No reason to believe these won’t serve as well as your previous ones. A very practical solution to the space/force ratio issue – ignore it!
The scales of these maps vary within and between them. The first couple are in the region of 25 miles per grid square. The third is a little larger and the fourth about half that. These are clearly larger areas than those over which a brigade sized unit would be spread. Yet, naming the places, putting the rivers in and maintaining the topology should give the right feel to the campaign. It’s a really good, practical compromise solution to the difficulty of KG Klink disappearing into a mass of divisions. I would have been wrestling inconclusively with the time/space scale for months!
Two thoughts occur to me –
The easternmost three columns of Smolensk represent roughly the same ground as the westernmost six columns of Vyazma. Perhaps matching the terrain up a little more might help the sense of continuity of the campaigns?
Operation Typhoon moved the frontline quite a way eastward beyond Vyazma before the Soviet counteroffensive started. Perhaps it’s worthwhile matching the scale of the Vyazma map more to the others and extending it to the east, to a line north/south approximating Volokolamsk/Kaluga, whilst maintaining pretty much the same number of columns? If so the westernmost three columns could directly match the three corresponding ones on Smolensk and the Vyazma map would serve double duty as both Typhoon and Winter Counteroffensive terrain.