I think Shane considers all CGs to be balanced....in the context that they are historical recreations of the actual battle.
A campaign gives you everything you need to win, or lose.....it depends on how you use it. Scenarios are what I call finite, meaning you have so many turns to accomplish your goal,both players know their opponents OOB and can plan a strategy for it. So if you have 8 turns to complete a game and you have 15 squads, 3 LMG, 1 MMG, and two Pz IV, then that is what you have. The only real variables are time( limited), luck, and very limited resources. One wrong mistake can cost you the game. So it requires a rigid timetable ie) 8 turns, a set objective ex) take that house, so your opponents side has to be designed with that same set of variable, except they may be the attacker or the defender. The scenario must be balanced to provide both sides a reasonable chance to win.But in a campaign setting you cannot achieve balance. Why...............it is called the OOB................like RO you have close to 30-35 RG's this gives you thousands of different combinations to work with regarding force selection, for a given day. Also if you maintain the historical context when a HASL is designed then balance is out the window. I am definitely not a designer , but I know WW2 history. If you have a HASL with say 30 CG days like Red Barricades then you have a huge number of random variables and outcomes. Force selection for each HASL, = the 30 days x the thousands of possible combinations due to the large OOB for each side.Add in who won or lost on a certain CG day, then that creates more variables, one side may get extra purchase points to apply to the next cg if they lost several days in a row., or the number of purchase points may depend on a modified secret roll. So a OOB for a certain CG day may be random or known. So to add another reason why you cannot really balance a HASL is this: the CG day itself. for RB CG3 it is 30 CG days long. That is 30 different outcomes for both players. Currently I am on turn 3 of the first day of RO CG 2 , both sides are beating each other senseless and neither has made remarkable progress, why the Hall 4 is a deathtrap for a attacker and a free fire zone for the defender, which is historically correct. After three turns the Germans have been victim to 24 separate sniper attacks, slowing down the advance , while the germans have half of Hall 4 due to a sweetheart roll for accuracy to place a 100mm.. OBA SR dead on target, the result was a lot of dead russians. so for both sides a success. but turn 4 could be totally different, So the results for this CG day will change the plan for the next., So in short every CG will produce an unknown outcome, which means each player will have to re-adjust their plan for the next CG day. So as in real life, a commander will have to re-adjust their plan according to the success of the previous day. If anything I can tell you is that you can have an elite OOB and still lose due to luck no matter how you plan and execute that plan. Balance in a campaign does not really exist. But where a scenario with 8 turns fails is due to this, you only have 8 turns to meet you objective,you need to be beat your opponent by beating his timetable , or ensuring your timetable is followed , there is no second chance. But a campaign game gives you multiple chances to succeed and multiple chances for your opponent to succeed.
The Red Factories cannot be balanced, why
1)there is a mind boggling number of outcomes concerning each CG day.
- Variable lengths of each CG day changes possible outcomes
- Huge OOB for each side to chose from = a massively effective FOG of war, you do not know your opponents plan.
- night assaults can change your operational plan
- Both sides may select an idle day to R an R their troops
- The concept of a timetable exists but has to be flexible
7)A HASL must try to remain as close as possible to the historical record,otherwise it will not produce a more historically possible result. ie) The German 6th army with luck could have been successful, because both sides were able to win. RO and RB are historically close for the ASL system. Players can win on both sides, it all depends on how you use your OOB efficiently, how adaptable you are wrt dealing with a successful CG day , or an CG day where you did not accomplish you mission. In short a scenario is not even close to a campaign game, the scenario is balanced to provide an reasonable chance for either side to win. In a campaign game, you follow a flexible timetable , with multiple chances to obtain a successful CG victory, balance does not even enter this topi, if you want to keep the spirit of the historical record alive.