Has anyone tried a German fighter bid?



  • Given that 10 bids come around every so often now I was wondering if anyone had tried it. Seems to offer a lot of flexibility G1 and can be used for the entire game if your smart and lucky enough. You’ll probably only have 6 figs still on G1 (unless Rus is kind enough to give you another) but I would never count on having 6 anyway.

    Coupled with a G1 10 inf 1 fig build the Allies are facing a very sizeable Luftwaffe for trading and keeping the shipping honest.

    I would imagine that the Ruskis would throw the kitchen sink at Ukraine if you placed it there to take out the 2 figs. (3 inf 1 art 3 arm 2 figs) but they’ll be really stretched in terms of man power and will have only the Archangel tank + any R1 builds. It also leaves a lot of room for that battle to go horribly wrong (20% they’ll lose and 19% they’ll only clear it)

    It won’t leave Gerry too short on manpower, the fig can be used in africa like the Lib bid. And no one would count on any Ukr inf bid surviving anyway.

    However there is probably some huge drawback i cant see  😄

    Opinions?



  • So you want a mighty luftwaffe?

    Regarding the Ukraine fig:  If you assume the russian player won’t sacrifice his fighters (Russian figs 1 and 2 are far more valuable than german figs 6 and 7) it’s actually up to 30% that you hold Ukraine.  However it’s only 25% that you keep both planes, and depending on how you look at it that’s still 70-75% against, and you just made the target very juicy.  If it starts going bad, the russians can usually pull back and save their tanks, but if it starts out well, your planes are toast.

    I’ve thought about it, but if you make your bid 3 inf in ukraine you’ve got far better odds of winning if russia attempts that battle/you are more likely to deter the attack and preserve fig #6. Then you can buy 2 figs on g1 and you’ve got the same 8 figs plus you saved 1 ipc to either give japan the 2trn/ic option or to allow germany to round out a 2 fig/7 inf purchase.  The disadvantage is you didn’t get to use Fig #7 on G1 or position it in range of most allied fleet for G2, but on the other hand your 3 infs are 2 turns closer to the front than if they were part of a larger G1 inf build.

    Now if you’re a gambler and you WANT them to attempt that ukraine battle, hoping to win it right there, that’s another thing, but I don’t have such a lack of confidence that I see the need to put my hopes on a 25-30% outcome before the game has even started (Well, actually, against some players I probably should  😛 ).  And even then, it’s not like the 30% upside is game-changing in your favor the same way the 70% would be for the Russians.

    I’ve wondered about figs in other locations, but haven’t put much thought into it or figured out one I like yet.  But I know I don’t like one in Ukraine.



  • @Petrucci08:

    I would imagine that the Ruskis would throw the kitchen sink at Ukraine if you placed it there to take out the 2 figs… . . .

    However there is probably some huge drawback i cant see  😄

    1.  you saw it.

    2.  but the horse sitting on your front porch is if you could have placed a fighter, you could have placed 10 IPC of units?!!  10 IPC preplaced is ubersecks.  Why waste 10 IPC preplaced on a fighter when you could put down some precious precious infantry (strokes kitty) yes, my precious

    3.  also if you preplace infantry, you solve the logistic problem of getting units to the front; this applies to both Germany’s eastern front and Japan’s western front.  You could always buy a 10 IPC fighter on round 1 or 2 after seeing the Allied game plan, then you could move that fighter to the front quickly.

    So no.  Don’t build no fighter build, you don’t need/want it.  Transport, sub, or ground unit(s) is my call.

    I really gotta do somethin about this horse on my front porch.  he eat the flowerz.

    O ya.  ur probably thinkin about . . . extra fighter in Africa, hm.  Thought I should elaborate on that point.  If you put another German fighter in the Balkans, you preserve possibility of G1 battleship/transport/fighter attacking UK destroyer plus G1 fighter to Anglo-Egypt.  So you have your safeties.

