Thanks!

cruisers suck.
they are too expensive. i think at 11ipc they would still be purchased infrequently. even at 10ipc they would probably be bought at a 1:1:1 ratio with destroyers and subs.

A kamikaze strike can target any specific
enemy surface warship (not a submarine or transport)
belonging to the attacking power.

Page 16 of Pacific 1940 2nd Edition rulebook.

That is why I prefer to incorporate the “no more than one unit per territory or seazone” rule.

I think the great variation that bids provide allow for great replayability. Who wants a game that always depends on what kind of dice Germany got G1? Pick sides, set up the board, roll a couple dice, quit. Blech.

To your point about a 12 being too much, though - only 1 game has been finished in the league this year with a bid over 11, and the axis(-15) won.

Most good players are not going to give their opponent more than 10, is what we’ve been seeing in the league results. And among what appear to be opponents of close skill level, the Allies have won at +9, +10, +8, +10, +9, and +8. And the Axis have won at -9, -15, -7, -9, and -11. Yes, that’s a small sample size, but it seems to be pretty even.

I think the best judges of when a game is fair and balanced are the players. As you can see, over half the games have been run at an 8 or 9. And 2/3 of those games have been won by the Allies. You have people that don’t want to give bids too big, people that acknowledge the Axis has an advantage, people that don’t really want to play the Allies - it’s an interesting and fluid dynamic that always seems to find its own level.

Also if Japan holds off until J2 to DoW, but the US player is either dead certain it will happen or hopes to discourage Sea Lion, they can slap a Naval Base on Greenland and load it up with their starting Atlantic forces US1, then drop the troops off in Scotland or Ireland US2.  If London is saved at that point, you’re still in a decent position to threaten landings from France to Norway, or even farther if the UK player can be accommodating enough to give you a Naval Base.

SZ 106 2SS
SZ 111 SS, 2 Bombers, BB, FTR, Tac (can divert 1 Bomber to 109 to help prevent scramble)
SZ 109 2SS, 2FTR, 2TAC
Normandy: Art/Inf/Tac
Yugo: S. Germany units and Romania FTR (so it can go to S. Italy)
NCM same
All available mechs/tanks, and remaining inf at France with Tac/FTR

Why risk S. France with 3 tanks? Save S. France for IT. 
Yugo is an overkill.  Why 9inf in needed for support (where are the other 3 coming from, and why isn’t 6 from S. Germany enough)?
I was taught that it’s better to eliminate the DDs to help choke off UK with your SS(hence why I left 110 open). Yes, I know the 110 ships run like hell…
70IPCs is plenty of cash for 10art,7mech.
While I know risking a plane to France’s AA is a risk, I like a quick battle so maybe I don’t have to dig into arts when I lose all my inf (trying to avoid a 2nd RD resistance)

I’m by no means an expert an global, it’s just something I used/learn.

We started at 3:00 PM and finished at 2:30 PM the next day with a one-hour catnap.  We were able to complete 2 games of 1940 & one game of 1942.  I one 2 out of three games. (one1940 and one 1942)

My USA purchase is always 1 Carrier for New York, and 1 Carrier, 1 Battleship for San Fran. The only exception is if there is a U-Boat threat in the Atlantic right away, (destroyers and scramble fighters) or if Japan goes pearl harbour (subs and scramble fighters).

as bidding is not a part of the official game, bid rules differ upon who is playing.

i have played hundreds of games of triplea live in the lobby and pbem(play by e-mail) in the old triplea ladder ranking, the vast majority of games i have played are revised, some global, and very few anniversary.  below is what i have seen.

the most common rules that i have played with(near universal amongst triplea players) is
1. bid ipcs can be used to place units pregame
2. units can only be placed in territories or seazones that already have a unit of the same power

rules that i have seen frequently
1. only one bid unit per territory or seazone
2. bid for the alliance that you think is disadvantaged and bid down. (i prefer to use the method used at conventions of bidding for your opponent to play the disadvantaged alliance and bid up.)

