Get the Brit Inf back in Egypt and a Russian Bomber for 2nd Edition

Answer is no!

Just remember only the Europe rule book has the rules about straits.
Only the Pacific rule book has the China and Kamikaze rules.

Can’t think of any others. You would think both rule books could insert those sections into the global rules section at the end.

Thank you for your input and play tests. Thinking for the money I might just drop troops and planes and start marching lol. If I could just get a few tanks behind Russia or into the middle east it would make for some entertainment.

Risk taught us when we were young that Irkutsk and Yakutsk are like the North and South Dakota of Soviet Russia.  Have you not visited the region of Kamchatka before–by traveling on a bold line via Alaska?  We all know that bold lines can support gigantic armies.

I think a very important component to strafing is understanding how it can rapidly move units beyond their normal movement range - which has been displayed in the G1 Yugoslavia to Romania example in prior posts.

It would be impossible to get the units from Greater Southern Germany to Romania on G1 without understanding strafing.

Of course, the units could simply step into Hungary and still be in position to strike at Eastern Poland.  However, you sacrifice the utility of clearing out much of Yugoslavia and thereby helping Italy by not understanding the mechanics of the “Strafe”.

Russia can also employ a Strafing strategy that would trade resources (generally Russian infantry) with Germany in a way that blocks a German blitz or denies the Germans the use of a minor IC.

In example:

Russia withdraws its stack to Bryansk in response to a German stack in Eastern Poland, inviting a German blitz of
Armor and some Mech into the teeth of 30 infantry, and another half dozen armor and artillery supported by Ftr and Tac.

Germany, unwilling to risk its Armor without protection, elects to blitz a single armor to Ukraine, waiting on a stack of Mech to arrive as reinforcements in Eastern Poland.

On the subsequent Russian turn, the Russians strafe into Ukraine, which is currently owned by Germany with 2 Infantry, 2 Ftr and 1 Tac.  Russia prevails, losing 1 Inf.  Effectively, Russia has denied Germany the use of the Ukraine IC, and traded a 3 IPC INF for a 6 IPC ARM.

On the subsequent German turn, Germany claims Ukraine for good, losing 1 Inf in the process.

Total cost for the Russian strafe:  6 IPC for Russia, 9 IPC for Germany + losing a turn of production out of Ukraine that can immediately threaten Moscow.

That, is the value of a strafe from the Russian perspective.

The list goes on, but understanding the strafing technique helps develop the early round strategies to keep pressure or alleviate pressure depending on the nation you play as.

Later in the game, understanding the strafing strategy can completely ruin your opponent and potentially tilt the scales in your favor to an economic stalemate or quickly end a game for a player not cognizant of the strafing applications.  From experience, this becomes a significant strategy to understand in the Pacific theater in application during the mid to late game.

A final input, is a variant of the strafing is a can-opener applied by Italy.  Italian units, due to their turn in a round, can open a door for a German blitz that Russia planned on having blocked.  Italy typically accomplishes this with Mech/Armor and a Bomber whereby opening a flank can ruin Moscow’s day.

The US has a variant of this if Germany leaves Berlin undefended whereby the US seizes Denmark, and the UK sails through the straights to land on Berlin.

Neither of these are true strafes, but they employ the same strategy of taking territory or denying territory in unconventional ways.

there is only an indirect link.
a 1 (or 0) ipc terr cant get a factory, and thus cant produce anything
a 2 ipc terr cant get a major factory, an is thus limited to 3 units produced
a 3 or more terr can build a major IC an is limited to 10 units produced (this is only a limitation for eastern and central USA with production of 12 and 20  ipcs)

Real simple, what are the ‘tweaks’ between the 2nd Edition and the latest Alpha rules?  Thanks.  Is it just the setup changes?

@Ruanek:

@Xandax:

@MarkHC:

Bottom line, I’ve played multiple games as the Soviet Union where I didn’t let anyone attack my units except an infantry I left as a road block.  Even when Japan invades Russia turn one/two and tries to keep pushing, it still didn’t make much difference because they can only take a territory a turn.  So when Germany finally reaches Moscow, almost every single unit I’ve built as Russia is there defending my capital.  Sure, if time weren’t a factor, it’s a bad strategy, but I know that the Allies are going to be landing in force by turn 5 or so, so the Axis is not able to deal with the Allied pressure and overcome a huge Moscow stack.

If the allies are landing in force in turn 5 Europe is lost regardless of a large stack of inf in Moscow.
Nothing is gained in the game by removing USSRs chance to defend and making a German attack on Russia go faster. On the contrary.
The huge stack isn’t an automatic win.

Well, not having the huge stack gives the Axis a bit more of a chance to blitz and take the necessary 8 victory cities quickly.

Well - of course. And removing the Russian troops entirely would equally.
You cannot remove the turtle. You shouldn’t IMO make it easier to take Russia.
We should however figure out why turteling is so strong and address that cause instead of just the symptom.

If you make it any easier to take Russia, you’ve effectively turned Germany into a one trick pony and removed most strategy from the European board.

The problem with that is if the US took Manchuria, it would revert to Chinese control so the US would not be able to use a factory there or even build one itself.  Also, US would not get the 3 IPCs for Manchuria either. 
However, USA could take Korea and put a minor there.