18 ipc allied bid

@Ichabod:

@Arthur:

Strollmasta, even with a 20-30 bid good Allied players only win 45% of the time against good Axis players.� � Those are the stats from hundreds of online league games for players who probably have 50-500 games of experience.�

I want to get beat by an Axis player with an allied bid of 30. I need to see it to believe it. I’m not a good Axis and Allies player, not much experience either and certainly prefer playing Axis. Most of my games are Axis.

ABH is really an outstanding G40 player and he’s also very humble! I’m eating crow here! In our game, only through G2, the situation on the board already indicates a challenge for the Allies to gain the upper hand. It seems like Germany already significantly mitigated the bid which all went to the UK Europe board. ABH has already demonstrated how the Axis could still win a game despite a bid of 30. I want to play it out a little more to see how the situation develops of course.

I’ve been in games where an allied bid of just 12 IPCs (2 UK subs), was enough to shut Italy down or make it irrelevant (me playing Axis) because both subs survived and Italy only has 1 destroyer. I’m not very good at this game, but dang, I thought that 30 would have been a lot. I have a lot more humble pie to eat from ABH.

It has been a fun game Ichabod.  We are still in the early stages and things have been working out along the standard route so far in the first 1.3 rounds.  The Italian and UK fleets have been annihilated, Italy gave up Africa without contest since most of the bid went there, and Japan is preparing for a J2 DoW (spoiler alert although there is nothing to do on R2 to stop it).  The game is starting to transition to the mid-game region where Japan is trying to get its economy up towards 70 PUs and threaten India while Germany makes a push towards Moscow.  Small tactical moves will likely swing the game to either side.

I have been watching some League games where the bids have crept up north of 40 PUs.  At that point the Allies have some more options.  With additional land units, Russia can go toe-to-toe with the German horde heading to Moscow.  Alternatively China can be boosted to a point where they can hold Yunnan or reclaim it with overwhelming strength on round 2.  I have never seen the Axis win if Yunnan is Allied control during the mid-game.  The difficulty of getting troops to Mainland Asia while controlling the Money Islands makes the situation untenable.

ABH,

I can see the “race” which is on full swing. I’m not comfortable with the Allies’ chances right now.

I’m concerned about the growing Luffwaffe and having to maybe waste IPCs on blockers at SZ110. I’m also disappointed with 2 wrong decisions I made.

This is the first game I’ve played where the UK was able to safely do Tobruk and Taranto. I could have used the India transport for something, but thought, maybe it was worth landing an infantry on Java to get a little more money for India since you didn’t J1.

I’m now thinking hitting Ethiopia is a better option than Tobruk as it could take 1-2 turns for UK Europe to get it’s National Objective back. If the Italian transport survives (UK can only attack the Italian destroyer/cruiser with a sub/bomber), not good odds, Italy could land on Cyprus. Hindsight is 20/20, but I wish I put 2 UK fighters at Gibraltar and transported ground units there. If I ever get a bid of 30 again, I think I’ll bid units for that setup.

Ichabod

Your strategic decisions have all been generally good. You can move your Atlantic fleet to Gibraltar on US2 and support it with an airbase in Gibraltar.  You will have to beef it up later in the game as Germany builds more bombers, but for now it would be perfectly safe without needing a SZ110 blocker.  If I traded my entire Axis air force for your entire Atlantic fleet, you would win in that exchange; I would no longer be able to press my attack further into Russia.

Tobruk was actually a smart decision for UK1 since I no longer have a North African force to harass Egypt and amphibious landing forces.  The UK bonus for having all of the original territories is nice but hardly a necessity that needs to be achieved ASAP.  Taranto probably is a fight that can be completely skipped on UK1 if you have additional fleet builds.  Your forces are likely sufficient to move next to Gibraltar. That prevents Germany from considering Sea Lion.  The undamaged Italian fleet will stay alive for many rounds, but would be instantly smashed if it ever leaves the shores of Italy.  With no bonus money coming in, Italy is relegated to canopening in Russia during most bid games.  Not having to pour money into Egyptian defense forces does make a huge difference, allowing UK to laser focus on helping Russia or assist with US invasion of Western Europe.  With 7 UK planes remaining after the first round, you have a good start to a powerful air force.