    But a 10 IPC preplaced should let you at the least put an infantry in Libya and tank in Algeria (or whatever, like 3 infantry in Libya if you can); that allows you to control Anglo-Egypt with high odds and allows you the freedom of moving the Med fleet west to take Gibraltar.  Even so, you could STILL transport units to Anglo-Egypt on G1, the added African reinforcements makes UK1 recapture of Anglo-Egypt difficult, allowing G2 tank blitz through Africa.

    In other words, a couple of ground units lets you do everything you could do with a fighter, and more.  Plus you have IPC left over.

    animal farm, animal farm
    never through me shalt thou come to harm

    What’s that expression, anyways . . . horse on your front porch, something you can’t ignore . . . oh well, whatever



  • Ah bunnies, what a great combination of condescension, humour and informative points in every post.  😄  +1 karma

    A 3 inf Ukr bid does seem much superior. I don’t see any mildly conservative Russian player attacking with 3 extra inf there.  Plus you both raise good points about placing land forces closer to the front and building the extra, highly mobile, fig G1. Plus with 3 inf in Ukr you get an extra fig in a sense since you hardly ever get to keep the Ukrainian fig.

    I’ve always thought bidding navy as kind of a waste, with the exception of an extra Jap tran.

    thanks for the replies fella’s  🙂



  • :roll:
    A prebid fighter in Finland/Norway to go after that BB Tran and Rus sub though, now that has merit! 2 fighters, a bomber and the atlantic sub, and there should be no UK navy anywhere around Europe, really peaks my interrest. 😮
    But nobody is crazy enough to give me 10 bid. :evil:



  • @Crazy:

    :roll:
    A prebid fighter in Finland/Norway to go after that BB Tran and Rus sub though, now that has merit! 2 fighters, a bomber and the atlantic sub, and there should be no UK navy anywhere around Europe, really peaks my interrest. 😮
    But nobody is crazy enough to give me 10 bid. :evil:

    You can do almost that exact attack with an 8IPC bid. Just place another sub in the Atlantic. Yeah, Russia can maybe take Nor, but the odds aren’t that hot, and who has the troops to hit Nor, WRu and Ukr on R1? Something’s gotta give…

    Bunnies, I think the phrase you were grasping for was “the elephant in the room.”



  • @hyogoetophile:

    Yeah, Russia can maybe take Nor, but the odds aren’t that hot, and who has the troops to hit Nor, WRu and Ukr on R1? Something’s gotta give…

    I’ve been forgoing UKR in favor of NOR in recent games, and I’ve been quite pleased with the results.

    If you want to kill one fighter, it’s an easier target. Germany can’t retake without risking a UK counter, and doing so leaves his transport in the Baltic. The extra 3 IPCs don’t hurt either. It’s not a sure thing, if Germany has good defensive rolls, but it leaves you far less exposed than a UKR attack.



  • @Aretaku:

    @hyogoetophile:

    Yeah, Russia can maybe take Nor, but the odds aren’t that hot, and who has the troops to hit Nor, WRu and Ukr on R1? Something’s gotta give…

    I’ve been forgoing UKR in favor of NOR in recent games, and I’ve been quite pleased with the results.

    If you want to kill one fighter, it’s an easier target. Germany can’t retake without risking a UK counter, and doing so leaves his transport in the Baltic. The extra 3 IPCs don’t hurt either. It’s not a sure thing, if Germany has good defensive rolls, but it leaves you far less exposed than a UKR attack.

    Indeed I think it leaves Russia far more exposed the Russian fighter from Mosca have to land in Karelia and so Germany have no problem to destroy it!
    You may strenghten Karelia sending three inf from Arkangel instead of sending thme in West Russia, but this weaken the West Russia attack.

    Moreover, I do not see NOR as an Easier attack, I used TripleA battle calculator with 10000 runs and odds are:

    NOR: 3 inf 2 fig vs 3 inf 1 fig -> 60% propability of winning (with 1,36 units left….)
    UKR: 3 inf 1 art 3 tank 2 fig vs 3 inf 1 art 1 tank 1 fig -> 96% probability of winning (with 4,84 units left)

    It seems to me that UKR is far better as attack (personally I am oriented to West Russia/Belorussia or only West Russia but this is another discussion).



