@seancb said in [House Rules] Should allies receive a bid?:
one more thing, I’ll take a 16 bid
We actually have 1 game completed (if you concede it). Looking forward to another…waiting in the lobby right now.
Is there currently an average bid(or even a bid) in G40 2nd edition
-
I would give you 160 bid - on the condition that it’s all in battleships. and follows standard bid rules.
There is a precedent for this! From an XDAP pit fight:)
So could that be a US battleship in sz 9, 10, 11, 12, 26, 27, 28, 29? lol
British battleships are probably more effective since they’re at war from the start. IIRC the RN exists in 9 sea zones at the start of the game, so you can add a battleship to all but one. But perhaps Russia will fall quickly anyway.
-
Why is the current meta here that only 1 unit per area? I mean at Gencon for as long as I remember at tournaments and FTF play if you gave a bid up they would have to spend all the ipcs on any units and place them where they want. There never has been a limit on 1 unit per area? I mean if your willing to give ipcs there shouldn’t be a limit there should they? I mean what is the purpose of the bid with that limit?
-
The purpose of the limit is to stop cheesy moves like placing 7 inf in Yunnan.
-
You are correct that tournament rules allow placement of the whole bid in one square. I was wrong about this in the past. Its a house rule, so people apply it differently–after you can place 12+ more worth of units it starts to get abusive.
Once I can put 3 subs off Egypt, I can do Taranto without losing my carrier or fighters…which seems like a huge advantage to me but I haven’t beat Cow or Garg, which would appear to require moving pieces and editing the game when they are in the bathroom, or treating them to all the free beer they can drink before the opener.
-
Without placement limits, China can have enough troops to prevent Japan from expanding into mainland Asia. That takes away so much historical accuracy. There just are too many cheesy bids if you can stack them all in one place. I would much rather deal with a bigger bid than a crazy opening round.
On a seperate note, I bet that a good Axis player could still easily defeat a relatively novice Allied player even with a 15 battleship initial bid. Controlling the ocean is not sufficient if the person has not mastered land tactics!
-
@Arthur:
Without placement limits, China can have enough troops to prevent Japan from expanding into mainland Asia. That takes away so much historical accuracy. There just are too many cheesy bids if you can stack them all in one place. I would much rather deal with a bigger bid than a crazy opening round.
On a seperate note, I bet that a good Axis player could still easily defeat a relatively novice Allied player even with a 15 battleship initial bid. Controlling the ocean is not sufficient if the person has not mastered land tactics!
Historical accuracy is completely gone anyway since the Germans can sink the entire Home Fleet in 1940.
-
The game is certainly not a historical reinactment, but it isn’t too insanely off in each region. The designer allowed us flexibility to change plans from the original strategy while keeping the learning curve modest. For me, this level of complexity is perfect. I don’t want a multi year historical marvel, nor a Risk-level simplification.
The Axis meat grinder is extremely powerful when going against a new person who miscalculated everything that can hit a territory or sea zone. Oops, didn’t see that 10 bombers could fly all the way to Normandy and help sweep off my landing force… 80 PU swing again. A few tactical mistakes quickly chew through bids.
-
$26
-
-
Allies.
-
one bid that has always intrigued me was 100 inf for US at start.
No need for the US to but ground units allowing almost all air/sea buys.
:-o
-
one bid that has always intrigued me was 100 inf for US at start.
No need for the US to but ground units allowing almost all air/sea buys.
:-o
That’s such a dumb bid in my opinion, why bother bidding 100 dollars for land units for the nation that makes the most money before NO?
-
one bid that has always intrigued me was 100 inf for US at start.
No need for the US to but ground units allowing almost all air/sea buys.
:-o
That would actually be so hilarious tho. Build a 10 transport shuck into Europe and go into critical battles with an insane amount of rolls at 1.
-
one bid that has always intrigued me was 100 inf for US at start.
But how can you bid 300 IPCs and win the auction?
-
one bid that has always intrigued me was 100 inf for US at start.
No need for the US to but ground units allowing almost all air/sea buys.
:-o
That would actually be so hilarious tho. Build a 10 transport shuck into Europe and go into critical battles with an insane amount of rolls at 1.
Transports roll a zero in G40.
-
Even better: a bid of a million British tanks in, say, Samoa.
-
@Caesar:
one bid that has always intrigued me was 100 inf for US at start.
No need for the US to but ground units allowing almost all air/sea buys.
:-o
That would actually be so hilarious tho. Build a 10 transport shuck into Europe and go into critical battles with an insane amount of rolls at 1.
Transports roll a zero in G40.
I meant transport the infantry. Drop 20 guys off a turn.
-
@Caesar:
one bid that has always intrigued me was 100 inf for US at start.
No need for the US to but ground units allowing almost all air/sea buys.
:-o
That’s such a dumb bid in my opinion, why bother bidding 100 dollars for land units for the nation that makes the most money before NO?
well… the interesting idea behind it is it would relieve the US from the need to build ground units, which wouldn’t have much impact at first but would phase in over time. So it would function as a staggered bid.
-
10 infantry in Western USA
10 artillery in Central USA
10 infantry in Eastern USA$100
-
I’m confused here. Are people actually bidding in the hundreds?
Has the bidding system changed since the AAMC?
Suggested Topics
