Bidding Systems

[DarthMaximus]

That’s a great point about the dice roller.

The CD is the sole reason I’m deathly afraid of doing SBR’s.
The CD is absoultely unbelievable in rolling 1’s on SBR’s (or on aa fire in general).  And if you happen to fly over an aa-gun on route to an attack the CD hits like 50% of the time.  It really does roll 1’s at will sometimes.

And if you attack a place with an aa gun look out, cause those guys are great shots.  :-)

I’ve finally warmed back up to SBR’s, but I still won’t on the CD.

The CD is also very good in the tech department.

I still do love inf b/c of the CD.
Man, sometimes those guys really got into grooves, they really seem to perform well, whether it was off or def.

[DarthMaximus]

I agree, 1 extra inf here or there doesn’t matter, that can be made up in any trading scenerio, or an extra hit here an there.

Likewise, I don’t the the 3rd edition rules do much to shift bid amounts, or should do much to shift your play.

You’re example about UK 1 is spot on.  I’ve played plenty of 3rd ed games and you can go 3 trns on UK 1, this certainly doesn’t help the Axis.

I like the Canada change, but you can easily work around it.

I see why LL would change bid amounts, b/c it is all about numbers, the battles are decided thus you can get very formulaic and say, well I bought 10 inf now and they reach the front next turn giving me enough to win the battle regardless of what I do elsewhere.  Very predictable.

But 2nd ed vs. 3rd, I don’t see much of a change.

I think an Aggressive Allied player will always win regardless of Ruleset (2nd or 3rd) and regardless of bid amount.  There is an inherent adv to being the attacker, b/c you can always retreat.  The defender has no such luck.

I also think Germany must be defensive in Europe regardless of Ruleset (2nd or 3rd).  They simply don’t have the numbers to do damage early and must preserve their armor and air for when Japan really gets rolling.

Which brings us to Afr,

Personally I’ve always thought of Afr as overrated.  You should take what you can for as little as you can, then as the Allies land, you fall back, (maybe you get a Jap landing to help, maybe not), then shift your early winfall from rds 1-4 into postion in Europe as Japan Apporaches Moscow.

Every game is different though and if you can hold some of Afr for more, then great!  Send another inf or 2, then great! But not at the expense of Europe.

That being said, my generic Allied strat has always been and will always be this:
1 - kill German ships
2 - reclaim Afr
3 - box Germany in in Europe

So, I will kill the German Med fleet in rd 1 or 2 regardless of cost to the Allies.  If that means 2-3 planes must die, so be it.
I will land in Afr in rd 2 or 3, then I will work through the CAUC from then on.  You can get to Egy, almost as quickly by going UK to Kar to Cauc to Per.

I do not like attacks on WE by the Allies, and perfer to go to Fin or Kar directly.  This gives the Allies the 1-2-3 on EE and UK/US the ability to reinforce Mos and Kar, as well as send inf or arm to Per (via cauc), to cut off the Germans.

If I can defeat Axis giving up 21-22 (not PE) 2nd ed, then I can certainly defeat Axis giving up 17-18 3rd ed.

I can see why the the bid would be about 21 though, as you start to approach people just playing PE, but that would be my bid every game and I don’t know how people in the club wouldn’t start off at that.  I’ll bid 21, if I lose the bid, hey I’ll happily give up 20, and if I win the bid, I got 7 inf to place.
Thus I would expect, the avg bid to be about 20.5 not 17-18.

Even looking at the 2nd Ed avg bid, posted in the link by warman the 2nd ed avg was right around 3rd.  So the ruleset doesn’t mean lower bid for 3rd ed CD.

I think just like 2nd ed players can get stuck in looking at things a certain way, I think that can easily happen in the CD club.

If the goto Afr, reinforce Afr, (then possible Tech with Japan) strat works, then it works, but are the players really trying to find a way to beat this or are they just all content with taking their own shot at winning that way?
Sort of going along with the status quo?

[OpTorch]

Great post  :-D

Cant wait for this soap to continue, but first I have to get some sleep.

A gn to all of you!

[Bashir]

grabs some popcorn and settles down on a comfortable chair. Let the catfight continue :D

[DarthMaximus]

And Like sands through the hour glass these are the Days of our Axis and Allies Lives…

:-D

As much as I like reading the back and forth, it really is entertaining  :-) , my Mod-ness must try and prevent it, or at least quell it to friendly banter back and forth.

Lets remember to not get too negative here.

[DarthMaximus]

On Topic,

You make some good points SUD.
It is my perspective that the Allies should almost always win regardless of bid.
This goes back to when my brother and I use to fight just to be the Axis b/c of the challange (pre bid days).
So my general default view is the Allies should always win, so being a non club player (not having to worry about rankings and such), I’m more willing to debate giving a higher bid to provide the Allies with a challange.  BUT, I’d also be more willing to take less as the Axis, to keep the challange of being the Axis.  Also I have the freedom to put conditions on the bid in either case.

However I can see how in Club play, you can’t, thus it may require different bidding styles, which would lead to a slightly lower amount then what I would expect if I’m looking at a lone game or two here.

Example, I can say, I’ll beat a 23 bid that isn’t PE, BUT in Club play, I’d never blindly give an opponent 23.  Why?  For fear he played PE.

I’d like my odds better at say 20 with the Axis, then giving up 23 where my opponent my play PE.  I’ve often said, my style of play would change slightly if I were to play in a club.  Just like it changes when I play ADS or LL or 2nd or 3rd.

So, yeah this type of phenomenon could lead to a lower bid.

I think the big difference from my point of view, is I’m looking at what I would play at and can take each individual game separately (not playing in a club), but the Clubs have no such luck, it can’t distiguish game from game, it simply takes the Avg bid (of whatever ruleset) and shows it to you.

I can already tell you that, while I’d be willing to give players here 22, 23 to test something, I’d never do that in a Club.  So if my club bidding would be slightly lower, so would other players, thus you get the 18-19 bid avg.

Also, you are right that 1-2 inf long term don’t make a difference.  The best Example of this would be say a rd 2, rd 3 SBR on Mos by Ger.  Say Ger hits a 5 IPC shot and a 4.  That right there is equivalent to 3 inf, or a Jap SBR.  And the more obvious, extra hit on a trading situtation when it is 2 inf, 2 ftrs vs. 1 lone inf.

[OpTorch]

handing the mic back to SUD  :mrgreen:

[Bashir]

Let the battle continue! :P  :evil:

[Avin]

By the way, for those mentioning club play, I started playing at DAAK close to a year ago as part of my first forays into playing A&A online, and I regularly bid 22 IPCs. I find that I very frequently will either get Axis at that bid amount, or my opponent will have bid the same amount thus making us tie and it will randomly choose. The only times I get underbid is when I am playing someone who is obviously a newbie to online play. So at least at DAAK a 22+ bid seems to be the norm. (Note: I also only play LowLuck there, so that obviously affects it somewhat).

[OpTorch]

LL surely affects the average bid (vs ADS). In ADS (@DAAK) the bids are more spread (20-24), while the distribution of the bids in AAMC is a bit less. More players there will bid 23 ipcs. There are a few players who will bid 24(+), but that is (still) the exception.

[Bashir]

Where are our 2 contestants?

[OpTorch]

Maybe we should take over.

[warman1999]

you are more than welcome to come over and try all you want to