  • @hyogoetophile:

    Bunnies, I think the phrase you were grasping for was “the elephant in the room.”

    Yes, everyone can see Aloysius Snuffleupagus these days.  I suppose Big Bird must have started passing around the hooch.

    Thanx, hyogoetophile.

    BTW, I’m guessing Aretaku’s thinking about 2 inf 1 tank 1 fighter vs 3 inf 1 fighter at Norway.  Long odds, with a pretty good outcome if successful, but I don’t like the attack myself.  I’m a proponent of W. Russia/Belorussia or W. Russia/Ukraine.



  • Taking Ukraine on Russia1 leaves you exposed. I semi-proved my theory on a german tank blitz by taking caucasus on turn 4 ( i expected turn 3 but could not count on Japan) despite at least 4 allied planes reinforcment and opponent knowing the strategy.

    I still have to play Mazer and refine last details but in any case, last game i played resaw that common scenario and gemany had taken Moscow by turn 5. Average opponent maybe or simply the fact he did not knew my strat.

    For the above, i did something different though, wich is the sub bid pointed out by hyogoetophile. With their whole fleet sunk, it kept UK out of action until it was too late.

    I solved Africa by going for anglo-egypt on G2 only. On G1 i took Trans-jordan instead to prevent UK fleet entering mediteranean while massing my forces from algeria in libya and many fighters within strike range.  This saw UK try to fortify egypt commiting most of it’s unit there. I brought back units with transport and striked from all direction with a shore bombardment you don’t normally get because of UK destroyer ( which was sunk G1)

    Overall, i’d say you better off taking Anglo-egypt turn 2 after this expiriment and really sink the whole UK fleet G1. So yea, for me a 10 bid for a fighter has it’s appeal as long it’s in Norway to strike UK fleet. But i never got 10, always 8 for bid so far, eheh.



  • @Corbeau:

    Taking Ukraine on Russia1 leaves you exposed. I semi-proved my theory on a german tank blitz by taking caucasus on turn 4 ( i expected turn 3 but could not count on Japan) despite at least 4 allied planes reinforcment and opponent knowing the strategy.

    Tsk. Tsk  Corbeau. If you are referring to our game has your “semi-proof”, then I an afraid you have gotten some details wrong. You have made it sound like you took a re-enforced Caucus with allied planes on round 4. But the fact of that game was, you exposed all german tanks to me in west russia round 3, so I conceded Caucus to you round 4, in order to destroy every tank the Germans had owned. You took caucus defending with 2 inf via your med fleet (1bb, 2 trans, 1 sub). I made the mistake of letting that med fleet live that long, if destroyed, you would have never taked caucus that game. 🙂  PS - i retook caucus round 5  and germany was very weak in unit strength.



  • Corb, we need to run the opening again, with you controling both axis powers. Then it will be less semi-proved or dis-proved.



  • Your game proves/disproves nothing,  NOTHING!  ahahahaha the power!



  • @Bunnies:

    @hyogoetophile:

    Bunnies, I think the phrase you were grasping for was “the elephant in the room.”

    Yes, everyone can see Aloysius Snuffleupagus these days.  I suppose Big Bird must have started passing around the hooch.

    Thanx, hyogoetophile.

    BTW, I’m guessing Aretaku’s thinking about 2 inf 1 tank 1 fighter vs 3 inf 1 fighter at Norway.  Long odds, with a pretty good outcome if successful, but I don’t like the attack myself.  I’m a proponent of W. Russia/Belorussia or W. Russia/Ukraine.

    Sending in also the tank? It will be in danger and out of reach of Ukraine. But it is possible.

    Sending the tnak increases win% to 89% (with 2,86 units left on average) and still leaves 1 fig in Karelia. It is better then the 60% but I still prefer to attack West Russia/Belorussia.



  • @Romulus:

    @Bunnies:

    @hyogoetophile:

    Bunnies, I think the phrase you were grasping for was “the elephant in the room.”

    Yes, everyone can see Aloysius Snuffleupagus these days.  I suppose Big Bird must have started passing around the hooch.