rules i have never played or been asked to use but have seen
1. all bid ipc must be spent in units and not added to any powers starting income
2. no bid units to certain powers(such as china)

Situational can make it hard.  If I knew I had a fighting chance (say at least a 30% chance of a win, I would stick it out, but if the Japanese wanted to play a waiting game (so planes could be used elsewhere) and build up for the attack, this fight is not going to be much of a fight.  I guess like Russia, it comes down to just how long you can hold out.  So what is considered a victory for the allies?  If India can hold out till Round 9, do you consider that good for the Allies?  I know that goes hand in hand with holding Russia, but for the experts out there, how long can you hold out and still achieve Allied victory?

I agree that Japan should be split, and have two sz"s.

Then we could have Sea Lion on the Euro side, and Sea Serpent on the Pac side.

southern france is easier than normandy g1. you can get one of those fighters in east europe somewhere (you know the one that is out of range from naval and you usually send to yugoslavia than italy). 3 mech fighter good to go.

I prefer to just do france. Though I like the southern france move when I am doing some kind of sea lion play. Prevents uk from merging fleet off gibraltar.

In this instance I prefer to take yugoslavia.

However if I am undecided… yeah I like the strafe. Shove east poland g2 no prob, start advancing sooner. It is really good if you plan on going all in on russia G5. It super all in, all the allies have to do is figure out a way to save russia. That is the whole game right there.

I’m in a slow moving game with my cousin right now. It is still the same game from when i first posted this (ie, the first time ive tried a major IC in Romania). It worked like a charm. I just took Moscow on what i THINK is G5, could be G6, with 10 tanks leftover. Italy doesn’t have egypt yet due to the UK being strong, but the Romania major IC will now pump everything down to the middle east and hopefully secure the win.

The Romania Major IC worked well with Japan only declaring war on Russia (he stacked in Amur so I took it out). Right now, because i am terrible with Japan, I’m sort of on the ropes, but I bought myself enough time that i should be able to win on the Europe board.

It’s not a matter of etiquette.  The owner of the air unit makes the decision whether or not to scramble it, regardless of the controller of the territory it’s in or the owner of the attacked fleet.

Someone suggested an inf for Anz on New Guinea (in another thread). It doesn’t sound like much, but you can get the Anz NO (Dutch New Guinea) w/o losing a transport. There are probably better places for bid units, but I thought that one was interesting. It wasn’t a game changer like adding fleet, or units to unbalance (or as some would say balance) the Med etc….

1 ipc units are too strong, they would replace infantry.

Oh yea, the old battle of who rolls better 2’s  :-P

Yes, Carriers and aircraft move independently, but the rulebook just states, that warships may not move …! It states nowhere, that aircraft can’t move to any seazone. They are not allowed to land on any allied terretorry or aircraftcarrier, but they can of course fly ther and if there is a legal landing spot, land there. The planes are not restricted to not move into the atlantic, they (in most cases) can’t land and therefore can’t stay there.

The allies can always make sealion next to impossible if they really set their mind to it (UK build infantry, no Taranto, bring ships home, get Canadians, prepare US airstrike).  If they do everything in their power to make it costly and Germany still goes for it, then Germany will be in bad shape after the sealion “victory”.  In that case, losing London is bad but not necessarily a total disaster.  Suppose the opponents don’t really like playing Japan and they’re not very good at it.  As long as USA, USSR and remnant of UK can hold the line against germany, the axis are placed in the crummy position of having to win as Japan.  In that case, it might actually be preferable to intentionally allow a (costly) sealion in order to put the onus on Japan.  If its a team game and the guy playing Germany is more skilled than the guy playing Japan, then coaxing them into a costly sealion might work out OK for the allies.

Thank you for analyzing that statement for me. Odds favor a scramble, but my experience with it is okay. My decision depends on my mood and what I feel like doing. :)

When I am germany I throw that battleship. I don’t want to lose fighters, I will lose a battleship.  In which case the uk scramble odds are on average less than 1 fighter for 1 fighter… the battleship UK gets to kill anyway. So yeah I like that better.