Hey Harris how exactly can you make it to where China can take, and hold, Yunnan? If I saw a full out bid for China as Japan I might just wait till T3 to declare war against the allies, and instead shore up the Asian mainland to stop the allies from stacking Yunnan. I do agree with you that if the allies hold Yunnan it is probably game over for axis, but I’ve never been able to do it…

Also what exactly does a Russian bid accomplish? I guess with a 40 bid you could get 13 extra pieces to help defend against Germany, and then you would easily be able to stack Bryansk for a while, but eventually Germany would have enough to overcome it, and with all that bid going to Russia instead of UK isn’t it much worse for the allies in the long run?

@theROCmonster:

Hey Harris how exactly can you make it to where China can take, and hold, Yunnan? If I saw a full out bid for China as Japan I might just wait till T3 to declare war against the allies, and instead shore up the Asian mainland to stop the allies from stacking Yunnan. I do agree with you that if the allies hold Yunnan it is probably game over for axis, but I’ve never been able to do it…

Also what exactly does a Russian bid accomplish? I guess with a 40 bid you could get 13 extra pieces to help defend against Germany, and then you would easily be able to stack Bryansk for a while, but eventually Germany would have enough to overcome it, and with all that bid going to Russia instead of UK isn’t it much worse for the allies in the long run?

I think he’s talking about a 10 inf bid for Yunnan, or something similar.

A Russian bid can fly one or two extra planes to Yunnan USSR1, enough to make that attack dubious and even more dubious with a J1 DOW. The 3-4 USSR planes in Yunnan is a counter to the 4 planes Japan can fly to Yunnan J1 without a DOW.

One game I played saw a USSR bid of a fighter in Moscow and flew the 3 planes to Yunnan. I rolled poorly as Japan and the Allies held Yunnan.

As you might expect, there was also an inf bid in Yunnan. Turned out I only hit once round one and the defenders hit four times so I had to retreat.

Attacking this does mean you can’t hit the UK BB if you DOW J1.

If two USSR planes are bid (Moscow and Stalingrad) and the inf, hard to see Japan winning.

So you all state that Japan suffers if Yunnan is hold round 1? Hm. I’ve played doozens of face-to-face games and Japan nearly never was the one to win the war for the axis. Ok, you can play weak and therefore USA has some options to focus more on Germany; but without taking Yunnan nothing is lost for Japan in my opinion. With taking Yunnan Japan slaughters the allies, without taking Yunnan Japan still fights the allies - that’s the difference. But axis’ victory is achieved by Germany nearly every time.

If they decline to attack Yunnan, then you can join with UK/ANZAC also.

Once China has the 6+ every turn and some artillery, Japan has problems

Japan can sacrifice planes, but once its lost 4-6 of them, the odds for Calcutta Attack/Sea Attack decline

China can’t do much by itself but there is a huge difference between a dead China of no threat and +12 Japan Money and having something alive and threatening

Now compare that to the situation where China, Russia, Uk, Anzac are all chomping at Japan’s inland territories, worth 20,
He only has two choices;  spend his troops to push you back (this is a wash)

Or pursue his strategy elsewhere and you clamp his empire down and take his $$

However, the truth is that Japan chooses these outcomes for you.  If he confronts US or AUS, you can play on the Mainland.  If he moves his fleet towards SZ 37, you have be much more careful.  He can take the spice islands AND hold the little powers off but he cant do both of those things AND fight the US 1:1

If you never win the map on the Pacific side as Japan then either the Allies are spending too much money in that half of the board or you have weak Japanese players.  Yunnan’s survival is the major tipping point in Asia.  Not only the territory is an 8 PU allied swing (6 PU bonus + 1 Chinese PU gained, -1 Japanese PU), but it opens up a pathway to Kwantung.  China can can-opener on its turn and the UK can send in a fast mover or two on the followup turn.  With bonuses that is another 9 PU gain for the Allies compared to a typical Japan-controlled Yunnan game.  An additional 17 PUs for the Allies every single round is a game changer.