    Thanx, hyogoetophile.

    BTW, I’m guessing Aretaku’s thinking about 2 inf 1 tank 1 fighter vs 3 inf 1 fighter at Norway.  Long odds, with a pretty good outcome if successful, but I don’t like the attack myself.  I’m a proponent of W. Russia/Belorussia or W. Russia/Ukraine.

    Sending in also the tank? It will be in danger and out of reach of Ukraine. But it is possible.

    Sending the tnak increases win% to 89% (with 2,86 units left on average) and still leaves 1 fig in Karelia. It is better then the 60% but I still prefer to attack West Russia/Belorussia.

    Under most circumstances, barring some really game-changing house rules &c:

    Russia losing fighter on G1 = stupid as h***.

    If you’ve got anything approaching a normal game, it’s not even worth discussing a strategy that ends up with Russia losing a fighter on G1 with 90+% probability, and parking the Russian fighter at Karelia on R1 is a great way to do just that.

    WHY:

    1.  Russia fighter’s good for trading territory.  Also good on defense.  Also good at forcing Germans to keep battleship escort for the Med transport (what, you just want a rogue German battleship cruising around looking for trouble?)

    2.  Russia can’t really afford to buy another fighter at the beginning of the game.  One fighter?  Three infantry?  Hm.  One can soak up 3 hits, attacks worth 3, defends worth 6.  Another can soak up 1 hit, attacks worth 3, defends worth 4.  What should I do.  Or I can get 2 tanks, which can soak up 2 hits, attack at 6, defend at 6.  O ya, let me go buy a FIGHTER HAHAHAHA no wait, a BOMBER, no a BATTLESHIP HAHAHAHA.  No, really, you CAN buy that stuff for Russia after you’ve won for all practical purposes, but if the game result is still in question, you probably ain’t gettin another fighter.



  • What I can say? I completely agree!!!



  • @AxisOfEvil:

    PS - i retook caucus round 5  and germany was very weak in unit strength.

    bah, cmon, you took it back only because Japan player refused reinforce it with 9 tanks and fighters. There was no way you retook it if he did reinforce. Can’t do more than that if im also playing against Japan. Not the thread to debate this anyways, we will do it in game.

    I still would consider a plane bid to sink another UK BB round 1. It has the advantage if surviving of not getting wasted after the attack like surviving subs are wasted by american planes.

    For Russia, i been seen buying a bomber for Russia every now and then on 2nd turn depending on how Germany forces are looking. A third plane make its way easier to swap the 3 territories with minimum infantry. The bomber range also enable to  trade territories in the Far east or bomb thoses Japan complexes if it has nothing better to do. In 4 turns, if japan went IC, i normally do get a good 30 ipc out of japan hands when i combine the 2 allied bombers for the effect. If they did not, thoses bombers forces Japan to escort their transports and can help with ground operations.



  • @Corbeau:

    For Russia, i been seen buying a bomber for Russia every now and then on 2nd turn depending on how Germany forces are looking.

    You sure are brave to admit to buying a Russian Bomber on r2 in this forum. I am going to duck now, as you might take some abuse!!!

    But in all honesty, i can and have bought a third russian fighter in say round 6-7. I buy it if russia is doing well in land piece count. At this point in the game, you will have germans staged to the west, and japanese staged to the east. You end up swapping novo, kazah, and western front territories with these forces. that can be 4 -6 territories you have to swap per turn. An extra fighter certainly helps at this time.  And it helps in the ultimate defense of Moscow.



