What is the most unusual/annoying/strange allied bid

I’d agree with everyting said.

I believe that any 2player game should be played with a bid or a handicap based on skill (in a broad sense of the word). We have had players here who believe the axis can’t win, and need a bid of 20. That is probably correct for the way they play the game. That being said, it is an interesting exercise to figure out what the bid would be on an expert level.

One thing that has not been mentioned is the game LL or not?
a LL game has to have a higher bid than a luck game. LL attacks can be optimized a lot better, an a smaller force in needed to ensure a win. Just try to calculate how much you need to be 99 % certain of paris falling in a LL game vs a regular game

Only on triplea have I had the pleasure of successfully pulling off Sea Lion. I’d love to do it on a table top game. The most recent time I had I think 8 tanks standing. No loss of aircraft as hits (2 fighters due to an AAA gun hit). I left the tanks there to really make it costly for the US to liberate London. My team won the game…London didn’t get liberated until like round 11. It was a very long game.

I prefer Barbarossa, but if the UK hands London a silver platter because it got too aggressive…then it needs to get punished. I don’t care what anyone says, no allies player like the advantage of London being knocked out for several turns. I’m not going to G2 purchase of a Sea Lion if several factors occur of course. But if Sea Lion is done right, the US has to respond and Japan has the chance to rage. Also, if Germany DOWs at the right moment, Russia can be pushed away from E. Poland (which I think is the critical position to keep Russia from getting to). They will come back, but then Germany might have the chance to get in position to start pushing Russia back from the border territories. Scandinavia might fall for a time being. Private Panic mentions losing a battle with favorable odds. That’s not going to occur on a regular basis.

If the UK gets really aggressive in it’s spending in the middle east UK1 and Sea Lion doesn’t occur, then in those situations I have a very difficult time overcoming a substantially large stack of UK fighters.

@knp7765:

So you are suggesting that the British player loses his capital so that he can sink the German navy? Seems kind of far fetched to me. Yeah, I guess if the German navy were taken out, it would help the US Navy later on and they could liberate London possibly. In the mean time, Germany got to plunder the British treasury and run hog wild on Russia while Italy gets strong in the Med and Africa since the UK can no longer replace their losses there. I suppose India could send stuff over to face Italy, but what if they are being pressured by Japan?

Yes, but Germany spent 2 rounds of income on a fleet so they essentially lose their ground units, probably some air units, the French treasury and whatever ground they have left would be sitting on London, assuming this worked/works.

So what’s holding back the Russians at that point?  They can DOW the round London falls.  (great, now I have that Fergie song in my head!  Bastages!!!)

I’m with ghr.  The strength of Russian infantry is in their mass, not left to die in a 33% that they take out an Axis Infantry with them.

I see what you’re trying to do with these ideas, but you need to be careful or you’ll make the US-China partnership in the game become a penility for the US which wouldnt be fair. Ideas I have heard have been to do things like;

If the burma road is open allow the US to replace the Chinese fighter if it gets destroyed.
If the burma road is open AND the US is at war allow them to purchase 1 unit for the Chinese per turn.

I like both of these and would better represent the US’s support to the Chinese, and also the importance of the Buram road. The second idea would need to be limited to land and air units only (obviously) but to have no more then 1 of each non-infantry/arty unit type (no more then 1 fighter, tatical bobmber, tank, mech infantry, ect…)

And to answer your question, a lot of people don’t do SeaLion b/cuz it’s not always a guaranteed thing. Depends on what the UK does. If the UK makes it as difficult as possible, then most likely the Germans can take it still but it might be a little dicey and leave them vulnerable to the Russians. If the UK makes it easier then the Germans will be more likely to do a SeaLion. I don’t think a successful SeaLion always means an Axis victory.

@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.