"Upgrade" bidding

As far as I have seen between 2012 and 2013 leagues, bids are ranging from +/- 6 IPC (that is up to 6 IPC or as low as -6 IPC, usually with someone just taking an AA Gun off the map so they can be allies or axis….)

OH that’s for Global 1940 2nd Edition

Nevermind - I just found a thread where this was explained - SORRY!

I have bid units to Japan before. An armor in Kwangtung is particularly effective and with a 9 bid like at tripleA, I’d even be inclined to place 1 inf in each of the 3 Asian territories.

@Frood:

No, that was me - see my “Ditto” above :)

Oops, sorry Frood. :oops: :|  I mis-read your post I think.  I just, for some reason, saw only what you had in the brackets.  Shame on me.

@Wazzup:

@axis_roll:

There’s two perspectives on this.  One is, as you state, extra pieces are added to initial game set-up to even the score.

Another bidding system (called the FIDA bid, initials of a number of online A&A clubs), splits the bid into at no more than 50% of the bid can be added as initial set-up extra pieces; the rest is cash to be split amongst Germany and Japan (you can give all the $ to one side if you want)

An example FIDA bid would be 15:  inf, tank in Libya (Germany), $2 to Japan, $5 to Germany.

Actually, in FIDA, this bid would not be allowed.  the Inf/tank is 8 IPC, which is more than 50% of the 15 bid.  In this example, you would be able to place inf, rtl at the most.

Whoops!!

Math error… math error.

Thanks for pointing that out.  My description says <= 50%, but my example was incorrect.

Thanks DM. It was the low luck aspect that really threw me the curveball. Taking a cursory look, it seemed that LL makes a lot of the first round battles, on both side, that are deemed “must do’s” by most players a little more palatable so, all things being equal, it was hard to judge which side would come out ahead at the end of the 1st turn.

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.