Balanced Campaign Scenarios?

[HMCS Rosthern]

Anecdotally, there have been statements posted here that campaign scenarios are not really sufficiently tested because it is impractical to test large and long scenarios the required multiple times to make a true assessment. The result is that some campaign scenarios are claimed to be unbalanced and favour one side.
1. Is the consensus that this is true?
2. Across all WDS (Tiller) Operational Campaign game series, and all titles, what campaign scenarios, based on your experieince, do you consider to be the most balanced?

[Liebchen]

Anecdotally, there have been statements posted here that campaign scenarios are not really sufficiently tested because it is impractical to test large and long scenarios the required multiple times to make a true assessment. The result is that some campaign scenarios are claimed to be unbalanced and favour one side.
1. Is the consensus that this is true?
2. Across all WDS (Tiller) Operational Campaign game series, and all titles, what campaign scenarios, based on your experieince, do you consider to be the most balanced?

You should make a poll.

I think that the grand daddy of them all, Smolensk '41, is very balanced, fwiw.

[ComradeP]

The vast majority of the PzC campaigns covered had a clear winner, but it depends on how lopsided the victory was how unbalanced the campaign scenarios are. 

I agree with Liebchen that Smolensk '41 is balanced, also because the historical result was a draw of sorts strategically. The Soviets lost a lot of men, but the German advance towards Moscow was stalled.

One balance issue with many Eastern Front PzC titles, even if the Soviets won the battle, is that the large maps and limited unit density can make a local breakthrough a game winning move. The Soviets also have serious issues with dealing with any kind of Axis mobile defense in 1943 and early-mid 1944. If the Soviets can't pummel the Axis, winning becomes much less likely. Smolensk '43 is likely to have a historical result against equally skilled players due to the Soviets having massive advantages in manpower and firepower, combined with the limited number of German mobile divisions present.

Of all the series, I'd say campaigns in FWWC are most balanced, because forces tend to be more evenly matched and the limited mobility of the era prevents disasters in a limited number of turns. 

A number of the MC campaigns can seemingly also go either way based on comments, but I only have limited experience with the series and only with Certain Strike '87.

[LordDeadwood]

Based strictly on campaigns I have personally played, I would nominate the Salerno '43 campaign (the actual Salerno landings) as being well balanced. I'm currently playing the France '40 campaign which seems fairly balanced, although it may lean in the German's favor. The only other campaign I have played to completion was the invasion of Crete scenario which seemed to favor the Allies pretty heavily.

[JP48]

Doesn't the question of balance have to specify whether against the AI or a real opponent?

[Liebchen]

Doesn't the question of balance have to specify whether against the AI or a real opponent?

That's an interesting point, but given that the Blitz is a club for playing H2H, I just assumed that it was an H2H-related-question.

[jonnymacbrown]

Doesn't the question of balance have to specify whether against the AI or a real opponent?

The A/I is only useful to play a few turns to familiarize one's self with the side you are playing. jonny

[Steel God]

Regarding the previous comments:

1)  I agree Liebchen that S41is balanced (the ALT version), but only if the Russian player is an experienced hand.
2)  Agree with ComradeP that the FWWC campaigns are hands down the most balanced (and interesting) or any game series offered by WDS.  Ed William's abilities as a player and a designer are key to this.  It's rare that a person is both a highly skilled designer, and a highly skilled player.  The CGs in the FWWC games, unlike most titles, are actually play tested and played H2H I might add.
3)  I agree with LDW that Salerno is balanced (the ALT version), not so sure about F40.  I've played a far amount of F40 CGs (ALT versions) and the amount of VPs needed by the Germans in way too low in my opinion, they can literally win by fighting a stalemate along the Meuse.  I've played Crete as well (ALT version) and find it well balanced.
4)  Boo hiss on playing the AI.  Balance is irrelevant against the AI because winning against the AI is like kissing your sister.  

Adding to the list:

I think the N44 CG (not the 700 turn CG the 350 or so CG) can be balanced if you play the ALT versions with the rules the game was designed to be played with (i.e. all of the "Optional" ALT fire resolutions).

I believe the Sea Lion CG (ALT Sept version) to be incredibly well balanced.

I think the Market Garden Scenario (the one in the Scheldt game, on the larger map) to be well balanced.

Sicily "might be" balanced.  I'm not convinced because some of my experience with that title is quite ancient at this point.

I am biased on this one, and it is a niche subject, but Operation Compass in the EA42 title is also balanced, but it's not exciting so doesn't get a lot of press.

That's my opinion - for what that's worth.

[mynorth]

because winning against the AI is like kissing your sister.  

You have to specify the intention of kissing. I kissed my sister on numerous occasions, and I'm not from the Mississippi/Alabama area.

[Liebchen]

because winning against the AI is like kissing your sister.  

You have to specify the intention of kissing. I kissed my sister on numerous occasions, and I'm not from the Mississippi/Alabama area.

Also, since the AI is so easy to beat, typically, it's like kissing your sister, if your sister was easy.