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

(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.)

@Karl7:

@Talleyrand19:

Been following this thread as best as possible so sorry if this was already mentioned and I missed it…

But what happens if Allies spend most of their money on the Atlantic with only a few capital ships in the Pacific to join up with Anzac. The Atlantic money goes to transports and capital ships and then tanks and infantry. With England’s help, you hit Spain and Gibraltar  (for the naval base). Then every single turn the US can land more stuff and set up a nonstop funnel. If Russia does its job then axis should not be able to keep up on both fronts. If Germany sent its Dark Skies bombers to try to stop the funnel, then fine you can wipe each other out and still land more US troops the next turn.

My friends and I have done this to each other and the Spain landing always overwhelms the Axis eventually. …

What have you all experienced when trying this?

Yes, this is a good strategy.  The weak point is then the Germans blitz into the middle east, ignoring Moscow.  They can get an economic advantage and then just sit back and outbuild the allies.

Perhaps have Iraq and the Persian territories be treated as True Neutral, just give the UK and USSR extra units to make up the potential difference.

@Dafyd:

I think that any question when we are trying to improve our skills is a good question…especially if we are really trying to learn.  The Hessian and ShadowHAwk are right.  The key to the Pacific are the two power fleets of Japan and the U.S.  The U.S. must go after the Japanese fleets.  Carriers loaded with planes are very important as well as the subs and detroyers.  As a side mission and with the permission of your Soviet ally, land troops in Siberia and help take back Soviet territories from the Japanese if they have begun to starve out the Soviet Far East.  It takes resources from the Japanese and can alter the attention of the Japanese player a turn or two if they are interested in defending Korea or pressuring the Soviets.

Good stuff here.  I’m a fan of 3 part attacks on Japanese fleets.  As an example:

Japan leaves a chunk of its fleet in SZ42 (off Java) for whatever reason.  They’re not worried about an attack because America doesn’t have the fleet off of Queensland to come after them.  What I’ve done in those situations is attack with the American ships, then follow up with India planes and Anzac ships/planes to finish them off. You’ll lose your American ships, some India planes and Anzac ships/planes, but if you wipe out half of the Japanese fleet it’s brutal for Japan because, as dominate as they can be, they can’t afford to lose too many major pieces.  America can lose a mini fleet and replace it; Japan cannot afford to be spending multiple turns rebuilding its fleet.

I really wanted to do the J3–take India & not have to worry about anything coming from there again, to be the proverbial—thorn in my side (thats what my original post for help with the J3 Crush thing was all about.  Then wanted to take DEI & start pushing the Anzac’s & US on my terms.  Not fighting this attrition battle & running for defense from behind with the Allies on the offense & pushing me.

This is where I thought this was heading with this sort of offense from Japan–take out the Chinese & UK fronts while the US was out of it & the Anzac hadn’t had time or resources to do much, then only fight on my terms w/ the US & Anzac on two Pacific fronts & maybe chip away @ the Russians if I wanted to help germany a little?

The way this has turned out, however, is by J2 I am now @ war w/all allies & have 5-fronts to still to deal with & fighting a war of attrition & defense.  Seems like the same ole Axis games where the Axis are always fighting a war of attrition & on defense.  I know this is the way it was in history, but I was hoping for a little different w/ a new game thats suppose to be slanted towards the Axis anyway, new rules that have been reworked 3-4 times & some killer new strategies that I hadn’t tried before?

I’m just a novice that has been playing this game on & off, mostly off, for the past 25 years–so I haven’t had the dedicated time to work up alot of these 3-4-5 move strategies like some of the dedicated Veterans here.  So I guess forgive my poor applications of some of these strategies, they all seem good & I’m sure work w/ the right set of circumstances & responses.  I guess I’ll just have to play more to practice more.

Boy, wont my wife like that one  :x  But I know my Kids & I will.  Thanx again all for help & posts & keep them coming.  :-)

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)

@TheDefinitiveS:

Note West India is part of the Pacific and the Canadian Territories are part of the Europe side.

This is true in the Alpha rules only.

I played it. DJensen is correct.