@greyshot I think the mistake you made was never threatening the East out of India. He had 9 infantry there and no real support ever on it. At one stage you had 20 infantry, 1 tank & air support you could have pushed out with 10, threatening him and forcing him to bring an additional 10 back down to keep India contained. This gives you an entire new turn to backup Moscow with more air from the US. I also think once he stopped pushing back out, your entire UK turn should have been air power to go into Moscow from India. You had 2-3 turns where you could have pushed 3 Fighters into Moscow and had an additional 6 fighters which given what he had left at theend (9 tanks & 1 artiller) would have made the difference)
Yeah, you had a great early game. But I think you made a few misplays that Manix used to claw back into it. It was super fun to watch! I hope to see more!
Thanks for sharing the game, truly enjoyed watching and listening to your considerations. A few comments: - You had such a strong momentum with the Russians in the beginning and some very successful battles in R1 strengthened with the wise decisions to redraw the Russians from the R1 battle after wiping out most of Germany's army! After 4/5 rounds you had a really strong position where UK/Russian without US support managed to press Germany out of Russia and back towards Berlin. Unfortunately, you lost focus - not really getting enough out of your IPCs, e.g. buying armors when not needed, investing in the US Pacific fleet, buying too many US bombers. I liked the idea of massive bombing Germany but in the end the bomber stack got too big and the IPS could have been invested more wisely. India is tricky in this game since Japan went straight West for Moscow, however, continuously buying 3 units was needed in order to secure India from Japan. likewise with your battles - in my view - you felt too secure and often invested too many troops in each battle. The few key battles around the defense of Moscow need the that amount of units you invested, however in most other battles you overinvested. The same applies to UK that invested units in attacking Western Europe that could have been send to Karelia and the support of Moscow. Having said this - I would enjoy playing an online game with you. Feel free to reach out. //B
Fun game it was neck and neck. Hard to keep track of every unit for that Moscow fight, I assumed he would use bombers for Moscow attack but can't say for sure. The American transports not moving hurt! Good game.
Your US turn right after Moscow fell was... ooof... didn't move the transport, didnt take Italy with 1 inf for 3 IPC, didn't liberate Alaska for 2 IPC, didn't sacrifice the transport in SE Asia to take also Burma for 4 IPC, didn't buy more transports (which you lacked the whole game for USA)... Well, understanable after suffering such a loss... All in all, it was a nice long game where Axis managed to win. That said, you managed to hold on early game but missed your great opportunities to score with Allies. Imho, you 90% used your transports into direct landing attacks during the game, while not often needing the amount of ground for those landings. Had you used even a small number of transports only for transporting UK towards Russia (especially after taking Karelia), Moscow would have been safer AND Germany possibly under even more pressure. This due to Manix always knowing you had no chance to direct take Germany (or even take and hold France with US in order to build a factory, due to lack of 2-3 US transports in the Atlantic) so he had no worries about that. Basically, you never acquired a respectful stack of neither US nor UK, and that cost you the game. Had you started building a stack in Karelia (with one Ally, better US but could be UK) while the other does the trades into peripheral German territories, then that stack would have made taking Germany around the same round as Japan takes Moscow a way to win (UK and US usually outpower and outmanouver Japan in the longest games). Manix on the other hand was low on artillery (both for Germany and Japan) and that should have hurt him a lot, still made it through. Also he had really bad dice vs your bomber raids, especially in the beginning of them. I believe he got really frustrated and was 90% sure he shall lose at that point. Also, your India defense was too strong, you often had opportunities to move 2-3 inf more towards and in help of USSR. Holding India while losing Moscow is never a good option. Would have been better to every now and then put an arty into it, then if you need to move out into Persia have a nice half mixed stack that would actually threaten Japan in Khazakh... Last thoughts: if you are not using the Baltics for supplying troops into Russia (talking after retaking Karelia), it might have been more fruitful to use it to constantly trade NW Europe and Baltic states with UK while using your US (with additional transports) to constantly ferry troops via Morroco into the Mediterranean, taking France, Italy and SE Europe. That way your troops would always have something to take with adequate numbers (not shoving too much of them into one territory) while taking 3-5 IPC more form Germany each turn while him having to retake even more to just repair the complexes ;) That is possible because if Germany has no control over France and has no bombers the SZ13 is completely safe for that schuck. Last last thoughts: the amount of IPC put into the fresh Pacific fleet in order to take back NZ and Australia 3 IPC and 1 turn of East Indies 4 IPC vs Manix not even building any fleet except a destroyer late on was not a well placed investment. Just imagine the number of new transport laden with ground US troops in the south of Europe for the same price, taking 3+2 IPC per turn?
Yeah, I thought the pacific fleet investment wasn’t a good idea too. Any investment you make needs to be towards creating a threat for your opponent. Half measures are just a waste of IPCs. Either build a fleet capable of capturing Japan, or don’t build a fleet at all. I only watched the first half. I am really surprised he lost. He had the game in the bag at round 5. Based on your analysis I see how he lost. I like this guys videos because he shares his thought process. Usually he’s right. It’s fun to watch.
GGs! Thanks for the game, looking forward to the rematch 👍
Can't wait!