An allied Yunnan ist pesky for Japan - nothing more. It frees some allied troops to fight the european axis, right. But Japan is still dangerous and Allies have to invest much to prevent an axis victory in the pacific. What I mean is that the Allies’ main problem called Germany don’t care some more allied forces transfered from Asia because of that Yunnan’ian benefit. Japan is truely able to win the war but dont need to. It still has to force the Allies to focus a bit on it even if Yunnan is held by Allies. Germany does the rest.

@Corpo24:

Thanks guys! Looks like I have a lot to think about.  Really like the fighter idea on Scotland.  👍

I would use the rest of the bid to place a sub in sz 98 (that leaves you an extra 2 ipcs to give to Russia). It’s important to attack the Italian fleet in sz 97 on UK1 (unless Germany is in full Sea Lion mode in which case you don’t) and the fig in Scotland and ss in 97 give you extra ammunition to do that while still being able to make other attacks (for example, destroying German units in sz 110 or sz 111).  Don’t strech yourself too thin on UK1!  If you attack sz 97, make sure you bring enough units to have 90%+ odds of victory even if Italy scrambles.

Wise tips from the master, Zhukov.  Without that extra sub in the Med the SZ97 attack is very risky.  With the extra sub, Italy rarely scrambles and has trouble defeating the UK navy until the German turn.  That allows you to convoy raid for a turn, break an Italian bonus, and force the Germans to lose a couple planes to sink the UK Med fleet.

@Zhukov44:

@Corpo24:

Thanks guys! Looks like I have a lot to think about.  Really like the fighter idea on Scotland.  👍

I would use the rest of the bid to place a sub in sz 98 (that leaves you an extra 2 ipcs to give to Russia). It’s important to attack the Italian fleet in sz 97 on UK1 (unless Germany is in full Sea Lion mode in which case you don’t) and the fig in Scotland and ss in 97 give you extra ammunition to do that while still being able to make other attacks (for example, destroying German units in sz 110 or sz 111).  Don’t strech yourself too thin on UK1!  If you attack sz 97, make sure you bring enough units to have 90%+ odds of victory even if Italy scrambles.

Russia over UK_Pac for the extra 2IPC? In both cases an additional inf purchase is allowed, usually. I reckon the inf swings things more in India.

I’ve never played where you can keep cash from the bid.

it sounds like from some of the comments here that people who are more experienced interpret the bid very liberally (can buy anything including bases and factories, place it anywhere without limit, and can keep cash), so unless they are limited by agreement, as I keep saying; they are exploiting those limits to expand what bidding can do.

It seems more sensible to place some limits on it, not because they are absolutely needed (I don’t suspect it will break the game somehow), but because an “X” bid should have some uniform application in order to judge what bid is adequate or average.    Being able to place 12 infantry on an empty square is completely different than being able to place 36 worth of varied units over a wider area.

“With the extra sub, Italy rarely scrambles and has trouble defeating the UK navy until the German turn.  That allows you to convoy raid for a turn, break an Italian bonus, and force the Germans to lose a couple planes to sink the UK Med fleet”

Unless Italy sees that the Germans suffered very few casualties from their opener (and therefore want to take some crazay risks), they should probably never risk their airforce either in that scramble or risk losing the whole thing on any early attack either.  It sounds awesome that you will be convoying Italy but the fact is that the subs will either be lost as casualties, or killed on the first Italian counterattack because at that point they still have 1 DD, unless you have multiple subs to replace the ones being lost, or spread them out (since you don’t start with any, this is hard to do).

That Italian air force is such a powerful can-opener that losing it isn’t really an option.  Someone pointed out that a standard Italian Xped force can kill 10+ lesser units and “open the door” with its airforce.  The Italian bomber often picks off lone infantry blocking the backfield at a critical time.

