What to do with the bid?

[simon33]

At least one has to be a Russian. A lot of players will allow another flying tiger but I’m unsure if this is a good thing for the allies.

[weddingsinger]

@simon33:

At least one has to be a Russian. A lot of players will allow another flying tiger but I’m unsure if this is a good thing for the allies.

So, as I think about this… is it best to give the bid units to ONE power with an immediate chance at effect?

The single biggest …er… victim, I guess, is usually Russia getting steamrolled by Germany.  The other tends to be China/UKPac

Most players give to the UK, but to what effect?  They shut down Italy quickly and then… Moscow still falls.

Either power can go nuts if the U.S. doesn’t get involved, so maybe giving to Russia or China/UKPac is the answer.  You get to slow down the Axis on your side of the board, even if its just one or two rounds while the U.S. can devote itself to the other side of the board for 3 rounds or so.

Russia can gather 5 art in Belarus its 1st turn.  China can make use of 4 artillery.  UKPac would benefit from an extra transport if your opponent doesn’t do a J1 (if they do, maybe something odd like extra inf at Yunnan, Philippines, etc that would gobble up some of the precious early Japanese troops would be a big benefit).

Otherwise, something to gut the German airforce early… extra UK fighter, destroyer, etc up by London.

[simon33]

I guess giving to UK increases the probability of Taranto succeeding from about 85% to well into the 90s.

If I had a 30 bid, I’d do 3 fighters: Scotland, Moscow, Volgograd.

The only real danger with the Yunnan stack is losing India anyway via the naval route. If that happens, normally China is pretty purple rather than yellow but it can’t really last.

[Arthur Bomber Harris]

I try to have bids that amplify the TUV changes during turn 1.  There is no point in worrying about the affects during Turns 3+ since you could just change your distribution of spending to accomplish those goals.

Priority 1: sub in Med to help in Taranto (great benefit for 6 bucks)
Priority 2: fighter in Scotland (makes it very difficult to do SZ 110 and SZ111 attacks without risking failure)
Priority 3: extra infantry in Yunnan (reduces forces left in territory after initial attack, allowing you counter with fewer Chinese infantry)
Priority 4: extra UK units in Africa to easily control the land by the end of UK2

After that, there are many options that have similar amplification factors, such as:
5) 1 art in Siberia or China to tie up multiple Japanese land units
6) extra UK sub or destroyer in Atlantic to guard fleet during G1 attacks
7) extra transport in Pacific to grab more money during first round
8) extra fighter in London to protect fleet, allow counterattack in UK1, and reduce London infantry purchases on UK1

From League play, I feel that a bid of approximately 40 is required to balance the game.  That should have an impact of at least an additional 40 TUV swing during the first couple rounds of play.  Just keeping one of the Atlantic fleet alive is a relatively large benefit.

[Ichabod]

@weddingsinger:

@simon33:

At least one has to be a Russian. A lot of players will allow another flying tiger but I’m unsure if this is a good thing for the allies.

So, as I think about this… is it best to give the bid units to ONE power with an immediate chance at effect?Â

If the bid was 23: 
Yunnan stack is very viable. 2 fighters go to Russia, and 1 infantry goes to China. Before J1, there could 3 fighters, 1 tac. bomber and 5 infantry in Yunnan. Most players would not attack Yunnan on turn 1. That automatically creates a problem that Japan has to negotiate.

Or if the bid was 20: A Yunnan stack is still viable. The bid is going to one country with an immediate effect.

Russia just has to remember to declare war on Japan in order to fly their planes to Yunnan.

The problem with this of course is that now Russia’s air force is out of position…which causes other issues for a turn or 2 against Germany.

[Ichabod]

@Arthur:

From League play, I feel that a bid of approximately 40 is required to balance the game.  That should have an impact of at least an additional 40 TUV swing during the first couple rounds of play.  Just keeping one of the Atlantic fleet alive is a relatively large benefit.Â

ABH, I’ll play you with a bid of 40. It could be a league game or just for fun. Your choice for that. I learn more from players with your level of experience. I have 4 league games going on right now…I’d need to finish one up before starting another. So, maybe I PM you in about two weeks?

[simon33]

Abh, there is no amount of bid that you would do a yunnan stack?

I think it’s a real problem for the axis.

[Kreuzfeld]

depening on the bidrules, here is an idea,
1 uk inf in london
1 french inf in london
1 UK ftr in scotland
1 uk mech in northern ireland
1 uk sub in med
that is a total of 25

you can build an mIC in egypt + 5 inf in uk1 and have more units available to defend london than in a non-bid game.
This would lock down africa and allow uk to build the mIC in Iran on UK2, and in Iraq on UK3. UK would be pumping out units to southern russia much quicker than in regular games. I would guess UK would have about 10 more units in southern russia bu tunr 4 than in a regular game.

[KaLeu]

@Kreuzfeld:

1 uk mech in northern ireland

Northern Ireland is not a separate territory here - it’s one with Scotland.

[Argothair]

Also if you want a factory in Egypt, you can usually just bid the factory.

12 for Egypt factory
6 for med sub
7 for S Africa transport
=25 total.

Transport frees you to take Persia uk1 while still crushing Ethiopia, sub let’s you do taranto while still scrambling vs. Germans, and factory lets you hold Egypt while still defending against sea lion (1st turn buy can be 7 inf for London + 2 inf for Cairo).

[taamvan]

you cant place the bid where there are no units, or anything other than units.  That’s the tournament version of bidding, obv you can HR anything as you like.

[AxisAndAllies1940]

For a bid of 20, I’d say 2 British tanks in Egypt. It would make Tobruk a definite victory, and would also make defending Cairo potentially easier. I’d also include an extra destroyer to help with Taranto.

