Just played my second game and I feel the revised edition is far superior to the original for many reasons.

I like the national advantages, although we have only been playing with two for each country. This has worked out well and keeps things from getting too confusing. It won’t be long before we have all of them memorized and it’s just another part of the game.

I love the tanks defense of 3, the 10 IPC fighter, and the addition of destoryers and artillery. The game feels much more balanced, and the choices for each turns buy are far more versatile than before. It’s only a problem because you spend that much more time planning your purchases… :)

The map is awsome, one of my favorite changes over all. I DO NOT miss the island boxes one bit, anyone else? The Eastern Front is far more dynamic and volatile, with Russia having quite a good starting position, IMHO. The Atlantic and Pacific are both more interesting and with all the extra sea zones, things have slowed down considerably in both areas of conflict. The artwork and new colors round it all off nicely.

The biggest change I notice is the speed of any significant gains, or rather the lack thereof. After playing two games, once as the Allies and once as the Axis, I feel that both games were closer to a draw than a victory for either side. Game one was played for only four hours, and was the “getting our feet wet” game, but it was not completed. Game two was played for nearly six hours, also not completed. In neither game did anyone gain a great advantage over the other. No victory conditions were chosen as far as victory cities are concerned, although several changed hands during the course of both games.

Of course, we made mistakes more than a few times, there was argument over the rules, and we still have a long way to go to get this all figured out. But therein lies the fun and enjoyment… well, that and stomping a mud-hole in your opponents butt!! :evil:

First job - clear convoys, second job - prepare D-DAY force.

Other options as time and resources permit, not neccessarily in this order:

Invade N. Africa and threaten Italy, or head right for ME.
Invade Norway and try to get troops to Moscow before the Germans.
Send air units to Moscow whenever possible.

The problem with trying to SBR Germany is that they can afford to keep fighters in Germany, and they can replace fighters if neccessary. That means bye-bye to your expensive bombers in short order. UK cannot afford to replace their airforce until late in the game, probably too late. If US wastes too much money on bombers, they don’t clear the convoys and they don’t put any real pressure on Germany. That is a sure way to lose as the allies, IMHO. 2 fighters and an AA gun can hold off, most likely destroy, any but the largest of bombing raids, ie. 5-6 bombers, or more. That is way too much money blown on the wrong war materials. 6 bombers cost 90 IPCs, which could buy a lot of transports and passengers…

I prefer to send the trns to assault Malta with 1inf and 1artl, while sending the BB and DD to attack the UK DD in Gibralter. This does a couple of things;

First off, it positions the Med. fleet near the Atlantic and can become a target for the Royal Airforce, which is a good thing. You can win this battle often enough to warrant the risk (42%). If the UK doesn’t attack, then you are well positiond to deter any attempt at freeing the three southern UK convoys, as long as you keep some U-boats nearby as back-up and fodder. However, let the BB absorb as much of the fighting as you can, that’s why it’s there. Seek small engagements where you have a pronounced advantage with good prospects of survival in the event of a counter-attack.

Secondly, this placement often entices the UK player to go after your Med. trns with his E. Med DD, and occasionally trying to move troops into Greece, which I would never do personally. At any rate, the UK player divides his ships and gives the German player an easy time of knocking them off with ftrs. Granted this often leads to the loss of the Med. trns for Germany, it can be replaced on G2 or G3 with little the Allies can do about it. And if the UK player is trying to make a stand in Egypt, you will soon overwhelm them once your trns is floating again. I have had great luck with this strategy and will continue to follow it until someone shows me a good reason not to. So far, my play group has not done that. Nobody else in my play group uses my strategy either, but that’s what makes this game so much fun. Do whatcha like!

Taking Gibralter G1 is also an interesting tactic, and I have used it once or twice. However, leaving the UK with a fighter in the Med. ended up causing me much grief later on, so I almost always go after it right away. If I think UK might try to place an Inf on Malta, I’ll buy an extra trns for the Med. with bonus IPCs. Looking at it now, this might not be a bad choice, with the idea of taking both Malta and Gibralter G1. Hmmm… it definitely bears looking into. That also presents a thinly veiled threat to merry old England, since you now have at least one trns in range of their island with dudes that can go along for the ride… along with a BB and DD for shore-shots. Not much of a threat, but enough to keep 'em honest, I’d wager. I’ll test-drive this next time I play Germany in AAE. Thanks for the ideas, that’s why I’m here.