New bidding rules?

[Avatar]

I don't believe the 1:5:20 bid gives enough to the allies. It clearly isn't strong enough for veteran players unless the Axis make major mistakes (which veteran players don't make). I'm think along the lines of 1:10:25, or even 1:15:30. Anybody else have some input? The point is that if your name isn't Terif, it's very very difficult to win as the Allies. Period.

[DalmatiaPartisan]

agree

1:15:30 would be apropriate

but who can make a proper distance between player quality?

If average player(as I am) plays against good player-1:15:30 for me as axis would make my side 1% chances to succed

[Avatar]

You're right. Actually, I wrote this referring to around 5-6 players. Terif, Rambo, Me, Zapp's gone, Condor?, anyone else's name here?. It very tough with this bid if you're not THAT good with Axis. If you're just GOOD at Axis, then the old bid is fine. However, if you are methodical and deadly with Axis (Terif), then Allies require a higher bid, or the game is boring and already decided before the action begins.

[Sombra]

Problem with an even stronger US is for me that it willl lead inevitably to an all out defense of France through GB. Conserve your units for Barbarossa? Why you can buy build a whole new army in no time.

[Liam]

It's the development of New Axis Strategies

A good Ally don't require so much

[Dragonheart]

I think it´s the opposite. A good allied player need much more than to be a good axis player. You need much more ideas and strategies to stop or slow the axis conquest.

As axis there are no new strategies as its always the same...Blizzing Poland,Denmark,France....collecting all minors as fast as possible and then crushing russia or the western allies ...that´s it.

And if you feel that your axis opponent is very skilled as axis you have to raise the bid....no new bid system required therefore.

[Sombra]

Well, Avatar you can always permit these deadly assaults on the italian beaches, which wouild permit the Allies to fight in the MEd and put there fleet to a good use.....

[hellraiser]

It is difficult to counter 2-4 star crack troops axis deploy later in the game even with more allied mpps.

that's why russia usually fails in defence - even with high AT science, it's zero xp units are cannon fodder. they cannot hope to mount a powerful counterstrike against a continuous german frontline consisting of high xp troops and hqs.

In this game the western allies do the difference by timing perfectly the overlord stuff. russia is there only to buy time. quite historically inaccurate because the war was lost in russia not anywhere else

[hellraiser]

imho it would have been very interesting to have the possibility to adjust the siberian transfer or at least its xp - remember that the transfer occured in time for the defence of moscow and the siberian troops although lacking combat xp were extremely well equipped compared to their germans enemies(thing that can be represented as 1 or 2 star xp for the sake of simplicity). This might make a difference because having the siberians + tech researched by the time germans threaten moscow will allow the allied player to mount a solid counterattack on one of the german flanks which may change the course of the war.

[Terif]

Hi Cosmin,

it highly depends on where and how you defend in Russia . In the open field you are right and russian troops will be slaughtered. Therefore they have to use natural defence lines behind rivers/swamps and should entrench in cities and forests.

BTW: siberian units in deed have better equipment in SC and already start with 1 bar experience .

German units usually only reach 2-4 stars experience after a long russian campaign (not at the start) and when Russia uses a pure corps defence. But if they keep also some armies/tanks for counterattacks at the right opportunity, there will not be much experienced axis units. If defence lines are set up right, often only 3-4 land units can attack/turn and collect experience anyway and from time to time the leading units (+ their experience) will be destroyed .

Russia will be in the defence and cant launch a real counteroffensive as long as it is the only front and Axis can use all their power there. So western Allies are in deed decissive and need to establish a second front.

At least in my games, Russia usually does not fail in defence. Surely, as long as Axis concentrates on Russia, they have no other choice than to stay in the defensive. But the moment when Axis shifts its forces west to fight against the invasion - and until now nearly all players did this fault - , gives Russia the necessary relieve so it can build up and launch a counteroffensive. And then like in history, the war will be lost in Russia and after a build up phase russian forces will move towards Berlin sooner or later .

Experience doesnt save the german units when a real russian counteroffensive is on the way. Experience will be lost very fast after a few battles - but again it depends on how and where you attack and on the enemy defence .

