What is the most unusual/annoying/strange allied bid

@marshmallowofwar said in Common bid elements?:

Just so are all aware, the ANZAC infantry in New Guinea is not a legal bid.

Marsh

In face-to-face games at home or play by forum games on this website, bid parameters are whatever players agree. Although I do acknowledge that it lies outside the suggested defaults for our league here.

It wouldn’t surprise me if other venues have fixed bid rules, but you may want to specify.

(Unlike what the others have said, I’m not that much of a friendly kind of guy, but I did genuinely mean the line about welcoming you to the board.)

Good question IKE.
That would be very true to the difficulty of playing allies: Giving up London or Egypt is the dilemma, what will the allies choose… I don’t know what’s best but I think both strategies can work.

Much depends on what happened UK1 and IT1 of course, so lets assume ‘Taranto’ happened (a rather standard move, especially with an allied bid). Without aid of the German luftwaffe (they will be massing against London), Italy cannot safely approach Egypt. Thats 1.

2: After Taranto and Germany pushing through for SL, London is very likely to fall but it is also very likely that it will be a pyrrhic victory for Germany. Russia will be a monster and the USA just needs to destroy the kriegsmarine.

If ‘Taranto’ did not happen UK1 I guess the situation does not change a lot if Uk2 still goes for it and stop Italy in the med… But in this case Uk2 also has the option to superdefend London, indeed possibly giving up Egypt in the long run (but only for a short amount of time if London survives).

I’ll not talk about the the possibility of the USA liberating London, as that also depends on what Japan is doing (and thus, how much investments the USA must make to prevent a pacific sudden death) but the USA should definately have enough ground and naval forces left to prevent Italy from breaking through.

I’ve tried this cheesy move two or three times, and barring the best possible situation (Japan has 4 unloaded transports you can deny them, and they DOW next round anyway to get the Philippines), it’s more a hindrance than a help to the Allies.  I don’t think I’ll be using it in the future.

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)

we don’t play with Victory cities, as we have never done.
Russia can be making into 50 IPC if they have installed well into slovakia
the US lands in a chain between canada and ireland (a direct push to retake England has never worked for us)
perhaps they can build IC in brazil, and support remaining allied forces in africa.
play evasive in the pacific

i know it’s very hard, but the key lays in japan being halted for a few rounds (allies attack B2 to have all objectives) and germany losing a lot of forces in england, and keep producing there to keep the territory.

@RedHunter:

Wow that was too many pieces left on the board. Like holy crap. How much % does the Axis win without VC to aid them?

I do not know the answer to that. We may be the only ones on this forum who play without VCs.

@McLovin1985:

With the new rules it seems to me that an airbase in Korea would be the way to go every game, stationing 3 fighters in Korea and at least 3 in Japan if theres any sense that an attack on any vessels or Japan itself is imminent. That would give you an extra 6 fighters to defend SZ6. Correct me if I’m wrong.

I did that in a game last week. Worked great. The U.K. attacked my Japanese fleet first and then a small ANZAC fleet did the same on their turn all in the same round. Wiped them all out with small losses.