And most folks like the idea of a "balanced" build of 4 INF and 3 ART to provide both good defense and to maintian Russia's offensive punch.

Really? I was quite under the impression that most people go with 8 inf. I'm the only person I know on these boards who goes 4 inf 3 art.

Territory-trades of Bel/Kar/Ukr keeps Germany well pinnedm unable to grow

That's precisely why a build of 4 inf 3 art is good. Having more artillery lets you trade more territory and a lot easier if the Germans decide to throw more than just minimal 1-2 inf in a territory. You only have 2 planes to spread over 3 territories of trading, so you're going to need some offensive pieces to keep the trade up.

Part of the reason for this is how I like to use my initial Russia units, so I need some extra pieces for Europe

If you mean one extra piece, then ok...

The reason I don't like trying to hold Buryatia is that it puts your infantry out of position to counterattack. If you hold the lines in Novosibirsk you can completely crash the Japanese offensive in Sinkiang or Yakut, because your fighters are tanks are in range. The way you do it, once sinkiang is taken then you have to divert forces from Caucasus/Moscow to defend Novo/Kazakh, since your Yakut infantry aren't in a position to do anything about it, or if they move, then they're giving up territory.

Aww Octo you can discuss strategies with us! Just because you haven't seen your strategy posted so far doesn't mean we haven't seen it or tried it ourselves or posted about it farther back in the boards or on different websites  I don't want to wait what could be weeks before we even get to see your thoughts and analyses 

Well I just hope that I don't bring bad dice luck on the both of us 

I don't mean to whine to sound so whiny about bad dice, but I hardly would say that the last couple games have improved my strategies or are a source of strategy to study : P

Well our last two games together have shown very little "real" strategy unfortunately, it was indeed one bad dice slammer after another.

Japan HAS done exactly what I said it could do...

Well, for the record, it didn't even come close to killing on Russia on Round 5-6 when the dice didn't ridiculously go against me. Becoming a 50 IPC nation is a different thing than winning the game ; )

Well Octopus, as Hannibal Lector said, "Thrill me with your acumen!"

I'm interested in seeing your strategy and seeing what your math showed you. This game is math based after all and I wish I were smart enough to analyze it the way you do.

is it impossible to win as the Axis? No, even against a decent player.

I never said it was impossible, I was making the point that it is improbable without a bid. I find that the Axis is usually between 1-2 rounds too late to make it an even game with the Allies; Japan is simply too slow and/or Germany wilts too fast.

Ncscswitch started off on the same note too when he came to the Revised boards, he was like OMG THE AXIS ARE SO STRONG and now look at him 

After many games, I believe the opposite remains true - the Allies have the advantage without any bids or lucky dice, though not nearly as badly as what I've read of Classic. Germany loses its territories a bit too easily, and Japan is miles away from being able to help and can its momentum can be broken somewhat easily because of the 3 prongs of attack, and Africa is easily put back into Allied hands. I have won a lot of games as the Axis, but usually against less experienced players who are easily intimidated by mass tanks, who don't contest Africa, and who really don't coordinate well nor are aggressive enough.

Russia turn 1: Build 4 infantry, 3 artillery. Attack Belorussia with 3 inf from Karelia, both fighters. Attack West Russia with everything else that can reach. Sub goes to UK fleet, all other infantry retreat west. Deploy 3 inf 1 art in Caucasus, and 1 inf 2 art in Moscow.

UK turn 1: Depends a little bit on the German build. I usually now start with 2 tran + 3 inf + 1 tank. This changes if the Baltic fleet was reinforced or not (if not reinforced, then I am more aggressive and build a carrier, invade Norway, and destroy the Baltic fleet on turn 1). If Egypt was invaded, I counterattack with troops from India and the fighter from the navy. I'm now going back to having the Australian fleet run east with a couple of inf (in 2 turns they can reach Africa).

US turn 1: Start with a carrier + 2 trans + 2 tanks. Position everything to go for Germany.

Turn 2 depends on what the Axis has done.

Sounds pretty much like a normal tactic, except are you at all trying to trade the territories that have like 1-2 German inf on them? I usually go spearing on like Round 3 or so as the Russians, but I really don't like to let the Germans sit on those frontline territories for free. If I saw such a focused beam as Germany I would do the exact same thing in Eastern Europe except I'd be throwing some casual forces to take territories since you're not diverting unless it's a bigger force.

I do this "vector" attack once the Brits can land in Karelia consistently and push right up next to Berlin. Do you mean something else like push right from the start or something? I'm not sure if I'd do that because it's inflexible and gives the Germans perhaps quite a few consistent and "free" IPCs (ukraine, karelia, archangel). Your spearhead is also going to meet very very strong resistance in Eastern Europe especially once the Germans see your stack in Belorussia. Do you also mean to ignore Belorussia in the first turn attack? It's not a bad thing necessarily if you do, I'm just trying to figure out your strategy.

Giving Germany those IPCs could make a vector attack from the get-go very difficult. You'd be sending like 24 IPCs of trailing equipment versus ~40 IPCs of defense.

