Question / Thought
As the continued balance question keeps coming up, there should be a "historical" setting, based on testing of the game based on what each side did in the war, particularly the early and late periods. If you played with the game set to "historical", and both players played exactly like each side did, you would see roughly the same results in the same time period. Now if that result is unbalanced because players of either side used a different plan, for example pushed to take Leningrad (and most can currently in WitE1, when historically Hitler only wanted to destroy/starve the City out, so the Germans never really tried to take Leningrad, only besiege...anyway), will there be alter net settings as in WitE now to give a +/- to different areas of the game to achieve that balanced game?
Also, just one comment about WitE1 currently, the beauty of the current system is it allows anyone who has ever played a hex based operational war game,to pretty much jump right in and play. You do not need to know how all the "systems" work, you just have to make common sense decisions, and if you follow history, you won't go too wrong. Now compare that with War in the Pacific: AE, where if you are playing Japan and you do NOT understand the production system, it will hurt you badly. Simple with depth is great, just don't let the depth become "Chrome" that most of the time becomes a way to manipulate the game systems (as everyone will if given a chance) to gain an edge. Keep it historical, keep it simple, and make it force you to make the decisions real Commanders had to make when faced with a situation. I know many players want to be able to change industry and build what they want, and I have no problem with that, but it should be an optional setting, because it deviates from the historical.
"Actions Speak Louder than Words"
"Give me liberty, or give me death"
"Pass the salt, please"