Hmm you are probably right bugoo–Karelia and Egypt in the same turn is too risky. Actually though, I once played a game where I took Karelia, killed the bb, and took Egypt… However with only 3 figs Karelia is obviously too risky so the better play is probably pursuing the dd/tranny combo with the 2 subs–the bb can be kept out of Finland/Karelia by landing all fighters in Finland… Re. Karelia, in a ll game it comes down to whether the aa hits. If no fighter is shot down then sometimes Karelia can be taken without sacrificing a fig…and that is pretty devastating for the Allies. If a fighter is shot down, then sometimes that’s 2 figs down for the Axis.
How to achieve balance part 2-> bids
-
If China gets say 4 inf placed in Yunnan, Japan will have a choice between committing all they got against that space (3 inf, 4 fig) or else go for Burma and bypass Yunnan. Most likely they will lose some fighters in Yunnan, and UK can reinforce India with 2 inf from transjordan. In that scenario, throwing a lot into India, Russian inf and arm, UK and US fighters transferred via Russia and Australia, could be a viable strat together with an IC. On the other hand, if Japan forgo Yunnan, Allies can go heavy into Africa, aiming for 2 ICs in Saf and Egy and stopping the Japanese later around Persia. Russian reinforcements will then go into China which will become a tough nut to crack for the Japs. We should see if considerations like these would change the game before just saying, well, this favours KGF even more!
-
Mmmm… I didn’t noticed 4 figs could attack Yunnan. I counted only two … well, then or 4 infs are not enough bid or the attack in Yunnan is too costly to being really done. It will be interesting see what does the people
Other option is simply move that fighter before starting. It would low the bids in case of chinese restricted bid. Or we could bid all type of units to China, not only infs. Then, maybe a couple of artilleries could compensate the loss of the fighter and this would allow negative bids
I also like the option before said of using 1942 setup for China in 1941. One way or another, we should do something with China, the question is what to do
Anyway, is interesting see that no option is winning clearly. Larry should done some official bidding rules :|
-
I am going to try to use the Chinese setup of 42’ in 41’ next time I play. The Jap forces in mainland China are almost identical in both scenerios so if it’s “balanced” in 42’ it should be in 41’.
-
what if Chine went before Japan? they could strafe or consolodate and also reposition the fig and reinforce.
-
Anyway, is interesting see that no option is winning clearly. Larry should done some official bidding rules :|
Yes, but he made a comment on bidding rules, although he has not yet made any official bidding rules, like the same concept as other official optional rules like the Dardanelles closing or LHTR, but he said that he would opt for a money bid.
-
I don’t think we have to be guided by Larry on this topic. Optional rules are his first choice to balance the game, it seems, probably due to the vulnerability of Caucasus and the power of SBR, yet people don’t seem to want to use the Optionals as a balancing device. We could opt to go for the spirit of AA50, which is to have a balanced Europe/Pacific boardgame, and then create a bid system that goes in that direction. Democratic, too… :wink:
Maybe unlimited unit bids, but only on territories or in sea zones bordering those with Japanese units, call it the anti-Japan bidding system, A-JAP? Hot candidates: Yunnan, Burma, West Coast. China, only having infantry, could only get inf bids, but it wouldn’t be so tied up just to China and create more variety.
-
Maybe unlimited unit bids, but only on territories or in sea zones bordering those with Japanese units, call it the anti-Japan bidding system, A-JAP? Hot candidates: Yunnan, Burma, West Coast. China, only having infantry, could only get inf bids, but it wouldn’t be so tied up just to China and create more variety.
I like this one. It allows negative bids also. A note, maybe we should let chineses bid one fighter: probably they will stick still to infs, but it’s good having the option just in case
-
OK, voting is over, China inf bids won but by a very small margin. I’ll move the discussion over to the League discussion forum and we’ll see what people think there! Join in and we can influence how the game will be played! :-)