ShadowHawk: Using your standard UK1 Taranto raid with no extra sub here are the two scenarios:

Scenario 1) No Scramble
UK loses one unit
Italy chooses to destroy the French fleet because it is difficult to kill the remaining UK fleet in SZ97
Italy loses most of their income on I1 from convoy raids, and doesn’t get any bonuses
Germany loses 2 or 3 planes when cleaning up the Med on G2

Scenario 2) Scramble three fighters 60% chance that UK still wins, likely keeping a bomber, tac, and fighter that can land in Malta with no fleet left in SZ97
Italy destroys the French fleet, maybe losing one more ship than in the previous scenario but those ships don’t make much of a difference in the game
Italy gets bonus from have the Med cleared of ships, has no convoy raid, and is in a similar strategic situation as scenario 1 since the additional income makes up for the lost fighter.

20% chance that Italy wins and keeps the transport and possibly a couple of planes
Italy is extremely strong and can threaten Egpyt.  Even if UK holds the territory, they are prevented from aiding Russia for several rounds.  The Axis are in such a strong position that they have a very high likelihood of winning the game.  I usually surrender as Allies if Egpyt has been captured during the first few rounds and there is no chance to recapture it.

20% chance that UK crushes the Italians without many loses
This becomes similar to Scenario 1 except that Italy has two fewer planes for the rest of the game.  While this is hardly your preferred outcome, you aren’t scratching your head trying to figure out what to do for the rest of the game like a situation where Egypt falls on I2.

Summary: 
60% chance of similar outcome to no-scramble
20% chance of being in a very strong position
20% chance of being in a slightly inferior position
Throw in other considerations and scrambling might or might not make sense.  So much depends on your gameplan for Axis.

Adding in one extra UK sub will tip the outcomes to about 50%/7%/43% for  similar/great/slightly bad.  No thanks to that scrambling opportunity.  It is very likely that the extra sub will survive until UK2 where it can wreak additional havoc in the Med.  With support from a bomber and other planes, it can destroy or damage remaining Italian fleet.  The net benefits are way more than 6 PUs.

If you got 75% chance of winning with the scramble you are pretty safe as the chance of italy scrambling are already low and even then you still win 75% of the time and of the remaining 25% there is a pretty big piece mutual annihilation.

Echoing ABH’s points, if I’m Axis I usually take that battle and scramble.

According to my TripleA calc, if Axis doesn’t scramble, the average TUV swing is 31.62.  If Axis does scramble, it’s 13.44.

Allies have 80% chance of winning.  That means 20% of the time that attack fails and around 15% the Italian bb survives.  It’s very challenging to recover from that setback as Allies.

Axis has extra incentive to scramble to obtain more income on Italy1 by avoiding convoys in 97.  Some go for a Italy 1 97 attack, but that’s risky for Italy and it allows the french fleet a pass.  So between the 18 ipc swing, the +8 from not being convoyed, and the extra planes Germany will not lose hitting 97 on G2, the scramble (risking 30$ worth of units) doesn’t seem like such a bad risk.

UK doesn’t absolutely need the sub bid (an extra fighter does the job in 97 just as well).  However, there’s no shortage of targets on UK1, so every extra unit helps.  The sub bid is also valuable for the potential convoy damage it will inflict over the long haul.

I also like to scramble.

Options I1 are very limited without the scramble. Normally, SZ96 is blocked so all you can do is hit sz96 & SZ93 and perhaps Greece with the Albanian force + air.

Although the sub + 2nd fighter from London changes things somewhat. Actually makes it a negative TUV expectation. Only one makes it slightly positive but probably negative after considering the TUV positive Luftwaffe attack.

Scrambling isn’t about winning. It’s about inflicting enough pain on the UK to make the attack hurt. Winning (keeping the transport is a win) is a bonus. If you don’t scramble, you will probably kill one unit. If you do, mutual annihilation or near to it is likely.

@simon33:

Scrambling isn’t about winning.

Agreed. It is only about the simple calulation: what is my IPC tradeoff for scrambleing. If your fighter gets to fire twice, you should almost always scramble. Only exception is if you have a jucier target on your turn.