Perhaps you should run through the forums to read all the complaints and accusations from some Axis players first.
What makes you think I haven't? ... I've been stalking this forum for quite some time tbh. My point was though, as have also been pointed out previously, that two wrongs don't make one right. Especially not so when the two issues (wrongs) are unrelated, ie there is no point in using the Lvov opening as an excuse to keep the Blizzard the way it is as they are unrelated.
The only way the Germans could have avoided their total supply breakdown in 1941 would have been to not invade the Soviet Union. They were not even close to being prepared logistically for the winter. The war was supposed to be over by then, according to their plan. There was no expedient or makeshift that could have avoided the catastrophic supply failure they experienced.
The blizzard rule in this game has a lot of problems. But causality isn't one of them.
This is fairly accurate, there are alot of underlying causes but in essence the germans did not have a contingency plan in the case that the Soviet Union managed to hold out until the winter. Lack of winter clothing, low manpower reserves, lack of spare parts for tanks and vehicles overall, overstreched supply lines and so on, there are numerous issues they were facing that all together left the german army in a very weak state by the end of operation typhoon.
(I have no figures but a guess would be that the germans were on overall somewhere around 50% TOE average, a german army in equal state in the game facing a soviet army in the blizzard with the rules as they are would stare down at Operation Bagration on steroids. That is also the point I am arguing, the germans were in bad shape at the start of the soviet counteroffensives but they were not in much worse state when the frontlines consolidated in late february/early march 42).
Peltons suggestion may give a somewhat more accurate depiction, although the exact numbers would have to be tested as well as how long the effect should last, my gut feeling is that 2 turns [might] be too little and maybe 3 or perhaps 4 turns might be needed but that is what playtesting is for. If we compare to history, what he suggests is essentially to give the soviets the capacity to knock the germans out of fortified positions (this may require more than 1 turn which is why I'm not sure 2 turns are enough) and then the game becomes alot more open as the germans, unlike the soviets, can not commit large number of units to dig defenses in depth.
The Blizzard rule in its current form simply dictates the entire 41 campaign for the axis side. It's all about getting far enough to be able to give ground, transport troops to germany so they don't suffer penalties and even the strategical value of Leningrad is highly increased since a large part of the axis ability to be able to cope with the blizzard to even a slight degree depends on the ability to free up the Finns. If the blizzard rule is rewritten then the focus shifts from trying to survive the blizzard and to a more open (and hopefully more enjoyable) game, for both sides. The reason I believe this is because Leningrad will not automatically be the number one priority of any decent axis player, which means it opens up choices again for both sides. Do the germans go for Leningrad, Moscow or both Leningrad and Moscow? As it is now, an axis player who has atleast a bit of experience, will almost always aim for Leningrad first and after that, go for Moscow once Leningrad is taken. Never the other way around, atleast from what I can tell.
I'll just end up with some historical speculation just to flesh things out. The germans reached Leningrad in august 41, there is nothing that actually says they could not have assaulted the city (whether it would have fallen or not is another matter). However, it is likely that if an assault on such a major city had been undertaken it would probably not have started until late august or early september and had probably taken most of september (and more) to reach a conclusion. From a game pov this would essentially have made it too late to regroup AGN to participate in offensive operations against Moscow, which seems fine to me, as it would force the axis player into a similar situation as the german high command, ie: do we commit (in force) to taking Leningrad or should we aim for Moscow.