OK, I've added a bid field!

[ian77]

[:D] I have been watching this forum for nearly three years (I think) and cant believe how excited I am that EIA is soooooo close. My poor over used, curling at the edges, cardboard counters may soon be able to take a lengthy and well earned period of R&R. But they will still have to do battle every so often for old times sake, that and the fact that drinking beer with old friends over the games table is slightly more socially acceptable in the wifes eyes than drinking alone in front of the screen!![;)]

[datacollectioncenter]

Hello all:

I like the bidding because, I find that everybody has their favorite nation to play (Can anyone guess Pippin's ? ) and so this creates an eagerness to bid high for their favorite nation BUT you don't want to go so high that it impacts your chances of winning. You bid a hundred VP for France and you'll probably get to play France BUT you probably won't win even if you win all of your wars. Bid too low and you'll end up with Spain, Turkey or Austria (Which I tend to like playing anyway) which many would say puts you at a disadvantage!

Quite a pickle that bidding can create!

Thank you

[ian77]

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

Hello all:

I like the bidding because, I find that everybody has their favorite nation to play (Can anyone guess Pippin's ? ) and so this creates an eagerness to bid high for their favorite nation BUT you don't want to go so high that it impacts your chances of winning. You bid a hundred VP for France and you'll probably get to play France BUT you probably won't win even if you win all of your wars. Bid too low and you'll end up with Spain, Turkey or Austria (Which I tend to like playing anyway) which many would say puts you at a disadvantage!

Quite a pickle that bidding can create!

Thank you

You are spot on Marshall, bidding is a game in its self, especially if you play with regular opponents. You try to second and third guess each other, bluff that you are going all out to play as Bobs favourite GB, and try and sneak France for yourself with a low bid. We have tried many different systems, one of the craziest being a straight forward blind draw for powers, followed by negotiation and the sale/transfer of powers between players, Spain and Russia were swapped with the first 75 Russian VPs being ceeded to Spain. This meant that it would be that much easier for Spain to win so France and GB both had to constantly score points off Spain! Meanwhile the Russian had to play a very aggressive game himself in order to score, but was still not considered a major threat, it was a cardboard bloodbath with Prussia and Austria the big losers, again! God I love this game!

Ian

[ian77]

ORIGINAL: Pippin

so if you find that a playerd bidded 100 VP for playing FR, you should quit this player from the game and look for another one.

I am not so sure. If someone wants to bid the whole bank for a country, then LET HIM! Even if he kicks everyone's ass, if he can't pay off his debts so to speak, then he simply doensn't win. Next guy in line wins. Sounds fair to me. He will learn soon enough.

In our face to face the guy in last place, with the lowest % VPs, has to pay for the all the beer..... and 7 of us can get through a lot in 15 hours!!

[eg0master]

ORIGINAL: ian77

[...]

In our face to face the guy in last place, with the lowest % VPs, has to pay for the all the beer..... and 7 of us can get through a lot in 15 hours!!

HAHAHAHA, I think we will be using that to eliminate any insane bids... [:D]

[ardilla]

The point, under my player opinion, about letting bid 100 or more points for a country is that I think the game will be unbalanced.

Why?

Because, if we have a player that bids 100 for FR this is 500/44 turns this means an average of almost 12 VP per economic turn, since this is almost imposible the FR player will know that HE WILL NOT WIN, so I think he will just "break" the game and do whatever he feels like, and having a player who can not win is something STUPID.
Because at the end this is a game, and if you play is because you want to win.

And of course we have GB, with the special rules of winning if nobody wins and taking away VP from other countries.

So, there still be possible for a player to bid 200 VP over GB and win the game using wisely the both above rules!!!!

That is why I thought that it could be nice to have a maximum bidding for country.
So, if 2 players are crazy about playing FR, they will probably bid the highest....so the losser of the random dice will play an unliked country...it is a high risk!!!

[Madcombinepilot]

This is awesome!!!

Looks great, can't wait to play it!

[Pippin]

Another problem is the ability of GB to win the game if nobody reaches the total VP needed. This can make a player bid very high for GB and then, with the other ability of GR of substract own VP from another country at war with, will make possible to GB winning even with a bid of 300 VP!!!!

