Since TripleA was brought up, here’s a thread discussing bid rules (and the reasons for them) for ladder games re AA50.
http://www.tripleawarclub.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?start=0&topic_id=235&viewmode=flat&order=ASC&type=&mode=0
(*) No bomber purchases are allowed for this game and bid combination
These IPCs may be spent on units to be placed on the board prior to game start. The IPC may be split by the allies in any way. The first restriction is that no more than one unit may be placed per territory. Naval units must go into a sea zone with existing Naval units of the same nation. Placement of naval units in empty sea zones or placement of, for example, British units with American units (and vice versa) is not allowed. Similiarly, ground/air units must be placed in the territories controlled by the same nation. However, ground units may be placed in territories that have no existing ground/air units.
Unspent IPC’s from the bid can be divided up between the Allies for spending in future turns as the Allied player desires.
In the lobby, people generally follow these rules as a community even though lobby games are not generally ladder games.
Since there is no Global ladder, there hasn’t been any discussion on Global bidding rules that I know of.
I’m undecided on the utility of these rules. It’s difficult to say whether restricted or unrestricted bidding makes for a better game.
I’m inclined to think that the excellent Global bid range (about 6-16 or so) makes for a wide variety of bids even WITH restrictions. So in theory it might not be a bad idea to restrict bids that lead to highly variable outcomes on turn 1, since so much of the game already depends on highly variable G1 attacks.
Is a seazone surrounding an island consider occupied if it is empty but the Island has units? I.E. Malta.
Malta sz should be fine since UK starts with a unit there.