UK & US IC's

@axis_roll:

@Argothair:

The TripleA bid rules are pretty simple:

Auction off the right to play with the Axis by saying “I’ll take the Allies if you give me a bid of 15 IPC…”, “No, but I’ll take the Allies if you give me a bid of 14 IPC…”, “No way, man, because I’ll play the Allies with a bid of only 13 IPC…” until someone says “OK, fine, you can play the Allies with that bid” because they don’t want to bid any lower.

However much IPC you collect with your bid, you can split any way you like among your nations, as any combination of cash and/or pre-placed units that hit the board on round 0, subject to the following restrictions:

(1) You can’t buy more than one unit per territory or sea zone
(2) You can’t place a nation’s unit in a territory or sea zone where that nation doesn’t already have at least one unit.

That’s pretty much it! You can spend your money on whatever you want, including bombers and eastern european tanks and things, but the bid is usually lower than it would be under Chicago rules, so if you do buy a bomber, that’s most of your bid right there.

Funny, the axis have a better chance to win, so it would make sense to bid an increasing amount of units to take the stronger side.  I know this bid system has been around for a while, but it is seems so counter intuiative to me.

Thinking about this comment, imagining how this would go:

“I’ll play the Axis against an Allied bid of 12.”
“No way, I’ll play the Axis against an Allied bid of 14.”
“Chump change, I’ll play Axis against an Allied bid of 15.”
“All right, I’ll take the Allies with a 15 bid.”

-Midnight_Reaper

@Zhukov44:

I’m not convinced the factories would necessarily help Allies.  If Allies can’t afford to protect them, they become liabilities.

A huge difference in AA50 versus previous editions is how seperated/well-defined the two theatres of war are for USA.  Once in one of the theatres, it is very hard if almost impossible to move into the other theatre while still being useful.  An example of what I mean may help.  If USA can establish a presence in the south pacific, either via a navy (hard to do early) or via Australia, she can land fighters into India for support.  Put an IC in Australia to cover these fighters, providing defense on their way to India, where they would again provide defense to yet another IC, and then onto their way to even threaten the middle east with units that have began to filter in from combined UK/US Algeria landings

@Zhukov44:

If UK is pumping ipcs into South Asia it may provide Germany/Italy opportunities in Africa and Europe.

Yes, it would be somewhat of a fine Allied balance, but the US can help Africa landings easier than building a naval force strong enough the threaten the IJN.  Supporting Australia/India with fighters (see above), keeps $5 more in UK coffers (Australia/India) and the third NO out of japans hands.  That’s a $15 IPC swing that more than makes up for less pressence in Africa/Europe.

Pacific warfare is primarily about controlling space.  So imho acs and figs are the best choice…since they are versatile and give you spatial dominance.  For offense, bombers aren’t bad either.

Naturally you will need transports and destroyers too.

You do definitely want to take islands–especially those for the USA and UK NO.  And of course it’s worth it to take Philippines whenever possible.

I will usually only build extra naval units with Germany if there is some sort of core to build them around. Be that a surviving cruiser or battleship. If I still have one of these in turn two or three I might build some subs or even a destroyer. Also the casualty rate on the Eastern Front cant be too high, because then I will buy extra land units instead.

So basically, it depends on how well the Allies play and how well my navy holds up. Its a opportunistic investment at best and I never considered it a feasible strategy for Germany really.

If Germany goes all armor, the Allies should be going for a very aggressive navy build in the Atlantic.  An Allies player that really pushes the pace can be making substantial threats on France and Germany by turn 3.  Even if Germany turtles on G3 and builds all defense, they will likely still lose France at the very least with such an aggressive build.  With Russia, you just need to play a little cautious.  I would recommend going defensive with your builds, and abandoning Karelia, pulling those units back to Archangel.  Even if you have to stack Moscow on R2 and leave Caucasus open, there’s no way that Germany can take Moscow on G3.  Once Germany starts having to play defense in France and Germany, Russia can start building tanks to push the unreinforced German line west.  It’s the beginning of the end for the Axis in Europe.

That is true at some sites but is not the case with bids here.

Japan because it’s as if a modern day army/navy was brought back through time and is virtually unstopable. I’m surprised Japan didn’t come with Cruise missiles and M1 Abrams tanks.

One of the benefits of the south african IC is that you do not need to care about the italian fleet. Let the bad boys with their 10 IPCs bombard egypt or caucasus - so what? As long as the United Kingdom can occupy the italians in egypt all is well. If you sink the italian fleet you still have no additional fleet that helps in the mediteranean. The bombardment doesnt kill you and the U.S. world bombing tour can start in asia, where it can wear down the japs. Remenber, the seazone japan lies in is 4 seazones away from western united states and has 3 adjacent russian airfields. That means that the lone presence of bombers in WUS can tie down a whole fleet in front of japan. By the way, how many ICs does Japan build in J1 and J2 in your games?