13 fighters in Karelia 😮. That sounds so great. Ive never seen that many fighters in classic games this soon. Such a bad attack Germany made into Karelia.

thx for uploading, nice game so far

Well done , your only the 3rd player I have seen to come back from a bad Soviet opener.

I like how you explain a lot and even say what you buy because sometimes I'm doing stuff while listening and also my phone screen is not the biggest. Also I have some questions. I am thinking about buying the game, but I have only wi-fi on satellite internet to play this game on. Will wi-fi satellite internet work in multi-player since it is turned based? If the game crashes, can you resume multiple games? Is the single player ai challenging? Is there a big multi-player player base? Any other things I should know before buying this for a ten year old laptop? Thanks :)

Nice bounce back from that terrible West Russia opening. Your opponent made two mistakes. He abandoned Karelia too easily and chased India instead of pushing directly towards Russia. India is a trap that distracts Japan.

You're calculator doesn't match aa1942 calc... 1 inf, 1 art, 1 fighter vs. 1 inf can fail taking the territory 3.7% of the tiem.

which calculator are you using... for the last US attack.. he had 4% chance to take.... and 12% chance to get that result or better for him.

I’ve learned, when defending, the defense profile of the “home” country is used. In round 10, you had a Japanese bomber, however it uses Germany’s defense profile. Sea battles have different rules

I’ve learned, when defending, the defense profile of the “home” country is used. In round 10, you had a Japanese bomber, however it uses Germany’s defense profile. Sea battles have different rules

But all in all I was really hoping that you would have less tanks left than that for a retake I had American and UK ground forces.

Oh if I had a bomber I would have definitely going for that. Cuz then I'd have two infantry and a bomber to take as casualties. The whole thing isn't worth it if you lose one fighter.

It interesting. In my calc you had a 50% chance with that 1-2 punch. With one more infantry it became a 57% for me to hold. I was committed. That bombing raid may have been the difference. Cuz if I have two more units now it's 65% chance for me to hold. I did think of doing that move that you talked about with the UK. I thought it was better to just put everything I could in Moscow and try my best to just hold it. I also thought I was getting Berlin. 😂

I suppose my biggest mistake was trying to stay in India.

the allied player have 0 artillery seemed suboptimal

It was a grinder. A couple things were a lot closer than I thought.

Maybe this is me and my personal bias speaking since I always played Japan a lot back in the day and I feel most comfortable with them of any country in A&A, but as a gold-tier axis player I let out a HUGE sigh of relief when I see the allies going KJF. It has the inherent flaws of A) Japan is inherently weaker, so while easier to kill in theory it also means that Germany left to rampage unchecked is more dangerous than an unchecked Japan, and B) Japanese cap being on an island means any invasion force has to be entirely carried by transports or supplemented by A LOT of aircraft, both are expensive and take time in addition to being further from your own industries making your supply line of unit place to unit going into combat much longer. An experienced Japan player can see the KJF usually before their first turn and can start appropriately spamming infantry and destroyers. As a primarily axis player, I just really feel that KGF is the superior strategy in almost every circumstance.

I'm curious what his rank is? He had several opportunities to sink your Atlantic fleet and since he would have been on easy mode with Germany thus sacking some planes is well worth it especially when he was slightly behind in KJF. Well done on the KJF you've been paying attention in FNB I see. ;)

0:17 Dysentery is bloody diarrhea.

You are starting to sound like ROCH Warrior and his complaints about unequal hit-backs! 🤨 It makes for good content!

gg

The G6 West Russia Battle was a 44% result. I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the amount of consternation afterwards *might* not have been totally warranted.

Ok, I had a game with Allies, where I strafed Ukraine on 1st Round leaving only the Fighter there and retreated with 3 tanks and 1 art. My question is this right move? I heard you have to strafe it instead of taking it most times, depending on results, but this is literally the theoretical best outcome to strafe and I still think it was a weak move. This fighter gone for the Germans will ease pressure on UK early naval building, also capturing Ukraine force them to attack with at least few units there instead of focusing north. Idk, IPC wise Fighter is 10 + 2 for capturing Ukraine + let's say 2 infantry lost (+6) totaling 18 IPC benefit if you capture the region versus 3 tanks and 1 art - totaling 21 IPC if retreating (if you have less troops remaining it is even more meaningless to retreat). Basically both options have almost identical IPC effect for USSR and Germany but the Germans seem to be in much better spot if they decide to harrass UK or to amass Airforce anywhere.

What does placement mean?