  • 😮
    Russian bomber!!!
    May as well go tech and get heavy bombers too! Deal out some real damage, to yourself :roll:
    If you think you can win with Russia giving up 3 tanks=9 attack/defence points, or 5 infantry=5 attack points/10 defence points for 1 Bomber=4 attack points/1 defence point! Then I want to play you. I could use an easy win for a change.
    Now go look in the mirror, and say to yourself, stupid stupid stupid, and slap yourself silly. And promise yourself you will never post again when you are drunk. If I had my way, Russian bombers would not even be on the units list. same goes for Russian Battleships. OK, don’t anyone confess that they have ever built a Russian Battleship or I’ll come over there and slap you myself!
    😮 8-)



  • I did say round TWO and depending how Germany is looking.
    Things to consider:

    • Did G1 buy an AC or tranport in baltic ( thats 16 ipc )
    • Are UK in position to reinforce Karelia
    • Do i have a stable enough front

    Also, it may seem a lot but each time i spare one infantry swapping territory, it’s a +3 ipc. A bomber does imply most of the time sending one less infantry. After 3 round, i did spared 9 ipcs in infantry.

    Note: I don’t play low luck, so high dice value counts for a lot.

    Yes Russia doing only infantry is what everyone does ( And i do when the situation calls for it) but you can adapt a game to what is happening. Another exemple of seemingly too pricy expense: if mediteranee is holded by allied boats, there is nothing against building 1-2 russian transports to ferry troops in south Italy or the balkans.

    I did not yet build a russian battleship but eh, i might do it if i am playing you, if only to give you a chance 😉



  • 😮
    OMG!
    Is this a challange :?
    I only play on the tripleA site.
    Bring it on Bomber boy. 😛

    ……LOL…lol…lol…lol…lol…lol…lol…lol…lol…lol…



  • Did you not know that a battleship buy on R1 is the best Russian move in the game. It’s totally broken. Those germans sure will have egg on their faces when you start bombarding Berlin  😄



  • @Bunnies:

    BTW, I’m guessing Aretaku’s thinking about 2 inf 1 tank 1 fighter vs 3 inf 1 fighter at Norway.  Long odds, with a pretty good outcome if successful, but I don’t like the attack myself.  I’m a proponent of W. Russia/Belorussia or W. Russia/Ukraine.

    Yes, I was advocating 3 Inf, 1 Arm, 1 Fig. You have to be careful if Germany has a good first roll, otherwise the fighter is at risk. The odds are long…but I like 'em better than 3 naked tanks in the Ukraine!

    Three games now, and in two I have ended with 1 Arm, 1 Fig remaining in NOR, and one saw 1 Inf, 1 Arm, 1 Fig survive.

    That armor is safe unless Germany wants to waste needed infantry against a UK counter, and it can be used on the following turn to retake Karelia, or wait until Inf/Figs do the job and blitz it back to Archangel. Also, provided that Russia and UK know their stuff, Germany will NEVER get that money back unless they do the turn 1 counter, and follow it up with Baltic fleet investment, which is not always feasible. A (semi)-permanent 6 IPC shift in favor of the Allies before the Axis even get a turn is worth the longer odds, IMHO.

    @Romulus:

    Moreover, I do not see NOR as an Easier attack, I used TripleA battle calculator with 10000 runs and odds are:

    NOR: 3 inf 2 fig vs 3 inf 1 fig -> 60% propability of winning (with 1,36 units left….)
    UKR: 3 inf 1 art 3 tank 2 fig vs 3 inf 1 art 1 tank 1 fig -> 96% probability of winning (with 4,84 units left)

    It seems to me that UKR is far better as attack

    But what is the goal? If the goal is simply the destruction of any and all German forces, then perhaps UKR is better, but if the goal is the destruction of a German fighter…

    Norway attempts this while putting only 1/4 of Russias starting tank force at some risk.

    Ukraine attempts this while sacrificing 3/4 of Russias starting tank force, along with half the artillery…and this is if the attack goes well!

    I’m not saying that a strafe of the Ukraine isn’t a viable option, but after seeing how advantageous a successful Norway attack can be in my last three games, I don’t think I’ll bother trying to take and hold Ukraine ever again. It costs too much for too little gain.



  • @Aretaku:

    @Bunnies:

    BTW, I’m guessing Aretaku’s thinking about 2 inf 1 tank 1 fighter vs 3 inf 1 fighter at Norway.  Long odds, with a pretty good outcome if successful, but I don’t like the attack myself.  I’m a proponent of W. Russia/Belorussia or W. Russia/Ukraine.

