Ukraine bid

Thanks to everyone for clearing that up. :)

@daggaz:

At this point, the game has gone on so long that I fail to see the massive statistical difference you would get from having, say, eight IPC instead of four on G1.  It really just comes down to the tactical errors your opponent makes, and how well you take advantage of them, be they ever so slight.

The massive difference of bids 4 and 8 can mean taking Egypt with enough to deter a counterattack or can mean 2 extra units deterring or thwarting an attack on Ukraine. If Egypt isn’t to be countered, then the UK has all sorts of options. Still, it comes down to the dice - you have a point that it doesn’t always matter 4 to 8 and so on. With two units to Libya, Germany can expect to take it with 4 units plus their plane(s). With just one unit to Libya and good rolls, they could end up with the same 4 troops sitting in Egypt.

@daggaz:

But its simply usually enough for germany to shred africa with minimal investment, hold it until the US is forced to divert troops, at which time Japan has spread the rising sun across the entire swath of the southern pacific and the indian ocean, and is usually able to reclaim the dark continent for axis hands, while at the same time putting the serious hurt into Moscow.

How are the Allies managing Africa in your games? Is Germany taking South Africa as America first lands Algeria? Africa is almost always the first place I go with the US and UK. Lately the US has been in the Med for long term control. Unchecked Japan will definitely plow through Africa.

@Frood:

No, that was me - see my “Ditto” above :)

Oops, sorry Frood. :oops: :|  I mis-read your post I think.  I just, for some reason, saw only what you had in the brackets.  Shame on me.

@Wazzup:

@axis_roll:

There’s two perspectives on this.  One is, as you state, extra pieces are added to initial game set-up to even the score.

Another bidding system (called the FIDA bid, initials of a number of online A&A clubs), splits the bid into at no more than 50% of the bid can be added as initial set-up extra pieces; the rest is cash to be split amongst Germany and Japan (you can give all the $ to one side if you want)

An example FIDA bid would be 15:  inf, tank in Libya (Germany), $2 to Japan, $5 to Germany.

Actually, in FIDA, this bid would not be allowed.  the Inf/tank is 8 IPC, which is more than 50% of the 15 bid.  In this example, you would be able to place inf, rtl at the most.

Whoops!!

Math error… math error.

Thanks for pointing that out.  My description says <= 50%, but my example was incorrect.

I am speaking of averages here…

And it is not the INF that creates the extra Russian deaths, it is the FIG and ARM living longer with the extra fodder AND the extra single roll of a 2 which gives you a 33% chance of an extra death in and of itself.

Wow, what a thread!

I must say, I take NCS’s position on this one for several reasons, the most pertinant of them being that

a) While the Axis certainly CAN win without a bid, when you have players of equal skill and who are equally skilled at playing both Axis AND Allies (not just one or the other side), a bid can certainly make the difference in the early round(s) and many times it’s what happens the first 2 rounds that can help decide the game.

b) figuring out statistics is something that can only be done over thousands and thousands of games. I mean, you can flip a coin 100 times and get 90 heads. Does that mean the odds of getting tails are skewed? No, because if you were to flip that coin 10,000 times or 100,000 times the odds are it would be very close to 50/50 and 1,000,000 times or more and likely the difference would be so negligible as to allow us to say it was 50/50. While we cannot play 1,000,000 AAR games, I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch to suggest that a bid helps even out the game.

You know, just as many of the issues of AA Classic were worked out in AAR, I think probably in the next iteration (or version) that many of the issues we’ve seen here will be worked out as well. Maybe an extra unit here or another territory there… whatever it takes to balance the game.

Germany would be ready to rock and roll with an extra 8 in Africa…  They would benefit far more than giving the 8 to the Japanese since there is very little to check Japan in the long run in Asia.  The Germans would not need to pull troops from Europe to successfully assault Egypt(closing the Suez-sealing off the Indian fleet), and they’d be able to drop reinforcements to prevent an American counter in US1 in Algeria.  The Germans can go after the Brit BB in the Med with the BB prtotecting the planes(The BB isn’t needed to protect the transport against the Destroyer in the Med when amphibbing Egypt because the amphib isn’t necessary).  The sub could be used to sink the tranny in Canada, hamstrining the Brits efforts in Norway in GB1.  They could move both fleets together in G2… without sacrificing Africa.  And take 4 IPCs off the Brits in G2 as well…  Plus the rest of Africa in G3(would be enough to offset what is lost to US in US2)…  Even if the Allies are aggressive in the first round, there is no reason why Germany would be collecting less than 39IPCs(as opposed to 37) in round1, 42 in round 2, and 44 in round 3.  This almost guarantees that Germany will hang around no less than 7 rounds(more than likely 8 or 9)…  Long enough for Japan to strike down Moscow.

Wilk

@trihero:

I dunno, I’ve been talking with a very good Revised player and he never will play the Axis unless he has a bid of 8 (1 inf in Libya 1 tank in Algeria).

A good thing is to throw ramdomly one NA and then, BID. So if the allies have Lend lease, colonial garnison, and superfortresses, and the axis have kaiten torpedo and dive bomber… the bid will be really high:

Winning bid 24 IPC ! I put 3 trannies in the baltic ! Sealion ! you’re dead , I win, lest start another game !