Some ideas following Cows arguments. The moment the Axis started to dominate the game was when they started to be more aggressive, likely the Allied will start to dominate the game again when they start to be more aggressive.
An aggressive UK in the med is already common sense, why not a more aggressive USA, Russia and Pacafic?
Japan is strong with its enormous airforce, but it can not attack northern russia, southern china, the money island, india and caroline islands / hawaii at the same time, while the Allies can attack from all sides. Concentrated Japan can overpower any of them, but when the Allies are on the offensive from the start on Japan, it will have difficulty to expand somewhere without losing territory where is retreating.
Germany is much better defended, so that is why Allied landings are not that scary for Germany as it can both defend the West and advance on the East, generally winning the games for Axis.
It is a time clock, and while Axis has figured to make their time go faster and more efficient, the Allied are lagging with old ideas that USA needs convential landings to suport the Allies.
I disagree.
I think Germany has a lot of trouble fighting two fronts when USA negates these three things:
1. LOGISTICS
2. PRODUCTION
3. SAFE SPOTS
1. Logistics is killing the German fleets, making his expansion and inner reinforcemets much more difficult, USA from London excell in this
2. Production is bombing all important German factories so Germany will be losing lots of IPC and even halting builds at some places (20 damage on Germany).
3. Germany has many safe spots where it can land aircraft, USA bombers range negates this and forces lots of troops to make his Luftwaffe is defended, those troops are not attacking Russia next turn.
So I see lots of benefits for a USA that invests the first 4-5 turn in Bombers against Germany. After that, they are free to respond to the situation, most of the time this will be to support the Pacific.
Same for Russia. It can have conquered Scandinavia in R3, while all builds are focused on the defense of Moscow. When UK and USA are doing their job, Germany will have a very difficult war. The moment they reach Moscow might be the moment they lose Berlin…
For only 10 IPC force the USSR might have lots of extra IPC in the middle east + africa. Already in 2 turns Iraq it has paid for itself. I will also send 1 tank, 1 mech and 1 fighter to help out the Chinese, while all Siberian forces retreat first turn and then go on the offensive (or lure Japan ground troops in pursuit).
I think it is possible to overpower the Axis much earlier than the Allies are doing currently. The roles are simple
UK takes down Italy and takes all those countles opportunities, whittling down Axis small bits while making sure they defend their capitals well. ANZAC plays the same way, taking that money island or killing that lone sub etc.
USSR provides manpower, land troops, land troops and more land troops, so does China.
USA provides the expensive and heavy stuff, bombers, capital ships. Bonus for them is taking Rome.
In this way all the Allied forces play to their strengths, not their weaknesses. For example Russia can more easily get land troops against Japan / Germany, while aircraft is too expensive. So, logically, the USA has lots of difficulties getting land troops to Germany, so don’t bother, bring those Bombers instead.
So no USA is not 100% bombers, but it will be their focus in the first turns. Ofcourse some transports or subs etc. might be a good addition based on the gameplay.