The same question was posted on this forum yesterday:
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=42532.0
Conceptually, the notion raises a couple of issues. First, it seems to have a kind of “all the gain without the pain” undertone, i.e. the idea of wanting to have all the economic benefits of accomplishing national objectives but without doing any of the actual work. On that point, my own feeling is that it would be more straightforward to just provide more income, without having an arguable rationale for it. Second, it misses a point about national objectives: the point that they’re not automatically pursued by players, that they’re not automatically accomplished even when they are pursued, and that the various NOs play off of each other in different combinations in a given game deoending on which ones get accomplished and which ones don’t. In other words, they’re variables rather than constants; the part of the question which inquires about a table seems to assume that they’re constants, or at least that they average out to being constants over the course of multiple games.