From: Land o' Lakes, FL
If the war in Russia game allows for the possibility of German victory
You get into the debate of how they define "victory", and what is the justification for it.
My defination of "victory" should be, given that the simulation is historical, if you do better than your historical counterparts, then you should "win". But if the simulation, well isn't, and that the yard-stick of "did I do better than history", is pointless.
For me, if WiR is an accurate historical simulation, then if the German player were exceed the over-all gains of his historical counterparts, he would win. Maybe he doesn't caputure Moscow or Leningrad. But maybe he rolls to Urals (or whatever). If the game is an accurate simulation, and he has accomplished more than his historical counterparts, he wins.
I can also buy the point that, so are less concerned with historical accuracy, and really do want to explore some of the more (IMO) outlandish situations. Maybe there's a scenario where Patton stages a coup, takes over military, marches past the Elbe, and leads the charge with the remaining German forces into Russia. At that point, the historical yard-stick is pointless, because it's absurd to begin with. Despite my reaction, even I would still find it an amusing scenario to play. Just don't call it a historical possability. If the game allows for those outlandish possabilities, the victory conditions SHOULD take those possabilities into account fairly, and victory conditions should be written accordingly.
"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me