Welcome! If you're a returning member of the forums, please reset your password. If you don't receive an email within minutes, it means your account is listed under another, likely older, email address. Contact webmaster@axisandallies.org for help.

Different Unit Bid Ideas


  • Customizer

    Ok, so basically, I think that if someone bids 3 ipcs and puts 1 inf in Egypt, and another person bids 20ipcs and puts 4 tanks in Brazil, that If I was the Axis I would rather play against the guy who put the tanks in Brazil.  Extreme example, but what I’m trying to say is that not all bids are equal, and the amount of money a person bids should not determine if their bid is accepted, instead it should be what they are bidding and where they are putting it.

    What units and where they are going should determine what their bid is worth, not the other way around.

    My goal for this thread is to reach some sort of consensus on what things are about equal, that way if the person who wins the bid wishes to pick something different BUT equivalent, they can do so.

    So, to reach this lofty goal, perhaps the kind people of this forum can help me out in determining what would be the equivalence of certain bids.

    Assuming NOs are in play, and the bid is limited to 1 unit per territory.
    Lets say a basic bid of 6 IPCs for the Allies.  Generally this results in 1inf in Karelia and 1inf in Egypt.

    What would be the equivalent of this bid?

    Chinese infantry do not matter as much as Inf in karelia and egypt, so perhaps this bid of 6ipcs would be equivalent to a bid of 9 or 12 ipcs in just chinese infantry?
    American naval ships matter even less than Chinese infantry, and naval ships are about 2 times more expensive than land units.  Ships on the west coast matter less than ships on the east coast, so perhaps this bid of 6ipcs would be equivalent to 14 or 18 ipcs in US naval ships off the West Coast (dd + sub, or cruiser + sub).
    Perhaps this 6 ipcs bid would be equivalent to a 8ipc UK destroyer in Seazone 2, or 15ipcs for a UK destroyer + transport in the pacific off of australia (1942 has none off australia)
    Perhaps it would be equal to 14 ipcs if used for 2inf + 2art in South Africa?

    Assuming that NOs are NOT in play, and the unit bid is still limited to 1 unit per territory.
    Lets say a basic bid of 6 IPCs for the Axis.  This might result in 1inf in Libya, and 1inf in Poland/East Poland.
    What would be the equivalent of this bid?
    The further away from the front, the less the bid is worth.  1inf in Poland/East Poland would be worth 2inf in Germany.  Maybe, maybe not, you guys are here to help me decide.
    Perhaps this 6 ipc bid would be worth 8 ipcs in a destroyer in the Baltic?  or Maybe that is too powerful, and instead it could be worth a 7ipc transport?
    Japanese land units matter even less, and Japanese naval units much much less.  Perhaps this simple bid of 6ipcs would be worth 9-12ipcs in japanese land units in mainland asia, or even 21 ipcs in land units in japan proper, or around 14-18ipcs in japanese naval units.

    Lets discuss.  Lets fine tune it.
    If you disagree with the whole idea, don’t bother posting.
    And we are not to talk about what should be the bid, only about what bids are roughly equivalent.



  • WAY back when the A&A CD-rom was the rage for Classic in online clubs like Spring1942, Warclub and Balance-of-Power/Axis&Allies World club and before the dice cheat, this concept was tossed around quite a bit but never resulted in any wide acceptance because it was too hard to agree on “what was a ‘lower’ bid?”

    In other words, the goal you seek (to equate bids on something other than a pure IPC amount) is practically impossible to do because it can be VERY subjective.  I admire your thinking outside the box, and it is fun to alter the set-up with different units other than a few scattered inf/art here or there.

    The best idea I recall from those discussions was to bid an IPC and unit count.  For example:  I bid $8, 2 units where as your bid could be $8, 1 unit.  The lower unit count bid would be the lower bid (and win the bid).



  • What is dice cheat?



  • @gnasape:

    What is dice cheat?

    There used to be a CD-Rom for classic that you could use in the MSN gaming area.

    One brilliant programmer figured out how to send the same seed to the random number generator that the program used in it’s code to roll dice:  a dice cheat.  He could only positively affect his own rolls, but just think how nice it would be able to attack 2 inf on 2 inf and never lose?  in essence, he could turn on rolling a one with keys on his keyboard like ‘scroll lock’, etc.

    The online real-time gaming community never really reached the same popularity after that, sadly.  Some might argue with that statement, but it was never the same after that.