@Avatar

About bidding systems:

They improved over time mainly because UK should not get more than ~300 mpps at the start, or the incentive (and possibility) to try to crush Germany in France gets too high (at peak times UK got up to 450 mpps (so thats probably the maximum possible), before bidding system was changed to the next level...).

So at the moment the 1:5:20 system still has some reserves. If you think Allies should get more mpps, you can use a higher bid. Or you can always use a different bidding system (e.g. if you prefer another mpp distribution between the 3 Allies) as long as your opponent agrees, thats up to you .

BTW: My last games confirmed me that - like in the standard systems - it is in deed better to give Russia most of the mpps and not USA. When USA has the mpps, players didnt care about UK loosing everything and sacrificed it in kamikaze battles since they thought to be able to replace it when USA enters. When Russia even gets equally less mpps, then it drastically limits their possible strategies (they need a certain amount of mpps to build up a defence and to still have some additional forces left for own campaigns).

With the current strategies I think around 5000-6000 mpps in total provide a balanced game between equally skilled experienced veteran players (like always the bid depends on the experience of both players and for intermediate players it is probably still 2000-3000 mpps, for new players 0-2000).

As far as I can see, this amount didnt change any more in the last 6-9 months and I guess axis strategies are at an optimum and can´t be improved so much any more to justify higher bids, so this will probably be the end of the bidding spiral - but we will see... .

[ September 20, 2004, 08:52 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

[hellraiser]

documented reply i may say

ref siberians xp -> my bad i didn't check ... make it 2 stars then

ref shifting forces to W

indeed shifting forces in the west is the beggining of the end for germany ... why should any1 do that? Corps and macaroni are so cool in defence... Allies still have to capture Berlin to win the war and that ain't so easy.

ref russia's defence:

anything but a russian corps defence seems to be very difficult to pull off by the allied player. After reviewing some AARs it seems that the vast majority of players who tried an aggressive russia against a tough axis player failed miserably.

2 stars xp are achieved fairly quickly ... not to mention good HQs xp from previous battles. IMHO 2 stars are quite something. And yes, sometimes axis spearheads get mauled. Usually if axis player do not gain proper intelligence (waste an airfleet attack one turn so u can rebase and gain that intel about russian T34s lying in wait to rape unsuspecting wandering tigers) previous to launching the assault or become unsupported by HQs. I quote you: 'attacking a HQ supported tank is always expensive'

I think a cautious axis player can manage to keep a quite compact frontline reducing the exposure to russian counterstrikes.

In my opinion, as axis, you either decisively breakthrough and exploit it immediately or you shouldn't bother to breakthrough - take the steamroller tactics instead: kill slowly but surely

otoh it is always easier to talk than to walk...

i am more a pub table-strategist than a good player ... but i like talking nevertheless

cheers

[Terif]

Yep - If Axis uses the right strategy and Allies the wrong ones, i.e. Axis will win and crush Russia (and Allies). If Allies use the right strategies and Axis does it wrong, then Axis will be crushed .

Like always, it depends on the players . When both players do it right and can convert theory into practice, then it really gets interesting and can go either way .

[BigDog944]

Back to bidding, I'm wondering why no bid system I've seen includes giving some MPP's to France at the start of the game? Has this been tried? It would surely make the early game a lot tougher for the Axis player!

Maybe .5:1:5:20 (Fr:UK:USA:USSR) would even the game up a bit more?

[Friendly Fire]

Hi, I think that isn't very popular because with a good defense it is very easy to delay Axis past the historical fall of France (Paris captured June 14) even at a zero bid.

[jon_j_rambo]

The reason SC is such an excellent game is because of the French Campaign. June is the average month which matches history. Somehow, SC worked out. I think Hubert might have gotten a little lucky to be honest.

Time to walk over to the SC2 section of the Forum, haven't been there for 6-months.

[jon_j_rambo]

I wonder what the game would be like without the goofy landing bonus?

[Friendly Fire]

You are right Rambo, I hate that goofy landing bonus! But I find that most of the time France falls in July or August against a basic corps defense. But I haven't played with 0 MPP for Allies in a long time, maybe you are right and France will fall in June typically.

In any case the whole French campaign feels pretty accurate in SC, probably the result of good playtesting.

[jon_j_rambo]

SC is fun, SC2 soon? Feels like a delay, hope it's good.

[Jev.Dk]

Who cares?