"Upgrade" bidding

The Kriegsmarine had a “Minenschiff” called Hansestadt Danzig, it was a converted passenger ship - not a whole class and is certainly NOT the mini we have ;)

It’s a good strategy.  The main benefit is it prevents the Allies from landing Algeria on Turn 1-2.  Another thing to like about it is you’re credibly harassing the Allies without losing any IPCs on naval units.

I’d probably attack the fleet with the RAF and probably also with the BS and trannies (which I’ll retreat to 8).  If Germany submerges, I take a shot with the American bomber.  So odds are there’s only 1-3 subs left over to go to the Med.  Meanwhile the combined fleet is in 8 (UK buys an AC and a fighter), and I put my Russian sub in 12.

At that point, if Germany moves to the Med I can go to Norway with the combined fleet, while the United States builds up air power to knock out the Med fleet.  If the Med fleet moves to Egypt or the Black sea I can land Algeria, which signals the beginning of the end for the Med fleet unless Germany invests in an AC.

Possibly the better move for Germany if 2-3 subs survive in SZ7 is to attack the combined fleet in sz 8 with 5 figs, 2 bombs, and 2-3 subs.  However, this is a good battle for the Allies unless Germany has 3 subs.  Nonetheless if Germany has 2 subs it might still be Germany’s best option to attack and hope for good dice.

I think this opening has enormous chances of success against non-experts.  Against experts I’d prefer to go to Egypt strong and get 5 infantry instead of a bomber.

@U-505:

The goal isn’t to discourage an attack on Ukraine, but to encourage one for the aggressive Russian players.

The person who played the bid, switch, said this:

It spooks the Russians, so they only attack ONE territory, West Russia.  Germany saves not only the FIG in Ukraine, but the 3 INF, the ART, and the ARM as well.

Sure sounds to me like one of his goals was to discourage an attack on the Ukraine.  Which it does, but only by encouraging a WR/Belo attack which is basically just as good for Russia as a no-bid WR/Ukraine attack would be.

@U-505:

With 2 inf in WR the Ukraine/WR attack gets pretty risky especially in WR.

I agree, and I would not do a Ukraine/WR opening if Germnay placed 2 bid Inf in WR.  I would do a WR/Belo opening though, and be only down 1-2 Inf, on avg, from what I would be if those 2 Inf from the bid had not been placed.  Killing one or two Inf in WR is not a very good return on investment for your 6 IPC bid.

@U-505:

2 inf in Ukraine doesn’t present any dilemma for the Russians. Belo/WR can go on just as if those inf were placed in Libya.

Yep, they can attack Belo/WR.  But the difference, as compared to placing 2 Inf in Libya, is that Germany has 2 extra Inf on the front lines in Europe to play with on G1.  I’m not saying 2 Inf in Ukraine is a great bid either, but it is a heck of a lot better than 2 Inf in WR.  Actually, 2 Inf in Belo might be the best bid if you are going to place your bid on the front lines in Europe.  If Russia attacks WR/Belo, it has to commit a tank which will be killed in the attack or the G1 counter, plus all that nifty hardware in the Ukraine gets to live.  If Russia goes WR/Ukraine, Gemany has plenty of fodder in Belo to punish Russia with if the WR attack goes bad.  And I’ve seen the WR attack go bad (as in all but 3-4 of the Russian Inf are killed) a few times on WR/Ukraine openings.

@U-505:

The problem is that WR has to be attacked on R1 no matter what. By adding the bid to the territory that ALWAYS gets attacked you put the pressure on the secondary territory. Either you make the secondary attack with the minimum amount of units or run the risk of taking a beating in WR. The risk may be high enough to a conservative player that both Belo and Ukraine aren’t attacked which provides immediate value.

2 Inf in WR would not change what I attack Belo with at all (3 Inf, 2 Fighters) and it does not make it very likely I will take a beating in WR.  I agree that if it does convince a player to only attack WR, it is worth it.  But I think such a player is making a poor choice, and I don’t like to base my strategies on hoping my oppenent will make a poor choice.  If Russia responds wisely to that bid by attacking WR/Belo, then the bid basically bought Germany nothing.

@U-505:

Attacking WR/Belo is probably the best move …. [but] it becomes entirely likely that a good defense in Belo coupled with the extra unit or units Russia lost in WR gives the German player an opportunity to counterattack WR with a good deal of firepower. Even if it costs you a lost fighter to AA, smashing the Russian vanguard might be the right play to make. And if you don’t counterattack WR, at the very least it will give you Caucasus for a turn.

3 inf/2 Fig vs. 3 Inf in Belo results in Russia taking the land 70+% of the time and at least clearing it with both fighters living another 20% of the time.  Not much room for a great defense there.  And if the WR attack does go poorly, which is not likely either, Russia can always fortify WR with Inf from the Caucus.  Sure, that may leave the Caucus a little weak, but getting Germany to overextend by taking it on G1 is not really a bad thing for the Russians.  (as long as they make damn sure to retake on R2)

It is an out-of-the-box idea.  I’d try to incorperate it into a Battle for Britian plan.

My approach with Japan the two games I’ve played has been to build IC in India and FIC, build Arm there, and build TRNs also to keep a steady flow of Inf from Japan to Persia. That puts a lot of pressure on Cau to allow either Germany or Japan to take it. Once you have a big Axis presence in Cau, that Sink IC becomes less valuable to the Allies.

In other words, go around it - to the south. Germany can take Cau a lot sooner if Japan is in a position to immediately reinforce with a bunch of stuff.

My tourney game I also faced Russian defence (but no IC) and was also not able to take Sink / Yakut until J5 or so, but still there was enough money that I had 2 ICs and 7 TRNs running. I think Japan’s priorities should be building TRNs, taking Australia / New Zealand / India ASAP (J3) and picking up all the island Inf. Japan’s TRNs practically pay for themselves because of the island Inf supply, and because they increase the value of your forces by moving them to the front much faster.

Haven’t actually faced that American IC in Sink though.

I like it.  Germany is more free, but they can’t just get away with putting a transport in SZ 15 without cover because England can hit it with a Fighter and a Bomber if they want too.

Wow, what a thread!

I must say, I take NCS’s position on this one for several reasons, the most pertinant of them being that

a) While the Axis certainly CAN win without a bid, when you have players of equal skill and who are equally skilled at playing both Axis AND Allies (not just one or the other side), a bid can certainly make the difference in the early round(s) and many times it’s what happens the first 2 rounds that can help decide the game.

b) figuring out statistics is something that can only be done over thousands and thousands of games. I mean, you can flip a coin 100 times and get 90 heads. Does that mean the odds of getting tails are skewed? No, because if you were to flip that coin 10,000 times or 100,000 times the odds are it would be very close to 50/50 and 1,000,000 times or more and likely the difference would be so negligible as to allow us to say it was 50/50. While we cannot play 1,000,000 AAR games, I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch to suggest that a bid helps even out the game.

You know, just as many of the issues of AA Classic were worked out in AAR, I think probably in the next iteration (or version) that many of the issues we’ve seen here will be worked out as well. Maybe an extra unit here or another territory there… whatever it takes to balance the game.

To me I’m looking for gamebreaking changes in LL that would convince me that it doesn’t have any validity for analyzing overall strategies in ADS. I don’t really get stuck on very small details in very small battles in which we’re talking about efficiency in fractions of IPCs - which either side can take advantage of. I’m looking at the forest, not the trees.

I think it’s something to have to live with, but it’s still better to look at overall strategies than having every other game in ADS screwed over by some important battle going horribly wrong.