I just used the Ukraine attack with good results, I may try it again I think.
@Imperious:
Nuno : Son plus qu’évident votre utilisation fréquente du traducteur de Langue en ligne pour prendre la seule langue vous parlez (pas très bien je peux ajouter) et essayant de vous donner une présentation fausse de vos adresses de communication réelles a été notée.
Votre fondamentalement dans l’idiot sans vie…
Nuno: Sein mehr als offensichtlich Ihr häufiger Gebrauch des On-Line-Sprachübersetzers, um die einzige Sprache zu nehmen, sprechen Sie (nicht sehr gut ich kann beitragen), und versuchend, Sie zu geben eine falsche Präsentation Ihrer wirklichen Nachrichtensachkenntnisse ist bemerkt worden.
Ihr grundsätzlich im Idioten ohne Leben…
Nuno: Его более чем очевидный ваше частое использование интерактивного Языкового переводчика чтобы брать единственный язык Вы говорите (не очень хорошо, я могу добавить), и пытающийся давать Вас, ложное представление ваших фактических навыков коммуникации было отмечено.
Ваш в основном в идиоте без жизни…
Nuno: Su más que obvio su uso frecuente del traductor de Lengua en línea para tomar la única lengua usted habla (no muy bien puedo añadir) e intentando darle una presentación falsa de sus habilidades de comunicación actuales ha sido notada.
Su básicamente en idiota sin vida…
you see anybody can do this-
Sounds like Political Discussion to me …
@Ender:
I just used the Ukraine attack with good results, I may try it again I think.
@Ender:
@Ender:
I just used the Ukraine attack with good results, I may try it again I think.
@Ender:
@Ender:
@Ender:
I just used the Ukraine attack with good results, I may try it again I think.
Sorry, some of the above messages are off topic. Please ignore them.
I think, considering that the TripleA war club has a 51% win rate for the Axis with their bid system, it would be a good one to adopt.
It actually makes sense if the Axis is winning more games than the Allies; that means your bidding is correct. Whoever is bidding the Axis is supposed to be favored to win.
What’s their bidding system?
@Cmdr:
What’s their bidding system?
IIRC, it’s a bid of 9, and only one unit per territory. This would be very workable for the typical bid here: 1 Inf to Libya, 1 Arm to Alg, and 1 IPC to Japan. It wouldn’t work well for attempting to stack Ukraine.
Then I guess you just flip a coin for sides…
Your forced to play as both axis and allies against one opponent.
2 games / opponent. Otherwise it don´t count.
@Nix:
Your forced to play as both axis and allies against one opponent.
2 games / opponent. Otherwise it don´t count.
Indeed. I think this is not a good system. A “very” good player will beat a newb without any bids also.
The bid is ok, with one unit pr. TT. The stats (51% axis victory) is also interesting and that means that with even players
and a one unit bid placement restriction, a bid should be about 8-9 ipc.
With your bidding rules (PBF), and the option to place 2 units pr. TT, the bid will be a little lower.
6-8 ipc.
My problem with the warclub ladder is that you have to play 2 games, I don’t see any good reason why they have this system.
I wonder what bids would be if there was no possibility of preplacement of units?
15-20?
Agreed, I’d not want to play 2 games every time - it would really slow down tournaments. And if you have a bid that has resulted in very equal results (Axis 51% win rate), you don’t need to play both sides, since each side has a roughly equal chance.
So I think I may bid 9 from now on, instead of 8 as I have been doing. I may get the Allies a lot more, but then I will just get better at the Allies.
Could be interesting to require the second game, if any, to be reversed teams. I’d say that the bid should probably be the same, but can be used differently. Dunno. Don’t really like that idea on the bids, but hate to see someone lose as the allies cause the other side got to auto bid 10 for an extra fighter or something. And hate to have a side lose cause they needed 8 IPC bid, not 7. Etc.
Have to think on that.
@Cmdr:
Could be interesting to require the second game, if any, to be reversed teams. I’d say that the bid should probably be the same, but can be used differently. Dunno. Don’t really like that idea on the bids, but hate to see someone lose as the allies cause the other side got to auto bid 10 for an extra fighter or something. And hate to have a side lose cause they needed 8 IPC bid, not 7. Etc.
Have to think on that.
The point system in the warclub ladder is flawed. I don’t know what it should be instead, but the bid system is good enough.
Except there should be open bids. Bid down for axis is the best alternative imo.
A “force play” of 2 games is also a bad solution.
There seems to be many different bid rules around, some use only cash, some
have limits on units, and other bid rules don’t allow ipc to be carried over.
There’s not much difference in placing all units on a TT and one unit pr. TT if the bid is not above 8 ipc.
It’s hard to tell if 8 bid (tank+inf) to Ukr is stronger than 9 bid, with 3 inf on 3 different TT’s, or
art+tank to Afr.
Imo an open bid down for axis is the best option, that means ipc can be carried over,
Bids can be split, and you can place all units wherever you
prefer, as long as the you own the TT from startup.
But still with the restrictions on the ladder you get a close to 50/50 result. Without it i would imagine the result would be different.
Well, for now I’m just going to bid 9. If someone wants the axis with a less than 51% starting chance, they’re welcome to it. :-D
And if I end up being stuck with the Allies all the time, I’ll just be getting better at my Allies game and facing opponents who are taking the Axis with a lower bid than they should be. :-D
I still think bids greater than 7 give too much advantage for Axis. Sub at z8 kills both UK BB, thus destroing any allied chains of reinforcements for at least 3 turns. I tried that bid and it rocks. Too much powerfull.
I’ve never yet encountered the sub to Z8 bid, and have only heard it mentioned recently. Sounds like it would be worth trying.
Perhaps instead of a bid, one should simply alter the starting setup - put an Arm/Inf in Libya, and be done with it. No bidding.
But that would be boring. The varying bid placement creates a lot of variety in openings, and the games that flow from them.
Sub to SZ8 is indeed powerful, but you got to pay close attention to the details of it. First, there is like…about 50% chance that you will lose an aircraft or both. If you’re hell bent on taking out that BB, you have to be willing to commit both fighter and bomber to die, as there’s an 80’ish% chance to clear - if you stay with all units.
Second, if you send both subs to SZ2, that pretty much means you have to send your med bb/tran westwards to tag the UK BB there. That almost guarantees Egypt will survive. In fact I can’t see anything else happening since the best you can do considering Ukraine is attacked is 1 inf 1 arm 1 fig vs 1 inf 1 arm 1 fig, and that’s to the defender usually.
Even if Ukraine wasn’t attacked and you send 1 inf 1 arm 2 fig at 1 inf 1 arm 1 fig, there’s about 80% chance you won’t take the territory (left with 1 or 2 figs, unless you want to sacrifice them to close the canal).
While you can hamstring the UK, you are at the same time hamstringing yourself.
You can send the BB and tra for egy still and kill the BB at Gibraltar with 3 figs
