In revised usa can land in africa without losing tempo (one transport= 2 units per turn) but cannot do this for europe so usa is basically forced to go via africa rather than Europe, this force UK to go via norway (except early rounds or major target in Europe). All games ive seen followed this template. Because USA is forced to go via Africa you dont need to worry about being too light or too heavy in Africa.
In the classic game if you went too light in Africa than you would need to land again in Africa wich was often disastrous. If you are left with too many units in Africa when you retake Africa allies would usually have a hard time on Europe/Asia. In classic units allies stuck into Africa should never be able to come back into play via persia vs any decent Axis opponents. So unless Germ had also invested strongly in Africa going too heavy in Africa is dangerous for allies. In rev URSS is also more solid and its less easy for Japan to get to it so allies get get into play via Africa wich mean that the part of the game is a no brainer.
In the classic omaha game common bids are usually 6 inf that can be split Lybia, manchuria EE and ukraine. 3-3,2-2-2,3-2-1 4,2 were common bids 17 bids with a sub was also common bid. With revised the bids are of course often the same. High bids are great, they introduce complexity, strategy without any luck factor.
In revised you have a lot more of critical opening battles wich obviously lead players to play LL. Battles like retaking Algeria or clubbing fleet can be brutal.
For me a dice game that endup being played mostly LL is just a failure. Dice allow players of different caliber to play each other and create variance, however I still think LL got its place especially for naval and AA.
For the V6 map its very interesting that going in Africa take 2 moves, this mean that Usa got different options. Maybe uniting mexico and panama and allow crossing venezuela this would allow usa to walk its units into brazil and transport bridge between brazil-- Africa.