Some brilliant commentary, had me smiling throughout! You are right on point sir… Allied bid should be 12 at least. I have recently enjoyed fighting for the underdogs and i have paid the price!
Now with all the aa50 knowledge it is onward and upward to the new frontier of tripleA global, a whole new world to explore! :-) of course cow already has it all figured out but for the rest of us i mean…
Thank you - that’s what I was hoping to hear
If you ever need a partner for Global1940 on battlemap let me know :wink:
Thank you - that’s what I was hoping to hear
If you ever need a partner for Global1940 on battlemap let me know :wink:
hmmm, you don’t see tripleA as the future of Global? I don’t see consistently having the time to play a Battlemap game on this scale. :|
TripleA probably is the future - I didn’t mean that. It’s just not my future
There is insignificantly more typing for battlemap than in AA50. I don’t even notice it. I spend waaaay more time trying to figure out what to buy and what to do than typing. But I guess we’re getting off topic. You can PM me if there is any more discussion… I don’t want people to miss the findings about Axis v. Allies I made below… thanks
I would add one point to your comments : do people know how to use the bid efficiently ?
When you speak of your 19 and 21 bid for instance, it was including expensive units like a fgt in Buryatia (just memories, I might be wrong). Imagine 1inf in Egypt, and 5 or 6 units on the russian - german front… suddenly Germany has to worry !
As I do not want to play always the same side, I started bidding higher. At this time, the bid (in my games) usually finishes between 9 and 11. I think that if you reach 14 or more, the axis player will need some new strategy to have a chance.
Since I arrived on this forum, I believe that the axis play improved. The allied one too, but not so much. So at this date, yes, allies need a bid help.
I remember playing the allies with a 0 bid on my first games here, including league games in 2010. I would not try that anymore. That makes me believe that the axis play improved.
I stop here, teaching is waiting…
Yoshi
How good to hear from the great Yoshi on the topic
I am not saying 19-21 bid is the appropriate amount.
I am saying that 9 is definitely not enough.
I bid 11 for the league championship and won largely because of bad round 1 Axis dice.
I suspect that 12-15 is the appropriate bid for 50/50 success. I hear other very experienced players (Darth, Bold) saying the same.
I think most of us are quite a ways down the “learning curve” on AA50 for Axis or Allies either one. I think the 2012 league results are very telling.
And I think you, Yoshi, need to ignore your personal experience because you mow down anything in your path no matter what bid there is. You destroyed Bold twice and djensen with Axis - 2 times with 11 bids. You are 4-0 with Allies. After about 5 of your very short games, you admitted that dice were very much on your side. :-)
All I’m saying is, you would need to play against yourself several times to find what the appropriate bid is.
But we have a lot of data here from the 2012 league, and it’s pretty clear that if 2 players have comparable skills and experience, the Axis player will almost always win with a bid below 10. And I am just marvelling at the fact that players not named Yoshi, will again and again accept the Allies at 8 or 9 and lose, lose, lose :lol:
Have a great day
I’ve been reading this thread since the beginning, and downloaded your ranking a few times ;)
There are usefull informations inside :) For an official ranking, the definition of the tiers would need some rules and not being subjective, but such a rule dos not look obvious, and as this is just a FYI ranking, this is imho perfectly fine.
What would you say about OBG score with the allies otherwise ? Looks like a good one, and he is not Yoshi :p
Anyway, what I wanted to add this morning : there are some long term allied strategies that I saw in LL (aka Lucky Lindy) games that I believe to be very interesting. And I did not see them outside from LL’s game. I dunno if this has an impact because the strategy is not common, thus induces a surprise factor that is better than the strategy itself or because this is really something tough to counter. But this would be interesting to see what it could lead to in the future.
AA50 induces quite often long games that we rarely saw in Revised (up to my knowledge). If there is no big cap between two players, you can easily go to 15 rounds or more before having a difference that will call the game. Difficult to define a strategy that will go for so long… and usually, this is the allied work to define the way the game will go. Axis just need to defend and adapt. Much more easier.
I agree that axis has an advantage, and currently a strong one. But you can already do a lot with a 9-11 bid. The highest is the bid, specially a russian ground bid, the safer the axis need to be at the beggining. But if they are too safe, an agressive allied play might take the win.
My experience of the game tells me that everything can change on some tiny details for two opponents of the same level. Some minor choices can change a win into a loss after a couple of turns (if the difference was not too big at this time of course). And usually, such details are choices that are almost unique each time (because of the previous choices / dices). Try to get a reliable strategy from that…
A very high quality post again, there Yoshi. Thank you for your excellent insight.
LL indeed had a wicked (or was it surprise factor, as you said?) approach to KJF in the early rounds and I definitely would have lost to him if he had more experience and had not given up on the Pacific right when he had me in trouble.
Regardless of the facts and reasoning mentioned earlier, I have FAITH :-D :-o, that with our due diligence we can continue to refine the allies play including bid placement, strategy, etc… so that the current axis advantage is lessened. I attempted that this season, and did lose a few games, but I currently have two more allied games going with Darth & Gamerman that still look like possible victories for me and the allies and this would bring my allied record to 4-4, against some pretty stiff competition. If I pull out those “W’s” it would be quite the statistical anomaly!
SO…I don’t discount anything stated earlier but I know we can do better with the allies. I haven’t found ANYONE willing to give me +12 with the allies yet… I don’t think I have… :mrgreen:
You keep having faith and we’ll keep winning with Axis.
I have to say you lucked out on Sealion (although I shouldn’t have tried it) AND you lucked out on an Italian can opener that would have very likely let to Moscow falling and defeat. In other words, you dodged 2 major bullets and you still have a good chance of losing. I didn’t want to have to say this, but really had to tell the other side of the story, there.
