think the Russians should trade their fighter in Moscow for a S. Bomber, the Americans should trade their destroyer in Hawaii for a Battleship, and the UK should trade their Mech Infantry in London for a Tank.

Maybe upgrade the cruiser instead

That should balance the game without the need to bid… What do you think.

it says “and/or” and it is the most common way to phrase such a requirements in games.

for basic gramar;
a, b and c = a and b and c;
a,b or c = a or b or c;
a and/or b = means if you have a and b, its ok, if you have a, its ok, if you have b, its ok.
same way you can make a list.

as bidding is not a part of the official game, bid rules differ upon who is playing.

i have played hundreds of games of triplea live in the lobby and pbem(play by e-mail) in the old triplea ladder ranking, the vast majority of games i have played are revised, some global, and very few anniversary.  below is what i have seen.

the most common rules that i have played with(near universal amongst triplea players) is
1. bid ipcs can be used to place units pregame
2. units can only be placed in territories or seazones that already have a unit of the same power

rules that i have seen frequently
1. only one bid unit per territory or seazone
2. bid for the alliance that you think is disadvantaged and bid down. (i prefer to use the method used at conventions of bidding for your opponent to play the disadvantaged alliance and bid up.)

rules i have never played or been asked to use but have seen
1. all bid ipc must be spent in units and not added to any powers starting income
2. no bid units to certain powers(such as china)

Also, when you post on the play by forum thread, you can’t edit your post like you can on these ones.  Once its posted, its there forever

@larrymarx:

@kcdzim:

I’d prefer a solution were russia is required abide the cease fire regardless of war in europe , but allow Japan to break it whenever they please (which still doesn’t cause war with the other axis powers).  Russia just has to make sure it will be costly for Japan, which is precisely what they did with the far east forces.

How about doing this but also allowing Russia to break the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact if Japan chooses to attack early?

The game already favors the allies.  Allowing Russia to preemptively strike isn’t helpful for balance on the Europe side.  However, barring russia from attacking japan first, under any circumstance, probably means Japan won’t bother with russia at all with no need to garrison and will focus on china first, while positioning for the J3 assault which matches far more closely the way AAP40 plays (where russia isn’t available to attack, and won’t attack Japan).

the 18 infantry already is pretty good about giving Japan pause on J1.  J2, it becomes more feasable, but even then Russia can back away and just leave the shorelines open, giving up minimal value.  I just don’t buy that Russia needs more freedom to attack.  While Stalin was of the mind of striking when either axis was vulnerable, the player is NOT the Stalin, and some safeguards like restricted declarations have to be in place so that the game can be balanced.  Otherwise it’s not 1940, it’s 1942.

In my perfect world:

A) Russia cannot attack or enter ORIGINAL UK or US territories ever.  Russia just shouldn’t be in India.  or the UK.  They can take Persia, they can take neutrals, and they can conquer ORIGINAL axis territories to their hearts content.  And even though it’s unlikely, they can help in France.  Frankly, if Russia is in position to take a european french territory, the game is either over, or has gone pearshaped, but this way they can get a token Syria.

B)UK & US units cannot enter ORIGINAL Russian territories ever.  If they do, they are removed (thus cannot defend), a marker takes their place, and Russia has the option to purchase that equiv unit during their purchase phase at half price rounded up (this is lend lease/pilot internment).

C) Russia can attack & control any neutral it pleases at start of game.  No neutral is friendly to Russia - they will all be combat moves, and they will always defend, even if Pro Ally.  Unless strict neutrals are changed to affect regions (unlikely), same rules as OOB for strict neutrals.

D) Russia cannot attack Japan until Berlin falls or Japan declares war on them.  They cannot enter China until at war with Japan (historically, they were still aiding china after the Cease fire in '39, but stopped after the Pact in 41.  However, since the Tigers weren’t in China until 41 (essentially taking over for the russian air group), the single fighter can be abstracted to be considered the Russian air group at the beginning of the game

E) OOB political rules for Italy/Germany.

Nice, well with depreciation of the dollar I would say that would probably be about what I pay for something like that as well. I will have to do some digging to find a place that does that, because I do admit that the ridges irritate me, not to mention the board separating from time to time if someone hits the edge or something.