After I have actually played the game in http://vdiplomacy.net/board.php?
gameID=34010 some actual play feedback.
Disclaimer: This particular game had a huge wrench thrown in in the mid-game when Austria muted the entire Western Triangle, so my experience might be warped.
Myself I ended up playing England.
Both Germany and France turned out to be good and reliable neighbours, so we went for Italy and Russia with Germany dividing its attention between the two.
By the late game the Western Triangle Alliance still held and ended up in a 3-way draw.
In Calhamer, things would have exploded after Russia and Italy had been taken out, as there would have been no serious way for England to expand but to backstab Germany or France. The Egypt warp zone is a real game changer that allows England to work on the south-east instead, and takes a lot of sting out of the Western Triangle. Combined with its beefed up strength it makes it darn easy for a Western Triangle Alliance to mop up the map once it is going, but it was also very unusual to have the West resolve so smoothly without 1 out of 3 players being a dick about Burgundy, the Channel or Belgium.
Italy ended up badly mauled by mid-game, but that was visibly driven by diplomatic blunder. Italy tried for Switzerland without securing the help of either France or Germany, and ended up getting dog-piled by both plus Austria. (And I have tried to rig an alliance of Italy with either in 1901 - Germany and France both being too busy in the south is always good news for early-game England.)
Russia ended up between a rock and a hard place, but that is to be expected from a concentrated Anglo-German attack combined with Austrian support. It wouldn't have been very different on Calhamer.
Turkey blundered in 1901 when it agreed to make EMS and Syria a DMZ, moved to Syria in Spring and then backpedaled when I announced to move back into Egypt (which I did follow through).
I never attacked Turkey before the end-game, but it never found its momentum after that and never seriously got past Bulgaria. (Not that this fate is untypical in Calhamer either, especially when Turkey doesn't commit and follow through one particular game plan from Spring 1901 on, but changes its mind in Autumn 1901.)
One thing that I have noticed is that England has to always keep an unit near Egypt, as Egypt is impossible to win back from NAO alone once it gets occupied. (And once an attack to reclaim it can be supported from Africa, Syria or EMS, Turkey is usually already in its death throes anyway.) What the game would need is two northern sea provinces bordering Egypt. You could either cut NAO in half and add Artic Sea (or Reykjavik Bay or whatever), or you could also allow access from MAO (which would fuel conflict and paranoia between England and France).