I meant if there is a whole airbattle and only 1 side gets through fighters and bombers - that's conceptually wrong.
If it is possible to have 1 air battle round - then 1 ground round, and cycling that way all is good.
I did not meant 'separate air battle' which I think it's a wrong concept by how TripleA works.
What I mean is to give 'AA fire' (like AA, Anti Tank, etc) to fighters / naval fighters against other planes.
It is not a separate battle - but each round fighter shoot at other planes (like each round an AA shoots specifically to planes, and AT to tanks).
I don't think it will be massive work that in terms of coding.
That too can work tbh - but it means some reworking.
Fighters having some AA against other planes when both defending and attacking and less regular attack / defence. (and Naval Fighters too or they'll end up being used as fighters on land too)
That should mirror some 'air battles' too that go each round on.
Armour & Tactical Bombers
I feel that armour is less used an amount, now that the AT got beefed up with its cyclical fire.
I suggest that armour gets +1 attack as well with the Improved Armour tech.
Tactical Bombers are rarely seen beyond the starting allotment. In general a fighter (either type) is more versatile in attack and defence. Even more so as Fighters get the improved range rather easily (same branch) while TACs need strategic technology as prerequisite, so ultimately a Fighter has matching attack of a Tac or differs of 1 (and it's not something you can easily mass to cut a large difference), and Tac helps tanks which are not overly used as of now.
So I feel Tactical Bombers too should get some beef in a way or another.
Given the large map and the span of turns it should take for a meaningful representation of the war I throw here a bundle of suggestions.
More unit tiers of some type. Like 3 fighters plus jet fighters. TWW in comparison has the base, the improved tech and then the advanced unit. I'd simply make the 'improved' a new type of unit instead of boosting all the existing fighters. I see it as like (hurrican > spitfire > typhoon, or Bf109 > FW190 > TA152 type of thing). That can be done for planes, tanks, and in general costy units.
Garrison troops. 0 moving infantry that can be moved only like the AAs, by trucks and trains. Helps a lot to balance quiet sectors and not have the Allies have an early landing start in the first turns - that in TWW is completely ahistorical - or the overly active Chinese army.
Not having Finland 'winterized' on turn1. Most of Axis troops there if not all of them (Germans included) had winter warfare equipment or were trained for - especially Finns. They should be able to move and the like OR if frozen the Soviets should not be able to make progress in the Finnish sector.
Japan Surprise Bonus - add some 'Kamikaze' units that can boost Japanese attack / soak losses in turn1, with some rule (via document) that can only be used vs UK and USA. That should help to mirror the fact the W.Allies suffered the brunt of the sudden attack.
Coastal defence boats. I am not sure how you plan to handle them - but they could have like 0 movement by default and gain a +2 from ports or so? Or remain at 0 movement to defend the coasts where they're placed in (Think of torpedo boats, coastal gunships, monitors, and the like). It would also be nice to evaluate some 'airfield' alike movement bonus for ships in general.
Doctrines technologies. Some troops can start with determined stats and simply being boosted up via techs to mirror warfare preparations. Ideally as manpower is added, in the grand scope there can also be the significant difference of quantity vs quality. Like - basic infantry can be 1-1-1 (attack - defence - movement) and through various techs (Infantry Tech I, Infantry Tech II, etc - be it a mix of improved equipment, training, doctrine) they ramp up to 1 - 2 - 1, then 2 - 2 - 1, then 2 - 3 - 1 and so forth.
Allies will get more PUs (Slightly) from West Afrika - as it is beefed up.
Allies gain 1 BB and 1 DD for free once West Afrika is freed plus X infantries around that zone, which by far will outweight any losses they suffer against 3 INFs (Can't see Germany easily affording planes there)
Vichy fleets defends there, certainly - but Allies can simply do, as you pointed out - their regular Norway / North France tantrum there and simply disregard that change.
I pointed that out already - saying that either Germany gets offensive units there too to require attention or the sector can be mopped up anytime by Allies.
Germany really lacks the means to invest in the sector unless they really want to pay a hefty cost elsewhere.
So as it is now it's pratically a 1 turn affair for USA to go to Azores, and by turn2 or turn3 they land in West Afrika, get the Vichy Dakar fleet as Allied (hefty bonus) and if the minor allies of UK want can skip the scrapping as they neglect the mediterranean alltogether and UK keeps pinning Cairo.
What Red said it's even worse though, Vichy loses flexibility due to the loss of N.Afrika that mandates 1 resource instead of a choice, and ultimately it's a neat Allied gain. Not minor - after I thought on his words.
That in a map that from my perspective is already heavily swinging to Allied favor.
The 'problem' of the man is that the Axis can easily keep a ship there though because Vichy is de facto producing German troops under all terms.
Unless the requirement is to have X PUs kept in Vichy or that Sea-Zone to represent German forces ready to intervene (Even if Vichy produced they're not used elsewhere to be ready to grab ships)
The Germans struggle to bring reinforcements there whereas the Allies can simply wait to Turn2 or Turn3 to gain a richer region, capable of hosting UK facility too in Nigeria - their tradeoff is less pressure in Europe in these turns, which is fair but I do not think it balances out properly once turn 5 is hit or so.
Without sacrificing much of the Cairo defence.
Anyhow - good to see that there are changes and will see how they pan out in practical terms.