Round 1 the Baltic fleet is gone to 2 fighters + 1 bomber, and the UK purchase is 2 tran 3 inf 1 tank.

If the UK wants to gamble a bit on that one.

It's about 74% for the UK to wipe out an unbuffed Baltic fleet. If somehow something survived then the American fighter + bomber should take care of it.

Point taken but again if Germany sees a UK build on UK1 of the transports plus INF/ tank then it's a matter of putting some more INF there and moving some of the tanks purchased during G1 in (along with airforce which, most likely, there is a presence anyways)

But you would actually have to dedicate quite a bit of force to defend Western Europe, which is force you're not using against Russia.

I would consider light tank builds for Germany somewhere around 3. You can always turtle as Germany and go heavy INF if you need but later in the game it's not as easy to get the offensive weapons out on the board as it is earlier, thus my preference for the offensive firepower right away.

Very interesting way of looking at it. I look at it precisely in reverse, perhaps because of what I've read of the old school A&A classic - always try to mass more infantry first than offense, because infantry takes the longest to get places, provides the most efficient defense, and gives you great fodder for attacks. Buying too many tanks weakens your ability to hold territories well, and it gets costly when you're burning up tanks vs the enemy's infantry fodder.

I have done mass tanks build in the past, and they did very well against my friends...but they were inexperienced and applying so little pressure on Germany that I could run them over in like 4-6 turns. I'll have to try your medium tank build (I would call it medium since you're buying equal amounts of infantry/tanks), but I sort of recall trying something very similar to that once and I just didn't have enough defense at some point for some reason. I'll try it again....

How early are we talking about a UK landing in West Europe?

We're talking round 2 if you don't beef up the Baltic. Round 1 the Baltic fleet is gone to 2 fighters + 1 bomber, and the UK purchase is 2 tran 3 inf 1 tank. That means 4 inf + 3 tank + 1 art + battleship + remaining airforce can attack Western Europe on Round 2, and a UK purchase in Round 2 could instantly reinforce the navy with say a carrier or something if the German airforce looks problematic.

Germany can take Africa and hold it if she is willing to committ some of the air power there, even with the Indian replenishment.

You can't take Africa in the long run without spending too much effort there. Any airforce you commit down there is stuff not being used against the Russians, nor threatening any of the Allied shipping. The Allies can always make 1 big drop in Algeria and start marching down on turn 2 (latest 3) which costs you resources to deal with.

Just how heavy are your tank builds? Like 6 tanks + 3 infantry, about that much?

Well, I guess the games I've played have been a bit more aggressive on the part of the Axis. Interrupting the US shuck with a small landing in Alaska plus taking out Africa (thus depriving UK for a few rounds) will keep the Allies at bay and, quite frankly, and especially if you are going with a pretty heavy tank build as Germany, you can chip at Russia for a few rounds and finally have them ready to get cracked. The key is never letting them get where they can purchase offensive weapons (tanks in this case) and make them stick to INF/ RTL combos, weakening that ability every turn due to IPC loss. I do appreciate what you're saying, however; just presenting another view.

How is this done exactly?

With a heavy tank build as Germany, you probably have very little defense for your Baltic fleet, as well as Western Europe. This means the UK is landing in Europe very early, which isn't good. I beat my friends using a pure mass tank build for the first 3 rounds, but they are inexperienced.

Taking out Africa is pretty difficult if the UK takes India troops and attacks Egypt on round 1, followed by a Round 2 landing in Algeria with both US/UK troops.

A small landing in Alaska is unlikely to disrupt the US shuck significantly, as they can have 5 infantry sitting in Western Canada from initial troops, the bomber from London can reach Alaska, plus any landing you do removes pressure from Russia.

Played properly, I do believe Germany can blast Russia into submission within a few rounds (barring really bad roles) or at least have them on the ropes. They can usually do this before either side is ready to land in WEu, unless the Allies are VERY aggressive.

I personally don't think so. I think that if any nation falls before Round 6-7, then it's bad dice or bad strategy. The Allies aren't in control of their navy and their system if they aren't dropping stuff in Europe by Round 3 at the latest, and they should have been doing things in Africa as well as threatening Western Europe so Russia shouldn't be in dire straits.

You can't deploy forces in a complex you just captured; it has to be in a complex you've had control of since the beginning of the turn.

But yeah if the Russians spread to a 3-way attack, then take advantage of where they failed because there's a very good chance that one of those attacks failed or depleted their forces too much.

I don't think it's feasible to retake any territories and not turn them into deadzones. West Russia is absolutely out of the question, as even if you have terrific dice and somehow overcome the stack there, both the Moscow and Caucasus buys are ready to hit you. Any territories other than West Russia are subject to an counterattack by the West Russia stack, so...

The only way I can think of is if you buy 8 tanks to start with and go en force into Ukraine or something. Then your deadzone would be more effective temporarily and probably the Russians wouldn't try to attack you if you massed there because of the 8 tanks coming right behind, but it's very hard to maintain a constant stream of tanks if UK decides to pick up on the lack of defense for the Baltic fleet.