What is the most unusual/annoying/strange allied bid

@surfer

Thanks for the advice! Yeah, I really messed up on those British and French bids.

Thanks for the advice regarding the other bid purchases.

@JDOW also would you mind if I read your input on youtube?

This plan doesn’t ignore Japan, that’s a compete foolish move in my opinion. I just build bombers enough to keep Germany annoyed while maintaining a Pacific Fleet. As I said before, I build a 1:1 build against Japan and make sure Hawaii doesn’t get captured.

@Ichabod:

@Sovietishcat:

Since I have joined Triplea, I had more success playing with no bid than bid.

Do you think that’s because when you get a bid you bite off more than you can chew, or did you play the same?

I see you often do Taranto, SZ 96, and Ethiopia. If you don’t change a thing, but still accept a bid and use it just for those battles, then it I’d think you’d be just as successful. Should just increase the odds of those battles. A bid might lead to UK Europe sending fighters to Moscow quicker while the US and company hammer Japan.

Actually I have played differently with no bid and I started to put more pressure in Pacific first and it seems to work out better, because lot of times seems like the Japan player starts panicking and do not know what to do or gets offcourse in their plans… The only time I have struggled is against you Icha :)

@Gamerman01:

Getting the money when taking a capital is as old as A&A itself, so what, about 35 years?

Never a good reason if it’s the only reason.

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.  :-)

it says “and/or” and it is the most common way to phrase such a requirements in games.

for basic gramar;
a, b and c = a and b and c;
a,b or c = a or b or c;
a and/or b = means if you have a and b, its ok, if you have a, its ok, if you have b, its ok.
same way you can make a list.

Thank you for the answers. I just needed to be sure