    Yes, I was advocating 3 Inf, 1 Arm, 1 Fig.

    Yeah these here beer goggles make some things seem BIGGER and some things seem SMALLER.  heheehe.  3 inf, 1 arm, 1 fighter, I knew it.  Somehow I typed “2” instead.  wups.

    You have to be careful if Germany has a good first roll, otherwise the fighter is at risk. The odds are long…but I like 'em better than 3 naked tanks in the Ukraine!

    I usually do West Russia/Belorussia or two-tank Ukraine if I’m feeling randy.  Which I mostly am.  naked tanks.  yeah baby.

    Three games now, and in two I have ended with 1 Arm, 1 Fig remaining in NOR, and one saw 1 Inf, 1 Arm, 1 Fig survive.

    The reason I don’t like doing Norway is I prefer brunettes.  But also I don’t like seeing German-held Ukraine and Belorussia on G1; that can end in a nasty early position for Russia if Germany decides to attack with air force and sometimes its Med transport.  The Germans have SIX fodder infantry, that’s a lot.

    That armor is safe unless Germany wants to waste needed infantry against a UK counter, and it can be used on the following turn to retake Karelia, or wait until Inf/Figs do the job and blitz it back to Archangel. Also, provided that Russia and UK know their stuff, Germany will NEVER get that money back unless they do the turn 1 counter, and follow it up with Baltic fleet investment, which is not always feasible. A (semi)-permanent 6 IPC shift in favor of the Allies before the Axis even get a turn is worth the longer odds, IMHO.

    I knew it, ur a ho!  don’t touch me!  no wait, baby . . . yeah . . . u know i can’t stay mad at u . . . yeah, it is a pretty attractive gain . . . are u sayin i’m fat?  er no baby . . . anyways

    I think that although a R1 Norway attack offers decent odds and a gain, the risk of G1 kitchen sink attack is just not something I like to deal with.  Then again, I’m pretty confident in my Allied game.

    @Romulus:

    Moreover, I do not see NOR as an Easier attack, I used TripleA battle calculator with 10000 runs and odds are:

    NOR: 3 inf 2 fig vs 3 inf 1 fig -> 60% propability of winning (with 1,36 units left….)
    UKR: 3 inf 1 art 3 tank 2 fig vs 3 inf 1 art 1 tank 1 fig -> 96% probability of winning (with 4,84 units left)

    It seems to me that UKR is far better as attack

    But what is the goal? If the goal is simply the destruction of any and all German forces, then perhaps UKR is better,

    Precisely.  Killing Ukr on R1 depletes a German artillery, a German tank, and a German fighter.  Plus assorted infantry.  That’s hawt.

    but if the goal is the destruction of a German fighter…

    Norway attempts this while putting only 1/4 of Russias starting tank force at some risk.

    Ukraine attempts this while sacrificing 3/4 of Russias starting tank force, along with half the artillery…and this is if the attack goes well!

    I’m not saying that a strafe of the Ukraine isn’t a viable option, but after seeing how advantageous a successful Norway attack can be in my last three games, I don’t think I’ll bother trying to take and hold Ukraine ever again. It costs too much for too little gain.

    Your overconfidence is your weakness.  What happens when you fail at Norway and Germany counters hard?

    Your faith in your friends is yours.  beer never fails me



  • Ok, ok, I know, I would like to write 3 inf.

    I see, sending the tank instead of the Moscow fighter. Still win% stay at 60%, too low IMHO.

    Tank in NOR is out of danger if UK is able to strike in NOR on UK1. If UK do not attack baltic fleet on UK1, I can not see the UK landing in NOR.

    Indeed the Tank is still out of reach of UKR on R2 and I do not like that.


Log in to reply
 

20th Anniversary Give Away

In January 2000 this site came to life and now we're celebrating our 20th Anniversary with a prize giveaway of 30+ prizes. See this link for the list of prizes and winners.
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys
T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

  • 6
  • 7
  • 56
  • 4
  • 14
  • 8
  • 5
  • 40
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

50
Online

14.9k
Users

35.7k
Topics

1.5m
Posts