@SubmersedElk:

I think the term “strafe attack” is in the original rulebook. Been using that term as others here understand it for over 25 years. It’s never referred to anything else, to my knowledge, and is not specific to air-only attacks.

Never heard of a “bleed”.

“Can opener” never refers to a strafe attack. It refers to capturing a territory so that an ally’s fast units can then blitz through it to attack the next level.

I’m afraid you’ve been using the terms wrong all this time.

No need to be afraid of things that are different. The terms we use make sense to us and we know what they mean. Therefore: not wrong. (Or did you mean badwrongfun? I guess they might be that. I suppose we’ll just have to live with that possibility.)

To clarify, a can-opening move refers to any attack that clears the way for fast units to blitz through. Often it will only use air units (and, thus, also be a strafing run that does not capture territory).

Or did the original rulebook have a different definition for “can-opener”?

I submit that, since the terms we have been using all of these years actually make sense, perhaps you have been using them wrong. And if the original rulebook used the term “strafe attack” to refer to a bleed (and, hey, I’ll concede that it might–it’s been many years since I’ve even played that version), I submit that that usage also was ill-conceived.

@Shin:

Everything you need, assuming you already have TripleA, can be found in the game notes here.

I’m afraid Triple A is not an option for me until there’s a mobile version. Haven’t had a desk/laptop computer in quite some time. Can someone at least summarize the major changes (and reasons for them)?

@Shin:

I think the Balanced Mod solves a lot of the problems posed by this strategy, in that it’s less optimal for the Axis to simply bypass Russia and starve them out.

I’ve been reading these boards for years, but I’ve missed this. What is the balanced mod, and where can I find out more about it?

I’ve suggested doing almost exactly the same thing with my group (usually 4 of us, so it would be two 1-on-1 games). Not necessarily around one table, but with linked victory conditions (that is, victory on one board ending the game for both sides). Haven’t tried it yet, though. We tend to spread our games over multiple weeks and a missing player (not uncommon) would really mess that up.

In the circles I’ve played with (for 20ish years, now–jeez I’m getting old!) we’ve always referred to an attack with the intent to withdraw as a bleed and an attack with only aircraft as a strafe or strafing run. Or can-opener, if that is its primary purpose.

I understand this community’s terminology, but I also understand why it can be confusing.