WOPR,
I think everyone tries and comes up with a strategy but until it’s tested against good/great players you won’t know it succeeds.
When the game first came out for the 1942 scenario someone came up with what they called a fail proof strategy for Axis, the 1-2-3 punch on Cauc. It works against unsuspecting players and newbies but not against veterans. Also it causes Japan to commit it’s airforce so taking Asia is harder but it gets the job done but at a heavy price.
On paper the strategy was great but our play group implemented and it worked but only because we knew about the strategy and it was eveyones first time playing AA50. This game was no NO and also the Russian player left Cauc open.
In my opinion, if Allies go after Japan hard or if UK goes for a 2 IC or India IC early to stall Japan, it might work against normal players (myself included) but at what cost? How is the European theater? Until you factor in all aspects of the game, the strategy can’t evolve and adapt.
AA has come a long way from the infantry push mechanics by Don Rae (although his papers on deadzone management did wonders for my game) to now. One of the joys of this forum is learning and interacting with others. I would have to say that most people on this site like to learn and contribute to the growth of the game. That’s where the bids come in, house rules, etc. But overall everyone enjoys the competition and the game, I take more pride in winning against an experienced player than against a newbie due to the challenge. Although, dice rolls are part of the game and I don’t mind winning due to some lucky dice rolls.
My two cents. Good luck on your gaming!