I think McHarg has a point here, but I also agree with Wild Bill.
Some of us, me included, like to identify with the side they play, especially in something as involved as a Megacampaign.
Personally, I used to like to play either British(first and foremost) or American against the Germans or the Japanese, but didn't mind playing the Germans against the Russians, or the Russians against the Japanese.
The reasons for this are peculiar: as a kid I fed my passion for anything to do with WWII on war comics depicting mostly the adventures of British and American servicemen against stereotyped Germans and Japanese.
In my childhood games I used to identify with these guys, and that stayed with me.
Later, especially after I discovered Squad Leader and the Eastern Front, I grew to admire the soldierly qualities of the Germans.
Having always been (and continuing to be) staunchly anti-communist I found it easy to decide that it was OK to fight on the German side against the Russians, as the two regimes were equally repugnant.
This, of course, ignores the fact that the Germans were the aggressor, but it's amazing how intellectually dishonest I can become for the sake of being in a position to command first class troops with sexy equipment.
Lately I find that I am maturing out of these silly distinctions, and I find it easier to play any side in any scenario purely from a miltary interest.
I suppose that the Americans will have a number of Megacampaign prospects, with the early engagements in North Africa, followed by Sicily/Italy, North West Europe and of course the Pacific theater.
But what of the British Imperial Forces?
British forces fought desperate retreat battles in Norway and France in 1940, and then in the Balkans in 1941. They fought the Italians in Abyssinia, and in the Western Desert before the arrival of Rommel.
As Rommel's best period has been covered by the MCNA, there could be an El Alamein Campaign (MCEA), following Eight Army all the way to Tunis from that Egyptian railway station, and including First Army in Tunisia. This does not need to overlap with MCNA, and may attract buyers.
Is it possible to allow a choice of nationalities for the core force with different, tailored scenarios, so that one could play it once as Australians, once as British/Scottish, once as Indian etc. (a multi-mega campaign)?
There could be a Sicilian/Italian campaign, with landings in Sicily, Salerno and Anzio and plenty of desperate fighting in Sicily, all along the Boot on both the Adriatic and Tirrenian coasts and central Italy(Termoli, Ortona, Cassino, Volturno, Garigliano, Monte Camino, Anzio beachead, Trasimeno, Gothic Line etc.), for British, Canadian, South African, New Zealand and Indian troops.
There should be a British/Canadian Normandy campaign, as it was British forces who pinned down the bulk of the German armour around Caen in the early fighting there, extending into Belgium, Holland and eventually Germany.
Finally, there are Burma and New Guinea.
Going back to the Germans, it would be interesting to see a "Desperation Megacampaign" covering their desperate struggle to contain the advance of the Soviet hordes from 1943 to 1945. (From Kursk to the Dnepr, Cherkassy etc.)
Not to mention a Stalingrad campaign covering the fighting for Voronezh, the Don bend, Rostov, the Caucasus up to the desperate battles for the city's ruins and the efforts to relieve VIth Army and escape the trap in the Caucasus.
From the Russian point of view, a Road to Berlin campaign, although it would double up with the German retreat campaign, without necessarily repeating the same battles, given the breadth of period and front, would I'm sure find support.
The scope is quite vast, and I'm sure it will be difficult to cover it all.
Still, one can dream...
:rolleyes:
)
yes yes yes ! I can play the passive role ! that's always better than nothing !!!
)