Alternative balance solution to bidding

@Arthur-Bomber-Harris
Yep - that Yunnan stack can be a pain.

@Ichabod:

@Sovietishcat:

Since I have joined Triplea, I had more success playing with no bid than bid.

Do you think that’s because when you get a bid you bite off more than you can chew, or did you play the same?

I see you often do Taranto, SZ 96, and Ethiopia. If you don’t change a thing, but still accept a bid and use it just for those battles, then it I’d think you’d be just as successful. Should just increase the odds of those battles. A bid might lead to UK Europe sending fighters to Moscow quicker while the US and company hammer Japan.

Actually I have played differently with no bid and I started to put more pressure in Pacific first and it seems to work out better, because lot of times seems like the Japan player starts panicking and do not know what to do or gets offcourse in their plans… The only time I have struggled is against you Icha :)

from what I can see when running sims, I test with germany attacking with every landunit that can reach (7 I , 4 M, 3 A,  6 T ) V (1 AAA, 6 I, 2 A,  , 2T , 1 Ftr)  it gives germany 99.9% chance of winning about 24 IPC of loss

If you compare that too
(7 I , 4 M, 3 A,  6 T, 2 F, 2Tac ) V (1 AAA, 12 I, 2 A,  , 2T , 1 Ftr) , it gives about 99% chance of winning with 46 IPC loss

So, those 18 IPC used, gives immidiatly about 22 IPC lost for germany, and keeps 2 ftrs and 2 tacs away from the brit.

(if germany brings less planes to france, the chance of winning for the defender goes up fast, and the losses goes upp really fast)

3 boats a turn on the Atlantic side or the pacific side?

Pacific.  He was speaking of the type of Navy that could get built up between Anzac and US with a late DOW.  Without pulling guys from the Atlantic, US can’t put a ton of guys on the Pacific in those first 3 turns.  Just to match the Japan Navy the US needs 2 more carriers, 1 battleship, 1 destroyer.  That’s  60 ipcs.  In my opinion, US needs more navy since they need to be the attackers.  That would require neglecting the atlantic almost entirely (which isn’t an awful idea depending on how good the German player is).  That also doesn’t take into account that Japan buys a Carrier and can load it without spending the 20-21 ipcs for fighters.  The Naval bases also allow for 3 more fighters to defend if used correctly.

Has more to do with the positioning the allies have as to why the allies bid ranges from 6-12.

Good find Fire Knight but I already found it a few days ago. I’m waiting now for a 1942 setup.

The game is probably balanced but I think it is harder to play the axis.  They need to balance defense and offense when the go into Russia with Germany, Japan needs to be careful if it does not hold Hawaii because then its captial could become in danger if its initial starting air force and navy is off conquering the world.  Also Gilbartar can cause all sorts of problems for the axis if they are not careful, the allies can hit a lot from there.  Italy can get jacked up by Britan if Germany does not at least threaten Sea lion and the Brits fly 4 planes to Africa from Pacific.

It is too early to know for sure if such a huge game is balanced but I still think it is at least close.  Those are just the observations I have made about the Axis being harder to play.

I don’t think I’ll apply any change to pacific in the Global Game. And I bet I won’t be playing stand alone pacific '40 after euro 40 release, due to global playing.

But I’m sure I’ll like more the stand alone pacific 40 instead of the europe 40! So I guess I’ll apply the new adjustement only in the stand alone pacific.