Nevertheless, 7-0 and 2-4
Those are the facts. You have a lot of faith.
I’m asking myself if you even seriously believe in what you’re saying, or if you’re just having fun yanking my chain, JWW :-)
The results of 1 or 2 games means little to nothing. My conclusions were drawn from data from 83 games all played in the past year under the same rules (Dardanelles open).
The Cubs do win against “stiff competition” sometimes. But smart money is not on a 1-1 odds bet on the Cubs when they’re playing the division leader.
And yes, I pick on the Cubs because I’m a life-long Cardinals fan. And we’re swimming in champagne yet again, baby! :-D
Go Cubbies! (next year of course) :-D
Great discussion guys.
Just to add in my two cents. I have been pretty much “riding” the Axis this year. I really haven’t been doing it on purpose, but it more has to do with bidding. I think I have a “shot” with the Allies at 11, but won’t go lower and I’m not comfortable giving up 12 (b/c of 4 units to Russian front), but it seems that a lot of players will bid 10 or possible 9 so I’ve been getting the Axis a lot.
I’ll also add that I think a lot of players like playing the Allies b/c of the challange thus they’ll under bid. It’s just more fun. I remember this from Classic. It was always more fun to be the Axis b/c it was a bigger challange. The bids could be 24 and you’d still have people playing with 15 or 18, just b/c they wanted the challenge of winning with the disadvantaged side.
I do think the Allied play has gotten much better, but I think bidding tends to still be low. I also think players like trying new things with the Allies so that might drive bids a bit lower. But IMO there is pretty much no reason to consider playing the Allies with less than 11, certainly not less than 10. And for me I draw my cutoff at 12 right now.
I haven’t looked at the map in a while but EB probably had a slight lead.
I’m sorry I missed the interesting discussion on bid amount and the greatness of the Axis. I suppose I’ll throw in my $0.02.
I was going to run a statistical analysis on the data using JMP software, however, I noticed something odd right away as I was inputting the data… When the bid is exactly $9 the Allies win more than 50% of the games!
I counted 50 games with a bid of 8 or less of which the Axis have won 38 giving a whopping 76% victories by the Axis
I counted only 27 games in which the bid was 10 or more of which the Axis won 19 (70%)
However when the bid is exactly 9 I counted 36 total games of which the Axis only won 17 only 47% victories by the Axis.
Clearly it you want to win as the alliance you should bid 9 and no higher! (having too many units will only confuse you)!
Okay back to being serious… the relevant data seems to be that with bids of 9 or above the Axis win percent is 57%. Still a pretty good win percentage but (In my opinion) not extreme enough to conclude the bid should be 12-15.
attached is the data I used, color coded for my convenience.
Interesting. One thing I will say about the 9 bid compared to higher is the higher bids can be a bit more exotic (ie ftr, bom, or sub bids) whereas 9 seems like an obvious 3 inf somewhere bid.
I usually like to get more units on the board in bids, perhaps these numbers might show this???
For example maybe a 9 bid with 3 inf is better than a 10 bid for a ftr.
Placement is also a huge factor in bids. I wonder how “all bid to Egy” does? I typically will split between Egy and Russia but maybe its better to just stack one or the other.
I wonder how the sub (ind) or ftr (bury) bids do?
I ran several statistical analysis of the data using a value of 1 point for axis victory and 0 for ally victory. I found that the mean for all games with a bid of 9 or higher is not significantly greater than .5. I also found that the mean for games with a bid of 10 or higher is significantly greater than .5. And the mean for games with a bid of 11+ is not significantly greater than .5 (this is partly because there are not as data points).
Interesting. One thing I will say about the 9 bid compared to higher is the higher bids can be a bit more exotic (ie ftr, bom, or sub bids) whereas 9 seems like an obvious 3 inf somewhere bid.
That is a good thought I had thought of another interpretation, that stronger players are more likely to play with a bid of 9 than a bid of 10. (but I think I like yours better it it is true)
One problem with the data is that it is not sufficiently randomized, there is more data for those that play more games, and less for those that play less.
wouldn’t you think a 12 bid of two brit ss in z12 would be too much for the axis to bear? It would force G to attack EGY to kill the B fgt, no? It might also make the destruction of the B DD & CA in z 12 such a priority that the G send both atl ss to z12.
Still haven’t found anyone willing to give me the allies +12. :wink:
Updated (1940 result)
@JWW’s sub build–not putting a unit in Egy causes its death more often than not. The long-ranging problems of German tanks running through Africa often causes a VERY quick Russian death, especially when they didn’t receive any of the bid. That FTR dies what… 65% of the time when it’s unbolstered in Egy? Just +3 saves its life and moreover the Global Empire bonus (along with Egypt’s +2 bonus and lower Africa’s amnesty against marauding panzers).
ftr nwe/ftr ger to 12 to attempt to take down the surface ships. clear 2 with your subs and nwy ftr. Ita fleet’s chances are alright with 10 punch and a free hit against only 8, sneak attacks or not. Not to mention the allies are risking their entire bid on this and it has a high probability of failure. If you’re looking for potential brokenness with +12… bmb bry and going bmb against dd in 51 is the way to go, or if you’re looking to build 2 subs with gbr–35 is a good spot. Japan has a much more difficult time with allied subs than euro. also sub 6 is a cheap way to deter a german fleet build (thinking of one extremely talented player in general :)).
I wonder if +15 could produce a problem: Is ‘IC ind’ broken?
Also 19-21 could be absolutely hellish on the European axis. 12-15 could be bad enough. Above 14–stacking egy could cause problems. So many good combos… ftr/arm egy, 2 inf art arm egy, and my personal favorite is 3 arm egy.
Darth–I’ll give you +11.
