Sorry for totally hi-jacking this thread with the British Vs Nazi armour argument. If anyone is still game to continue the discussion maybe we should start a new thread.
A cold war wargame might be interesting if you completely ignore atomic weapons...
A cold war economic/diplo/stratey game would probably utterly suck - tanglible achievemnts such as acquisition of territory all abstracted into an 'influence' or 'prestige' value as territorial expansion in this era is about as popular as home trepanning kits.
The combat system to be completely redesigned to allow continuous contact. A front could be maintained and held in a retreat for 100's of miles. A Division and certainly a corps could sustain combat over months. Battalions could be rotated. Replacement men and equipment could be fed into the line as needed. If a division did need to be redrawn and refitted, a fresh division could take over its positions.
The combat system to be completely redesigned to allow continuous contact. A front could be maintained and held in a retreat for 100's of miles. A Division and certainly a corps could sustain combat over months. Battalions could be rotated. Replacement men and equipment could be fed into the line as needed. If a division did need to be redrawn and refitted, a fresh division could take over its positions.
I wasn't suggesting that the line should always hold. Sometimes units should be over run. Sometimes the line should be broken. However later in the war, defence in depth and the huge increase in the number of powerful anti tank weapons meant that major breakthroughs were very difficult without very substantial superiority in men and material.