I'd had to take a break from Claude due to being too close to my weekly usage limit. Now that weekly usage is reset, here are Claude's comments on some of the map names:

Hesse → Rhineland: yes. I’ve changed my mind here. Vendetta’s point holds. On your map, “Hesse” borders Belgium, Holland and Lorraine, and the real Hesse touched none of them. The land along that border was the Rhineland (Rhine Province, Saar, Palatinate). My earlier objection was that Cologne sits in your Ruhr territory, but that matters less than the name contradicting the geography a player sees. I’d keep Ruhr as it is: it’s the name everyone knows for that industrial area, and it’s what players will be bombing.

Bohemia: I’d use “Bohemia-Moravia”. Cernel is right that it was one name, and Vendetta is right that label space matters. But Bohemia is one of the largest territories in that part of the map, so the 15-character name fits without crowding (about 150 pixels in a territory roughly 270 wide). If it ever has to be one word, “Bohemia” is a defensible shorthand. I wouldn’t split it into Bohemia and Moravia; that’s a gameplay change for a naming problem.

Württemberg vs Baden: keep Württemberg, low stakes. Both are defensible, as Cernel says. Stuttgart, the region’s main city, is in Württemberg. “Baden-Württemberg” is too long and dates from 1952. If you want Alsace implied, Baden is fine, but on your map Alsace sits inside French Lorraine anyway.

Silesia and Upper Silesia: the split is deliberate, and it’s yours to defend. You drew the Silesia/Cracow line along the 1922 partition so that the Polish-majority part pays Germany no manpower. That’s why Upper Silesia looks cut in half. Cernel’s connection argument is true for 1941 administrative borders (the annexed Żywiec area did touch Slovakia), not for the population line you chose. The German part of Upper Silesia bordered Moravia, and your Silesia does border Bohemia(-Moravia). I’d keep both the name Silesia and the line, and explain the manpower reason in the thread. Splitting Silesia into Lower (west) and Upper (east) is fine if you want more territories there, but it isn’t needed. It also doesn’t fix Schulz’s Berlin-to-Krakow distance complaint, which is a geometry issue, not a naming one.

Neumark: I’d still keep it. The territory east of Berlin, bordering Pomerania, Silesia and Wartheland, is the old Neumark (Brandenburg east of the Oder). “Southern Pomerania” would name the wrong province. Cernel’s reply doesn’t actually argue this one, so I wouldn’t read it as a strong objection.

Budapest → Hungary: yes. It’s a one-territory country, like Austria and Switzerland.

Ruthenia as a 1-PU territory: worth doing, mildly. It’s historically real (Czechoslovak until 1939, Hungarian in 1941, Soviet after). It also fits your population rule neatly: Rusyn-majority, so it gives Hungary/Germany no manpower. Gameplay-wise, it puts a step between Hungary and Lwow, which is the route the Hungarian army actually took in 1941. The cost is one more small territory. It would mean redrawing tiles like France did, but it’s a small job.

@KurtGodel7
Love your effort in trying to balance the game, can't wait to play the definitive release

Name World War II v4 Terminus Edition v3
Description World War II V4 with different territory values, unit costs and some new unit types
https://axisandallies.fandom.com/wiki/World_War_II_v4_Terminus_Edition_v3

Good Points

Bad Points

The end of the game. Round 7. The Soviet Union destroys the German army at Dnepropetrovsk. 76 conscripts to soak up hits, plus 42 anti-tank guns to provide some firepower while soaking up more hits, plus some tanks and artillery to enhance the offensive firepower.

I may need to make some tweaks to help balance this. However, Germany did put up a better fight on the northern part of its eastern front than it did in the southern portion.

The Asian mainland, round 7. Japan would love to just crush China but thus far has been unable to do so. Japan would also like to start pushing Britain out of India, but that hasn't happened thus far. Britain just got Raj tech, which means three free colonial militia for India each turn.

Japan has conquered the Philippines and part of the East Indies. It finally took Hong Kong. Singapore is proving a disturbingly tough nut to crack.

Neutral farming for America Pacific. Also it has been building up its fleet to be able to challenge the IJN. Japan hasn't kept pace with the naval builds, because it's been preoccupied with mainland Asia and the East Indies.

The Soviet Union has been one of Japan's problems. Vladivosok is worth 7. The Soviets recently started placing 9 units a turn there due to industry tech. Japan does not want that war, because it's one war too many.

End of the game tech: Germany had just gotten Speer's Industrialization. It was making good progress with advanced tech. But all that was hollow without Panther tank tech (which it did not yet have). Japan was making good progress with its Japan techs, but the Japan techs it really wanted--the income increasing ones--would not kick in until later in the game. Italy was unlucky with its tech rolls, with nearly everything chosen at random. Britain had made good use of tech (industry tech), the Soviet Union had gotten conscription 1 tech (1 free conscript a turn per factory, so long as the underlying territory is originally Soviet and worth at least 9). Possibly the most successful for tech was America Pacific. It had discovered fleet carrier, it had an SPC, and it had extended range for piston tech. (Allowing its fighters, heavy fighters, dive bombers, and torpedo bombers to have a range of 4.)

Conclusion: I could have played better with both sides. No question there. That said, I believe the map is unbalanced in favor of the Allies. Germany got distracted from its eastern front too quickly. Japan could maybe use a couple extra transports with which to start the game. Britain can exert too much pressure too quickly in France, and it's difficult for Germany to counter that due to Britain's advantage in local unit placement capacity. Italy had some success, but it didn't look as if that success was going to turn into anything decisive. America Atlantic's income grows over time--I think it hits full income on round 10--so it was going to be able to put more and more economic pressure on Italy.