Alternatively, 2 extra fighters in London would help reduce the chances of Sealion.

[Argothair]

I’ve never understood why people get so excited about attacking Tobruk. It’s worth 0 IPCs, you’re not destroying any enemy planes, the units in Tobruk aren’t immediately threatening to attack anything except Alexandria (which is also worth 0 IPCs), and in general if you can kill the Italian ships (and you can) then the Italian units in north Africa will be stuck there doing nothing important for the entire game. You can go the entire game without ever actually needing to kill those units. I don’t understand why people would want to kill them on turn 1, let alone why people would want to place a bid with the idea of killing them.

I suspect people just like recreating the Second Battle of El Alamein, or they feel itchy about having enemy units near what they see as “their” turf. I really can’t see any strategic purpose.

[weddingsinger]

@Argothair:

I’ve never understood why people get so excited about attacking Tobruk. It’s worth 0 IPCs, you’re not destroying any enemy planes, the units in Tobruk aren’t immediately threatening to attack anything except Alexandria (which is also worth 0 IPCs), and in general if you can kill the Italian ships (and you can) then the Italian units in north Africa will be stuck there doing nothing important for the entire game. You can go the entire game without ever actually needing to kill those units. I don’t understand why people would want to kill them on turn 1, let alone why people would want to place a bid with the idea of killing them.

I suspect people just like recreating the Second Battle of El Alamein, or they feel itchy about having enemy units near what they see as “their” turf. I really can’t see any strategic purpose.

Part of it is that the Italians still have a transport (and small chance of 2) for their turn and there is some threat, even if its not huge.  Getting rid of the Italian Tobruk, especially the fast movers, means you can free up units in Cairo and the navy to do other tasks and confirms Italy’s relegation to ineffective power who can’t do much but be an occasional pain in the rear every 2 or 3 turns.

[Arthur Bomber Harris]

@simon33:

Abh, there is no amount of bid that you would do a yunnan stack?

I think it’s a real problem for the axis.

The Yunnan stack does become possible around the 40 bid point.  I still wouldn’t put it as the highest priority because Japan can entirely skip China, transport units to India and obliterate it on J4.  After that, Japan can focus on maintaining the Money Islands while sending their 60+ resources to attack the Middle East and Africa.  Losing all of China is not necessarily a crushing blow to the Axis.  Some bovine guy really likes that strat and has demonstrated significant success.  If you are not playing the Balance Mod, the Axis can score a late-game victory by crushing Moscow, capture India, and hold the Money Islands.  Eventually the German air force can project enough power into W. France, eastern Atlantic, and the Middle East that the Allies can’t simultaneously protect all three regions.  Something can crumble around G17 and the Axis will gain a sustainable economic advantage.

If you look at the TUV swing by adding an extra fighter in Scotland, the calculation is eye-opening.  That single extra unit can be enough to save the SZ111 fleet AND allow a more successful counterattack on UK1.  That fighter means you need two fewer infantry built in London, can aide in the defense of Gibraltar, make its way to Africa for critical UK3 or UK4 battles, end up in Moscow to retain control on G6 (or kill a bunch of tanks if a big battle happens), and then make its way down to the Middle East to protect that region around UK10.  That little fighter could end up with a massive swing during the course of the game if it works out according to this perfect scenario.

I would avoid wasting money on a Egypt factory with the bid.  A couple of arts can accomplish the same goal for significantly less cost.  Here is what Zhukov did with a 33 bid.  Overall the plan is very solid.  I would object to the Anzac infantry in New Guinea, but many players allow that build so you might as well try it and see if your opponent screams at you.

+1 ipc Russia
1 fig scotland, 1 ss 98
1 anzac inf ng
inf yunnan
fig russia

[simon33]

You’re preaching to the choir on the Scottish fighter. If that is bid, there becomes no way of attacking both fleets without provoking a full scramble.

I think that a Yunnan stack is optimal probably with bids of 30+. That way you can do the Yunnan stack with the Scottish fighter. In the event that Germany does attack everything and win, you do have to sacrifice Taranto which is when you might hit tobruk.

The fall of India j4 is by no means assured, although it is certainly possible. Losing all of China really weakens Japan and invites usa to go full kgf.

[Argothair]

The other thing to point out about the yunnan stack is that if you’re dropping bid russian fighters there, they can fly to India before j4 to help defend. You can also take Persia on uk1 and build a factory there for extra units, if you know that your yunnan stack will be so huge that it will push Japan into attacking india.

[simon33]

@Argothair:

The other thing to point out about the yunnan stack is that if you’re dropping bid russian fighters there, they can fly to India before j4 to help defend. You can also take Persia on uk1 and build a factory there for extra units, if you know that your yunnan stack will be so huge that it will push Japan into attacking india.

The problem with this is Soviet fighters can’t get back to Moscow for a G6 attack unless there’s a neutral crush. Perhaps this isn’t a problem though because if there’s an abandon China strategy, the neutral crush is probably optimal, particularly if you can get on Norway before Germany can activate Sweden. It is a problem if Japan can fight both China and India but I can’t really see how they can do so.

[simon33]

My fear of the above strategy is so strong that I’m perfectly happy to give up 29ipcs and play axis but I won’t play axis against a bid of 30.

[simon33]

Having just done the Scottish fighter thing, I can see a major limitation with it. Without Germany attacking both SZ110 and SZ111 you can’t scramble and therefore the Luftwaffe live on to assist with Barbarossa. If you scramble G1, you can normally kill several Luftwaffe which reduces Germany ability project power to both Normandy and Moscow.