I have thought about this ages ago, but in the end decided it is not too much a problem. Lets look at it this way, Britain has 2 ways to win. Get her quota, or hope everyone else ends up in a draw. Now, lets assume she bids infinit on herfself. Great, now she has effectively cut her winning strategies down by half. There is only one way now, hoping everyone results in a draw.

What has changed from before, till now? Some could argue it is almost a disadvantage to her now. And lets not forget, if she goes around trying to subtract victory points from everyone else, they are going to get very, very mad. Having a lot of mad players at you is not safe for your country, to say the least. In no time, you won't even have a half point to your name, so how can you subtract from others? Not to mention having your status slide wayyyy low is not a good tactic for your country's health.

In any case, if Britain wants to do this tactic, let her. She has always been able to do so, what is the difference now(except one less winning path)? Seems more of a disadvantage.

Oh, and BTW, once Britain falls, she is out of the game for good.... so you can see what may happen here...

[ian77]

I have thought about this ages ago, but in the end decided it is not too much a problem.

[/quote]
Thats a pretty good summary of the position with regard to an over inflated bid for GB Pippin IMHO.

The "draw means GB victory" just adds yet another layer to this game and its off map diplomacy. I've said it before but it is still true, GOD I LOVE THIS GAME!![:D]

[yammahoper]

Aftre our first few times playing EiA, we gave up on bidding and eiher drew from a hat or bid on each nation using 0ne through seven. People who bid the same roled for resolution.

Bidding does not need to be used at all. It certainly is not intended to be an intricate part of the game, though if people bid high, it would become so. I have never seen a bid over 40, which was for Russia, and Russia both won that game and became the first non dominant power to achieve dominace (our dreaded Russian/French alliance game, won by the man who introduced us to the game of Eia, and always a brilliant player). The way the required victory point totals vary from nation to nation (330 for Aus, 400 for Fra, 370 for GB, 320 for Pru, 325 for Sp, 335 for Ru and 315 for Tu) means diferent levels of aggression and terms of peace can be handled. France needs to stay at war almost continually to win (there are 40 eco phases in the game over the 10 years, and VP's are only awarded then, so Fr needs 10 each phase to simply stay in the running...for those who have not played the game, the Political Status table is self adjusting. The higher you are up the table via winning battles and wars then the further you fall during the adjustment phase, and will continue to fall untill in the nuetral zone, where 7 VP an eco phase is the rule).

Quick math will show what a nation needs to average to win in ten years, though I have never seen a game last the full 120 months before someone won. When to declare war, when to win battles, when to gain the political points for conquering Minor Nations, when to gain a few points with an alliance...all relate to political staus and the earning of VP. Go on a hot run of 15 to 13 VP a phase for four to seven phases and you take a nice lead, and even TURKEY can do this. In fact, Turkeys lead becomes even larger because of the reduced points needed to win. The answer if this occurs? Have Austria of GB beat up Turkey! Anyway, I have seen every nation except Spain and Prussia win (Spain was usually an UMP in our table top games).

BTW, all these VP totals to win assume you are using the ability to manipulate your economy for more money and manpower, which results in a negative adjustment on the Political Status Table (but gives extra money and manpower for building stuff as you super heat your economy), or slow your economy and loose money and man power, which results in a positive adjustment on the Political Status Table (as you spend more money on your nations infrastructure and less on the war machine). With this rule, nations like Turkey, Spain, Prussia, Russia and Austria can battle their way into the Dominant Zone on the Political Status table, gaining 9 VP an eco phase minimum, and STAY there without fighting at all, just manipulating there economy. The nations on the fringe of the map, like Turkey, Spain and RUssia, can use this tactic most effectively, fighting a few minor nations, conquering them, then sitting back, negative manipulate thier economys, and build their armies. Sooner or later, France or GB will HAVE to come for them, typically by (if France) bum rushing them, or (if GB) paying an ally to to it for you.

yamma

[Madcombinepilot]

From reading the replys, It seems that people who never played tabletop EIA dont understand the bidding system. So be it. Bidding plays a part of the games dynamics, but the no matter what the bid, the game is still decided by the diplomacy in the other room--and who rolls the '6' during the shooting....