I like breaktrough, the only map i take my cromwell out for a spin, i just love flanking panthers and panzers there.. Ticket bleed RUINS some of the greatest maps for FH, dont do it to breaktrough as well.
I could see adjusting the ticket count, though, to account for no bleed. In general, though, bleed invites poor tactics, I find.
If I was designing BF1942 over again, I'd DRASTICALLY change the scoring system. You'd get points for kills and captures, of course, but you'd also get points for healing/repairing, and an extra point for kills while defending or attacking within a flag radius (as opposed to random kills out in the field).
But, the thing I'd do with bleed is completely alter what it represents and change how it works. Maps would have standard time limits set by the server still. But, instead of the bleed we have now, you'd ACCUMULATE points while holding them, rather than LOSING points if you don't. Servers could set caps (IE: first team to 1000 points wins) or base it on time (team with the most points at the end wins). Alternatively, I'd set it so that you get points for holding territory, but lose points for losses of troops. So, you might, at the end of the map, control all the territory, but you'd have your victory graded down because it was too costly. This is kind of similar to the system you have in Steel Panthers where you can still capture all the territory flags, but end up having only a marginal victory because you took too many losses, or that you can still be holding territory but lose the map because you take too many losses. So, maybe the servers would have a ceiling and a basement. The ceiling would be "1st team to get X points wins" and the basement would be "1st team to lose X points loses."
Breakthrough is nice. Too many Typhoons though, which pretty much guaruntee Allied victory. I've never lost the map as allies.
I like Breakthrough, along with Valirisk and Nordwind one of the best maps. One major flaw in .66 though: the damned camo StuGs that you can't see nothing with :(