  • Ouch, I consider dice luck (good or bad) to be part of the game!

    If it happens it happens, whether it’s a dice program or FTF, my friend is not a big fan of dice rolls that’s why we have two games of LL dice.  My friend feels that he’s getting shorted by the dice.  It evens out over time but dice are very fickle!  To me with LL it’s not the same game, too much number crunching!

    Off topic, is there a players help for rules regarding LL dice in this forum?  I looked but was unable to find an official thread, also how about resolving mistakes, etc.  We usually resolve it friendly but wanted to make sure we are doing it correctly.  Thank you in advance.


  • Customizer

    I never understood why people would cheat at anything that does not involve money.  Anyway, back to the topic.

    I understand this idea of differing unit bids would be very subjective, however if enough people seriously think about it and respond, we would at least set the stage for its potential.



  • @Veqryn:

    I understand this idea of differing unit bids would be very subjective, however if enough people seriously think about it and respond, we would at least set the stage for its potential.

    I agree with your statement. But in AA50, we can’t even get group concensus that the game is imbalanced, and if it is, by how much.

    I think that ‘base’ bid needs to be solidified first



  • @axis_roll:

    I agree with your statement. But in AA50, we can’t even get group concensus that the game is imbalanced, and if it is, by how much.

    I think that ‘base’ bid needs to be solidified first

    This is b/c of 3 reasons mainly, first, AA50 is not as old as Revised.
    Second, there is 4 optional rules, 2 of them affects balance most certainly, it could be that 3 optional rules affects balance.

    The third reason is that, at least in the 41 +NO setup, the first rnd dice is extremely important. With various outcomes, in many games the side which is favored will only reveal itself after the first rnd.



  • I agree with your statement. But in AA50, we can’t even get group concensus that the game is imbalanced, and if it is, by how much.

    Well, I think a consensus is growing that if you have a standard Axis opening, attacking EGY and YUN, Axis will win 55-65% of games with NOs on the '41 scenario. Look at Darth Maximus count of 100 games over on the League forum and it’s there if you ignore games with atypical openings.

    I’m more into the forced bid idea myself, the idea of forced bid to China or anti-Japanese bids. But maybe a bid factor could work:

    1. Europe or Africa X1
    2. Middle East or Pacific X2
    3. American mainland (land/air) X3

    Although agreeing on this could be troublesome, I agree with axis_roll on that one!  😉


  • Customizer

    Well, you guys might be missing something here.  You do not need to agree that the game is imbalanced, or have a consensus on what bid is necessary to balance it, to have a consensus on what I am talking about.
    Example: Person A may think the game is already balanced and that a bid is not necessary, Person B thinks an Allied bid of 6 ipcs is needed when you play with NOs, and Person C is nutty and thinks that 21 ipcs are needed for the allies with NOs.  But all of these three people may in fact agree that a bid of 2 infantry in europe would be equivalent to a bid of 2 naval warships off the coast of america.
    Agreeing on what to do to balance the game is not a pre-requisite to agreeing on certain bids types being equivalent.

    Or, to think about it in a different way, lets think of this as a Ratio.
    I’m just going to throw this out there, but lets say you have a Bid of X.
    If you use it on the “front line” in either Europe or Africa/MiddleEast, then all you get is X.
    If you use it not on the front line in Europe/Africa/MiddleEast, or you use it on the front line in China, then you get X1.5
    If you use it not on the front line in China, or you use it in the Atlantic on Navy, UK main island Air/Land, then you get X
    2
    If you use it on Pacific navy, or American Continent Land/Air, then you get X*2.5.

    Now, as you can see, if you think X should be zero, then they all end up as zero.  If you think X should be 6, then you could either get 2 europe/egypt inf, or 3 chinese inf, or a cruiser in the atlantic, or a DD + a sub in the pacific.  If you think X should be 10, etc, etc.


Log in to reply
 

Welcome to the new forums! For security and technical reasons, we did not migrate your password. Therefore to get started, please reset your password. You may use your email address or username. Please note that your username is not your display name.

If you're having problems, please send an email to webmaster@axisandallies.org

T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

  • 1
  • 5
  • 4
  • 47
  • 23
  • 31
  • 1
  • 6
I Will Never Grow Up Games

51
Online

13.4k
Users

33.7k
Topics

1.3m
Posts