Very good point, Keenan.
Since its debut with SC1, this strategic series employed certain abstractizations and concepts which more or less remained unchanged to this day and which, IMO, provide us with a very enjoyable game.
Both sides benefit of certain tools to try to achieve their objectives:
1. Stronger starting position and stronger economy early on
2. Being a continental power they make better use of inner lines of communication/transport which allow rapid redeployment of units across the territory they control. Here we got the so called "teleporting" of units - if we think a SC turn is 2 weeks (correct me if i am wrong), maybe it doesn't sound that far fetched. Okay, IRL, if you operate 4 panzergruppen, 5 armies, 3 HQs from Kiew to Paris in 2 weeks - that is not gonna happen not because trains are too slow but because there ain't no rails and trains to accomodate that in the first place :D - but in the game both sides can do it - UK/USA can operate from washington/london all the way to Arabia or Persia, in one turn as well. If both sides can do it, it is more or less balanced (admittedly Germany can employ it more efficiently, but it is not a game breaker by any means). OFC there are ways around it like going for 1 week turns and halving the operational movement to make it look more real but I, frankly, don't have a problem with it.
Operating a unit, besides the visible mpp cost and readiness/morale hit, also has an opportunity cost associated with it - what would the unit have achieved if it stayed and fought on site versus what it may achieve once it is operated on a new front.
3. Troops/HQs experience is high - the benefit of fighting since 1939 - this is quite a challenge for the Allied player, many times the combat rolls are ridiculous in favour of Axis so the allied player has to go the long way in order to kill them - got for supply, go for HQs, fight in low Axis supply areas, etc.
4. Ability to apply massive force in an area of its choosing - this last item more or less sums up the main Axis tactics in this game after all.
1. Slower economic start, ramping up collosally after USA and Russia are in the game - by design, Allies favourite strategy will be drawing Germany into an attrition war she cannot win. Allies will win, not by employing super experienced troops but by employing lots of them and having the ability to replace quickly anything Axis kills.
2. Ability to act in virtual any corner of the map via amphibious landing supported by their powerful navies. A very strong tool, almost on par with germany's use of inner lines for operational movement. And modelled as abstract as the op move is, as well - can you imagine embarking in NYC on a landing ship and crossing the Atlantic and land and conduct combat? Or going thru a wormhole in the middle of the ocean and appearing in the red sea/persian gulf? :) Certain concepts have to be abstractized, there is no way around it.
3. Ability to employ the "total air war" strategy. In contrast to Axis, which can build just a couple of strategic bombers, the Allies can use scores of them to ruin the Axis mpps and wreck their lines of communication/supply. The strategy is less likely to work in a fast game but once the game stalled a little bit, this can be a decisive factor.
4. Op movement - yes this tool is available to them as well - Russia makes use better of it first, then once the Wallies gain ground in europe, they can employ efficiently as well.
So each side has certain strengths and weaknesses, make use of abstract concepts which may seem unrealistic but are totally necessary in a game like this - all in all a pretty well done game and enjoyable experience.