Another website which has some interesting map changes (and some other ideas as well) is:
http://www.wargamer.com/axisandallies/original/houserules/gamester/aaa.html

Of course, it does require taking a magic marker to your board, but I think it could be worth it.

I played once as Germany (and this was with Russia and GB under the same person), and quickly ran over Russia, and then the rest of Asia (although Industrial Tech did help a bit). It really isn’t fair to the Allied players, except maybe America, because they rely on each other far more than Germany and Japan: unless you play same set-up, it’s just going to be a mess.

Wait, so according to this, Britain and the U.S. can each spend 4 IPCs to raise the defense of Karelia by 1 for an entire round? Essentially, Germany will lose an extra 2-5 units early on, which can cripple their attack. Makes the Axis road even harder, but it is realistic. Maybe if in Mainland Asia only?

If you mean how many troops are in one unit of Inf or what have you, I’d say that one Inf is 10,000, an Arm is about 1000 tanks, and a Fighter is about 100. The carrier and battleship almost have to be single, but I don’t know what that would mean for subs and transports . . . I doubt the makers really knew how much was in each of them.

The 2nd Ed rules call it “bridging,” and they specifically say that you cannot move more than 2 Inf or 1 Arm like this. After all, a transport can’t send ten separate loads for D-Day at the same time.

What’s Germany doing on the U.S. West Coast? I’ve never seen a game where that could happen, although East Coast is possible, just not easy to hold for long.

Wow: 7.1% odds. Now, the time it would take to play 14 of these games is the same as one or two standard games, but still, just go for Russia. Hitler WAS right to attack the Soviets instead of the Brits. Then again, Russia would have probably betrayed Hitler if Operation Sealion had actually happened . . .

From what I see, your strategy does nothing to attack Sinkiang, China and India, giving them time to build ICs and making the Japanese road to Russia essentially impossible. Also, what about the U.S./U.K. shuck? If the conveyor belt really gets going, you have to deal with 6-8 Inf a turn, if not more, and that will make Russia impossible to defeat without sacrificing Berlin. Play your strategy with a little more support on WEu and knocking out Southern Asia (which also gives Japan $7 to use, not the Allies), and it will probably work. Just going through Manch is asking for trouble.

I agree with Kidhorn that an India IC is dangerous, but S.Af can’t do anything: two tanks a turn, yes, but it will take them so long to get up there that Japan will be threatening Moscow, and you’ve been cutting the shuck out of 10 IPC’s a turn for NOTHING!!! Of course, an IC is cheaper than two trannys, but the India fighter and the Syria inf can retake AES anyways . . . so don’t bother.

Typically, when I play, Japan is going to take India and Sinkiang on turn one, so it makes sense for Britain to, rather than build an IC in S.Af, have the Ftr and Syria Inf (assuming there’s only one unit there), and possibly have the tranny drag one India inf if there’s two armor or an armor and an Inf in AES, so the S.Af. IC’s no help, as Africa’s safe, and drop an AC and tranny in the UK Zone, so that the shuck is ready for UK2 and possibly even US1