I might propose they are mainly focused on where AP's are spent (HQBU's vs OOB ), some allocation of OKH resources , re-purposing of units between fronts .. think of all the big decisions and allocation of resources you make as a single player .. now think 3 players vying for AP's as an example. Fix Gudarin's OOB? Or save AP's so Armor can cut off PSKOV ...
There are subtle compromises in objectives and corrdination between fronts .. but I would contend my previous statement is the big job of the supreme commander for OKH ..
Im not sure I understand what you are saying because I dont quite see the relation with what I was saying.. ?
EDIT : Are you saying, that the supreme commander do not come up with operations to execute to win the war ?
I would certainly come up with operations that have been thought of, prepared, reviewed by ground commanders (according to their area of operation ) and then put in action. ALONG with all the other decisions that has to be made. You cant win a war without a proper plan.
I'm saying .. the supreme commander might be more of a role hearding cats ;)
I suppose it is worth distinguishing what a Supreme Commander has to do, with what it would be good for them to do. The absolute requirement for the game is that the Supreme Commander HAS to allocate things like points, units etc to the others, and their responsibilities. But someone who does that job well might start doing something else - and might find what they have to do a very small part of the game for them.
Personally that is where I think the interest comes from for the role - and the thing I would love to compare notes on with other Supreme Commanders whether or not I am one in this game. Some approaches are
i) Make a strategic analysis of your situation and that of your opponent, develop a grand strategy over multiple turns, and let that lead on to who gets what. Is this Neogodhobo's idea?
ii) Spend a lot of time with other players getting their plans and ideas, seeing where they cannot all be done, and man managing the way to get as much as possible for all. Perhaps what Crackaces is suggesting?
I think there is a lot more to be said on this and it will be a hot topic for the game. Perhaps a "Dummy's guide to how to be a Supreme Commander" can be written afterwards?
The concept of putting together the plans of the individual ground commanders spiced with a vision of the five stages of the game as I highlighted above. If the idea is "I" then the supreme commander simply needs obedient ground commanders .. if "ii" then the supreme commander needs expertise within that front. Given the number of AAR's .. it is easier for one to grasp a small part well than the whole salami ..
"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"