New Game, New Strategies
The changes in brief:
Italy/Axis Minors as a 6th player
Soviet/Japanese non-aggro treaty in force
Soviet & Japanese Xenophobia
No new complexes
Infantry recruitment in non-IC areas
Surrender rules based on losing 3/4 "home" Victory Cities
Uk Pacific territories including Australia controlled by USA
Powers listed in proposed turn order
With the Treaty blocking any advance into Russia, Japan has to look elsewhere. Happily there are four possible lines of attack to consider:
1. China. More areas here represent significant expansion, and with the USSR (CCP) and USA (KMT) able to place infantry here Japan might want to close down China permanently.
2. India. A drive through India can choke the UK and bring quick IPC increase to Japan, with the possibility of triple-hitting the UK's Middle Eastern centre with the Italians moving across from Africa and Germany driving down from the Caucasus.
3. Australia. With a significant US/Australian force in close proximity Japan may wish to crush the possibility of a big US build up in the SWP, and so block MacArthur's return to the Phillipines.
4. The Pacific. A large invasion fleet to threaten California and draw American forces away from Europe.
Japan should guard against the 3-hit KO blow of the Chinese taking Peking, the Brits moving through Burma to take Saigon, and the US retaking the Phillipines.
The two main changes (Xenophobia and the Treaty) should balance each other out as the Soviets can move forces west from Siberia, but cannot now be reinforced by the Western Allies (apart from limited IPC convoys). Control of the CCP gives the chance of pricking at Japan without breaking the treaty. But with 3 VCs on the front line with Germany the early emphasis will still be on defence.
With the Italians (hopefully) dealing with it's southern flank, Germany can concentrate on eastern and western campaigns. The obvious strategy is to go all out to KO Russia, preferably with Italian help (Finnish and Romanians).
But the western front is not to be ignored. With all trans-Atlantic crossings now taking at least two turns, U-Boats and Bombers could starve Britain of reinforcements and allow plans for an invasion.
With it's four VCs scattered around the map Britain has to identify priorities, preferably with Allied co-operation. Delhi is within range for Japan, while Italy could mount a determined thrust at Cape Town or the Middle East.
The new boys on the board have obvious targets in Africa and the Middle east, but playing after the UK means that they could start with their precious fleet at the bottom of the Mediterranean. Italy had better convince the Luftwaffe to target the RN on turn one; promise Germany to build infantry in Finland and Romania every turn for the push into Russia.
The treaty means that Japan is much more likely to go after American forces, so you can no longer afford to abandon the Pacific. Your new Command (and VC) in Australia gives you a vital springboard to attack Japan from the off. You can build several infantry in China and Australia early on, while the longer Atlantic crossing and Soviet Xenophobia make it much more difficult to get troops into action against Germany so quickly; and then realistically only in north Africa, or the big build up in England for Sledgehammer.
If you neglect the Pacific, Japan is likely to take Chungking and Sydney meaning they only have to land successfully in West USA to force an American surrender. It's no good having large forces on the East coast as it will be too late to take back Los Angeles.
All in all, I think a more interesting and historical play out. There really is NO EXCUSE for another version of A&A which just defaults once more into columns of German and Japanese tanks headed for Moscow-in-the-Urals, or 3 stacks of Allied infantry piling into Karelia until there are enough to take Berlin.