@kondi754: I feel like this thread has been hijacked enough as it is so I'll keep it (relatively) brief. Ultimately this is all about a game and there will undoubtedly be some speculative scenarios that are more far fetched than others, though I imagine the attraction of a "What If Hitler Does Not Invade the USSR" would be a campaign path in which Germany builds up its naval and air forces for war with Great Britain and possibly the United States rather than just a variant of the war in the East with the Soviets as the aggressor.
The war games you mentioned have been known for years; like all war games, they are hypothetical (some more than others...I'm sure the US has run ones for invading Canada). The Red Army's general staff would have been very neglectful of its duties indeed if it did not conduct war game scenarios against a foe whose leader openly wrote of seizing and colonizing large tracts of their country (Hitler was not alone...the notion that Eastern Europe ought to be German-ruled was shared by many Wehrmacht officers who had served in Russia during World War I and the Russian Civil War).
You obviously are well-read and are entitled to your opinions, though I am a little baffled that you give such credence to a theory that is treated with derision by nearly all reputable historians of the Nazi-Soviet War. (David Glantz is a pretty dry author who is careful with his words, so that makes his remarks (linked) about the "Suvorov Thesis" (i.e. an unprovoked Soviet attack on Nazi Germany) all the more striking).
http://mr-home.staff.shef.ac.uk/rzhev/rzhev2.html
The Failures of Historiography: Forgotten Battles of the German-Soviet War (1941-1945)
“While many detailed Soviet works on the war display sound scholarship and are accurate, unfortunately the most general and most accessible to Western readers tended to be the most biased, the most highly politicized, and the least accurate. Even the soundest works have been vetted ideologically, and the authors have been forced to write their accounts with the narrowest of focuses. These realities undercut the credibility of these works (fairly or unfairly), permitted German historiography and interpretation to prevail, and, coincidentally, damaged the credibility of those few Western writers who incorporated Soviet historical materials into their accounts of the war. These stark historiographical realities also explain why, today, sensational, unfair, and wildly inaccurate accounts of aspects of the war so attract the Western reading public.”*
*For example, see Viktor Suvorov (ne Rezun), Ledokol (Icebreaker) and Den'-M (M-Day), whose preposterous claims about blame for the war pervert history for political purposes and profit."
