What is the most unusual/annoying/strange allied bid

I took a look at the opening post. Although I do not agree with all points, it sounds quite solid in general and can function as some good common sense and/or as rule of thumbs for less experienced players.

@Commando:

@ghr2:

@Commando:

@ghr2:

Brando, why would you leave 1 inf in each territory?  The only ones that matter are rostov and Baltic States.  You will lose 6 ipcs in units for not much gain in epl/bess.

I leave 1 Inf in each territory, so the Axis/enemy can’t just walk in. Inf have a 33% chance of a hit. Prevents a country from just taking a territory w/1 Inf. Usually the attacking country has to attack w/2 ground units, just in case your Inf gets a hit. Also prevents the enemy from sending just one ground unit on a long walk across your territories(i.e. when Japan starts marching across the Soviet Far East). I don’t always do this. Like in China, I consolidate the Chinese Inf whenever possible. But in Russia, I always try to leave at least 1 Inf in each territory. One thing to point out, I don’t leave 1 Inf in each territory, unless the enemy has a chance to take that territory.

Because they only have a 33% chance to hit, I would not want to risk giving away nearly free infantry kills to Germany unless they are defending something valuable.  Each infantry you put in his way is 1 less body defending something critical for a 33% chance to kill 1 thing.

It’s not just a 33% chance of killing something. It’s making the enemy commit more than 1 Inf/1 ground unit to take the territory How would this hurt a country like germany that will have mechs constantly reinforcing and the positioning does not screw him?. Maybe you didn’t read my entire post. Again, I don’t always leave 1 Inf behind in each territory(i.e. China and other territories) Japan can just send 1 inf and air, it really won’t hurt him if he wants to.. However, leaving 1 Inf behind on such things as islands, even 1 IPC islands. Your enemy would most likely have to commit at least 2 ground units to take the islandIt depends on the value of the island and the likelihood he/she would go for it.. Therefore, forcing your opponent to commit more resources to take territories and have less units to use elsewhere. I understand what you mean, but this is also a game of economics and efficiency.  If your opponent does not need to go for it, or is not even affected by it, the one infantry won’t be an issue.Like I said in my explanation, Soviet Far East is a good example. There are 13 IPC’s from Soviet Far East to Vologda/Samara. If your strategy is to leave these unguarded for Japan to just take w/1 Inf, then go for it. In my opinion, over the 26 years I’ve played A&A, it’s the wrong stategySince russia can easily stop japan from taking it unless Japan commits more to the front, it really is not an issue.  Also, with mongolia, it won’t be unguarded.

@ShadowHAwk:

Well you could move 1 step forward capturing a contry and then move 1 step back. Sort of capturing a country without actualy ending up there.

Yes, but that happens during the combat move. Once the non-combat move phase comes around, that particular tank can not move again. It has to wait until that player’s next turn.

@Spendo02:

Explain how the Allies stop a G6 attack on Moscow.

Threatening a counterattack (ie artillery in Bryansk) makes them stop for a turn to bring up reinforcements.

UK pac is the answer to EURO axis after a KJF… that’s why people do KJF. Japan shutdown… ok uk pacific you make 22-30 right? ok that is what russia was making before he went down… you go hold egypt down till usa supply train shows up. don’t worry anzac got yo back. japan makes 0 from naval bombard… it can be so sick sometimes.

I don’t like the aa gun buy. also I tend to buy strait inf for uk1, because I sink the hell out of italy. I don’t care if I get sea lioned. Gives usa something to do in the atlantic, because I tend to buy some mech for russia anyway. so the turn london is nabbed i got romania hold and can hit the other adjacent to russia spots.

Which is why I never really minded sea lion so much. russians bank hard. i save persia for them to blitz too, I always do that russian income thing in iraq/persia and if i can get the two italy territories in east africa, I do it too. just 3 mech all i need to start banking. get a bomber to bring down there so 2-3 mech inf 1 bomber kills 1 ethiopia guy or w/e unless uk has it.

1. Yes.

7. France controls it, until it is taken by an Axis power.

@JimmyHat:

I don’t like the rule either, I think that so long as you have a factory you can earn and spend ipcs.  After you lose your last factory then you hold onto your unspent ipcs until you or an ally liberates one of your factories.  This seems more realistic to me, but I think the current rule is there more to prove that once your capital is captured you might as well surrender.

That’s an interesting idea.  So all nations would be treated like China and keep their unspent IPCs with hopes of one of their factories getting liberated, even if it’s not necessarily their capital.

Actually, there is a kind of historical precedent for having to capture the Axis capitals.  In the “Why We Fight” series, at the end of each film it shows a quote from the Secretary of War Henry Wallace that said “Victory can only be acheived by the complete and unconditional surrender of Germany and Japan.”  So, as far as the game goes, if you have Japan surrounded but your Japan player doesn’t want to surrender, then you just have to keep pounding him with SBRs until you build up a big enough invasion force and take him out.