Posting this not to rag on you or troll or anything, but for improving your game play going forward. G3, did you really need to kill the UK AC? You clearly got extremely unlucky, that is not in dispute, but did you need to risk anything at all?. That entire G3 turn seemed insanely risky. 3 different attacks that you said all needed a hit in round 1. What are the chances of getting three first round hits? 2. you made it very clear that the 2 fighters were vital to killing Russia is it worth risking them at all, especially when you could have added them to those other two attacks on Russia that 'need' round 1 hits? 3. What is the value of that AC to UK if you keep laser focused on killing Russia, is UK having that AC going to give Russia a greater boost to their Defense then having your 2 fighter contributes to their offense? 4. You got tilted right? After you lost the first fighter, what did your odds become then? And considering those odds, did it make sense to hail Mary a single fighter against the AC? This isn't rhetorical, I am in no way and A&A expert, I play a similar tabletop game where stacking odds is the point and bad luck is super swingy. A big portion of that game is knowing when taking the 98% to 2% is furthering your objectives or just a 2% to lose the game for no gain. From the way you talked in game it sounded to me like you took a 2% to lose attack power for no gain. But I think only you in hindsight can review if this was the right move or not. Cheers and may the odds ever be in your favor!!

I would argue it's the heavy tank buys that lost you the game. It might not be intuitive but infantry is always better than tanks. Always. 2 infantry (on attack) vs 1 tank is 54.7:37.9 odds. That's not even considering the main function of infantry - to act as meatshield for the heavy hitters. The only advantage a tank has is its mobility (and in rare cases, you have too much IPC but not enough building cap), and if you're not utilizing that, you don't need to buy a single tank.

The guys on FNB usually start over when Russia is unable to take Ukraine R1

There are worse R1s, still it was pretty bad.

how did you compute the odds on the UK1 SZ 7 battle? The aa1942calc shows 21.7% chance attacker loses everything and 23.4% chance the defender survives.

in a KGF I always, and I mean always buy all inf the first 4 rounds for Germany, buying tanks in only very specific circumstances where Russia got a ridiculous bad 1st round, but otherwise inf 1 through 4 rounds and then combination of tanks etc..

This trend (It seems from the various content creators I've watched) of giving up on the money islands in a KJF is bewildering to me. Japan needs to match the US fleet and take advantage of the distance the US has to travel to resupply its fleet in the Pacific? Can someone explain the logic to this strategy> Genuinely curious.

I know, I keep uploading Axis games. Don't worry Allies will get some action very soon!

youtube.com/@johnrobertsgaming?si=zdfMZFJkDR0CLdhX Ever want to colab?

bombing is way too inefficient unless you're going to some stupid green skies 3 us bombers/turn then it doesn't matter if you lose bombers. in general, i still think allies are at a disadvantage. too easy for germany to spam inf/art to trade with starting fighters while japan cleans up asia. us should be given ~2-4 more IPC to start to really put axis on a timer and not let them stall out since it is more likely they win quick than allies

Your German fighter pilots are conscientious objectors

Nice game. His failure to buy another UK transport is puzzling.

Thank you for the vids. As a 'high gold, low platinum' player I still learn strats from you. Dread getting matched with you some day!

Bookmarked. Cancelling my evening plans 😊

show the IPC swing after the battles please.

That was a great game and your detailed explanation each step is very helpful. That bombing run on the allied navy on your Japanese turn was absolutely brilliant. You stated earlier not to build that American navy in the Pacific when you go KGF and I completely agree. Had those ships been in the Atlantic they would probably have been in that sea zone defending. So that just made your point even more. Well done on the win.

its 5 hits, not 6. the transport dont need a hit on the first round. also subs are terrible on defense, i never expect my sub to hit on defense, unlike AA gun on SBR. you just rolled terribad on first round. probly hit once on first round and once on 2nd round of combat because clearly there was 2 rounds. crazy unlucky

So much good content you give us. Thank you for the time it takes. I don't need NetFlix, Prime, Hulu, etc 😁

Note: All audio related issues are a 'work in progress' in older videos like this one. Most if not all problems and concerns are fixed/managed in the most up-to-date videos.

Note: All audio related issues are a 'work in progress' in older videos like this one. Most if not all problems and concerns are fixed/managed in the most up-to-date videos.

Note: All audio related issues are a 'work in progress' in older videos like this one. Most if not all problems and concerns are fixed/managed in the most up-to-date videos.

Note: All audio related issues are a 'work in progress' in older videos like this one. Most if not all problems and concerns are fixed/managed in the most up-to-date videos.

Note: All audio related issues are a 'work in progress' in older videos like this one. Most if not all problems and concerns are fixed/managed in the most up-to-date videos.

Note: All audio related issues are a 'work in progress' in older videos like this one. Most if not all problems and concerns are fixed/managed in the most up-to-date videos.