It’s tricky, since a good Japan player will whomp all over the Pacific anyways.  What you need to do is rob Germany of Africa and place the IC at a spot that can’t easily be taken out.

The optimal place to put the IC is actually Egypt as it properly reinforces Russia, puts pressure on the Med, makes a giant choke-point for Africa.  The U.K. is now in range of Europe on both sides, blocks the Suez forever, and can send units to Russia easier, because they don’t have to be stacked on defense(can’t hold India forever anyways).

But you will need U.S. support, so you might have to wait until turn 2 to place it unless the German med fleet is badly beaten.    Russia can also of course send air cover for it if you decide to build it on turn 1.  If the U.S. player sends their bomber there as well, they can later on do effortless strategic bombing of Italy as well and be well within range of Europe.  It’s also the optimal place to use U.S. and U.K. forces to do the famous 1-2-3 punch vs Eastern Europe. Two turns later, U.S. forces will have a large stack of units there and it’s never being taken down.

With that in place, the U.S. job is much easier and they can concentrate solely upon Japan and Germany proper.  Forcing Germany to actually fight a war in/reinforce the Med. is all you need to do to cripple its focus on Russia.

Note - the counter to the U.S. and to divert its attention is to actually take Hawaii with troops(Central America is now in range - and the U.S. has to not leave any openings).  This game is highly dependent upon dividing your enemy’s focus to multiple fronts.  If Japan doesn’t do at least this and the U.S. can focus entirely upon Europe, it’s over for the Axis.

For me, just having the Battleship be harder to kill is a massive change(buying one is a good move now).  And, some of the rules are actually based upon player made ones from the 80s and 90s.  The Kamikaze option for instance was around since the 80s in informal play - everyone I knew allowed it.  The main problem with the original game was that sea units were an afterthought in the game design and the game was all about the land war.  The changes make what you do at sea just as important.  Really so on the new Pacific version - almost painfully so if you link the two maps into a “super” game.

It’s also fairly balanced.  The original was only winnable by the Axis if you did silly things like lower armor cost to 4 and so on, or changed to win condition to only one capital, because there was a strategy that would pretty much crush Germany every time like clockwork.  With the new game, a bad combat in the Atlantic and a submerged sub blocking you can cause a massive tie-up.  Germany actually stands a chance now.  And Russia isn’t as horrendously nerfed, either.  In reality, Russia was by far the strongest military force in WWII.  But if you play the original game, it plays like a wet noodle.

It depends, actually.  I have this version, but it came with the 1942 rules changes and the new pieces.  This was basically the 1942 game with the older (easier to see) map.  But IIRC, they only did this for the last couple of months before the “1942” version was released. If it is the latter revised/anniversary rules in a revised box edition, don’t bother - it’s nearly the exact same game.

The big difference is the new Europe/Pacific version because they link into one giant map.  Entirely new territories, rules, and so on.  It’s worth spending the money on, as is the older “Europe” version, IMO - I find it quicker and far trickier to play.  The older “Pacific” just doesn’t do much for me.