@greyshot I think the mistake you made was never threatening the East out of India. He had 9 infantry there and no real support ever on it. At one stage you had 20 infantry, 1 tank & air support you could have pushed out with 10, threatening him and forcing him to bring an additional 10 back down to keep India contained. This gives you an entire new turn to backup Moscow with more air from the US. I also think once he stopped pushing back out, your entire UK turn should have been air power to go into Moscow from India. You had 2-3 turns where you could have pushed 3 Fighters into Moscow and had an additional 6 fighters which given what he had left at theend (9 tanks & 1 artiller) would have made the difference)
Absolutely fair. During the final recordings I made some mistakes as I was out at a wedding at the time. I could have done better but I had fun.
Yeah, you had a great early game. But I think you made a few misplays that Manix used to claw back into it. It was super fun to watch! I hope to see more!
Thanks for sharing the game, truly enjoyed watching and listening to your considerations.
A few comments:
- You had such a strong momentum with the Russians in the beginning and some very successful battles in R1 strengthened with the wise decisions to redraw the Russians from the R1 battle after wiping out most of Germany's army! After 4/5 rounds you had a really strong position where UK/Russian without US support managed to press Germany out of Russia and back towards Berlin.
Unfortunately, you lost focus - not really getting enough out of your IPCs, e.g. buying armors when not needed, investing in the US Pacific fleet, buying too many US bombers. I liked the idea of massive bombing Germany but in the end the bomber stack got too big and the IPS could have been invested more wisely. India is tricky in this game since Japan went straight West for Moscow, however, continuously buying 3 units was needed in order to secure India from Japan.
likewise with your battles - in my view - you felt too secure and often invested too many troops in each battle. The few key battles around the defense of Moscow need the that amount of units you invested, however in most other battles you overinvested. The same applies to UK that invested units in attacking Western Europe that could have been send to Karelia and the support of Moscow.
Having said this - I would enjoy playing an online game with you. Feel free to reach out.
//B
Thanks for advice.
Fun game it was neck and neck. Hard to keep track of every unit for that Moscow fight, I assumed he would use bombers for Moscow attack but can't say for sure. The American transports not moving hurt! Good game.
Ya mate nice video, keep em coming
Thanks!
Your US turn right after Moscow fell was... ooof... didn't move the transport, didnt take Italy with 1 inf for 3 IPC, didn't liberate Alaska for 2 IPC, didn't sacrifice the transport in SE Asia to take also Burma for 4 IPC, didn't buy more transports (which you lacked the whole game for USA)... Well, understanable after suffering such a loss...
All in all, it was a nice long game where Axis managed to win. That said, you managed to hold on early game but missed your great opportunities to score with Allies.
Imho, you 90% used your transports into direct landing attacks during the game, while not often needing the amount of ground for those landings. Had you used even a small number of transports only for transporting UK towards Russia (especially after taking Karelia), Moscow would have been safer AND Germany possibly under even more pressure. This due to Manix always knowing you had no chance to direct take Germany (or even take and hold France with US in order to build a factory, due to lack of 2-3 US transports in the Atlantic) so he had no worries about that.
Basically, you never acquired a respectful stack of neither US nor UK, and that cost you the game. Had you started building a stack in Karelia (with one Ally, better US but could be UK) while the other does the trades into peripheral German territories, then that stack would have made taking Germany around the same round as Japan takes Moscow a way to win (UK and US usually outpower and outmanouver Japan in the longest games).
Manix on the other hand was low on artillery (both for Germany and Japan) and that should have hurt him a lot, still made it through. Also he had really bad dice vs your bomber raids, especially in the beginning of them. I believe he got really frustrated and was 90% sure he shall lose at that point.
Also, your India defense was too strong, you often had opportunities to move 2-3 inf more towards and in help of USSR. Holding India while losing Moscow is never a good option. Would have been better to every now and then put an arty into it, then if you need to move out into Persia have a nice half mixed stack that would actually threaten Japan in Khazakh...
Last thoughts: if you are not using the Baltics for supplying troops into Russia (talking after retaking Karelia), it might have been more fruitful to use it to constantly trade NW Europe and Baltic states with UK while using your US (with additional transports) to constantly ferry troops via Morroco into the Mediterranean, taking France, Italy and SE Europe. That way your troops would always have something to take with adequate numbers (not shoving too much of them into one territory) while taking 3-5 IPC more form Germany each turn while him having to retake even more to just repair the complexes ;) That is possible because if Germany has no control over France and has no bombers the SZ13 is completely safe for that schuck.
Last last thoughts: the amount of IPC put into the fresh Pacific fleet in order to take back NZ and Australia 3 IPC and 1 turn of East Indies 4 IPC vs Manix not even building any fleet except a destroyer late on was not a well placed investment. Just imagine the number of new transport laden with ground US troops in the south of Europe for the same price, taking 3+2 IPC per turn?
Yeah, I thought the pacific fleet investment wasn’t a good idea too. Any investment you make needs to be towards creating a threat for your opponent. Half measures are just a waste of IPCs. Either build a fleet capable of capturing Japan, or don’t build a fleet at all.
I only watched the first half. I am really surprised he lost. He had the game in the bag at round 5. Based on your analysis I see how he lost.
I like this guys videos because he shares his thought process. Usually he’s right. It’s fun to watch.