Itās not that surprising that the 1942.3 setup would be roughly balancedā¦itās adding 14 points of units to the Allies, and subtracting 6 points from the Axis, for a total of a 20 point swing, which is comparable to the bids being offered in competitive 1942.2 play.
What I dislike about the new setup is that beyond securing a rough balance between the factions, Ā the new setup does very little to address what I see as 1942.2ās major weaknesses:
() the irrelevance of the periphery, e.g. Norway, Anzac, Brazil, South Africa, Urals
() the direct pipeline from Tokyo through China to Moscow
() an un-thematic, un-imaginative repeat of Pearl Harbor that leaves the US without any good reasons to fight near Midway, the Solomons, New Guinea, or any of the other 1942-era Pacific flashpoints.
() the near-total absence of counterplay for the UK, US, and China in the first three rounds. The Allies need at least that much time to stockpile infantry and rebuild their fleets, which can be slow and boring work. Adding extra infantry to India doesnāt exactly scream āfear my clever counter-attack.ā I get that the Axis start the game on offense in 1942, but it shouldnāt be a 100%-0% split. The Allies should have some options somewhere on the board in at least some openings for a plausible early counterattack, and I just donāt see it.
Also, for what itās worth, I have now been waiting for over ten days for Larry Harris to approve my comment on his website.