- First instinct would be to move the Mirage 2000 into Jet Fighter VI to replace the Gripen and fill its spot with the Tornado ADV; this would better align both contemporaneously and in respective roles with their Soviet and US counterparts: the Mirage 2K as a late-70s/early 80s light multi-role like the F-16 and MiG-29, and the Tornado ADV as a long-range interceptor like the F-14 and MiG-25. Gripen, like the Rafale, first flew in the late 1980s and could conceivably have entered service during the scenario's time frame, but is a bit of a stretch. If you want to keep some Swedish flavour, Draken in Jet Fighter III to replace the Mirage III or Viggen in IV to replace the Mirage F1 could work as substitutes.
-I'll move the Mirage 2000 into Jet Fighter VI and add the Tornado ADV.
- On that note, while I am extremely loathe to part with the Tomcat, having the F-14 might be redundant now that you are making a distinction between fleet defence and land-based interceptors. Although it ended up being the much more capable and versatile aircraft, the F-15 was initially intended to be the US' response and counterpart to the MiG-25 in the latter role, taking over from the likes of the F-106. Its place in Jet Fighter VII could be filled by the YF-22 if you want to be unsporting and give the Yanks an even more superlative advantage.
From my reading the F-15 was basically a totally over-engineered response to the MiG-25, right? And then the Soviets came out with the Su-27 as almost an answer to it? I think the YF-22 is too far beyond the scenario's timeframe. The Rafale I think was pushing it/past it but I believe I saw it came out in the mid 90s.
However, I think Jet Fighter VI and VII are basically going to be available at the same time. People will have to choose (at least until they research both) which path they go down (almost like choosing between a Panther or Tiger in my Hinge of Fate) - do you want the overengineered and expensive F-15/Su-27/Rafale or would you prefer the cheaper and still-better-than-earlier-jets F-16, MiG-29, Mirage 2000?
- As a propeller-driven aircraft, the A-1 Skyraider properly belongs in Jabo I with the Il-10 and Tempest rather than the early jets of Jabo II, though I'm more than happy with the A-26 taking its place as well - Skyraider should be with Corsair and Firefly in Early Naval Jabo any way
I'd have to get rid of my darling Corsair but the Skyraider makes more sense - I'll move that one to Early Naval Jabo. Guess I'll have to make that Pacific campaign so I can get CT's state warbird back in a scenario some day.
- For Jabo II, since you have a light bomber (Il-28) for the Soviets, I think Canberra for the Europeans and B-57s for the Americans might be a better fit as well. All three were exported and used quite extensively by client states too.
Done.
- Jabo III - supersonic late-60s land-based Jaguar would be more of a contemporary for the Thud and Su-17 than the late-70s transsonic carrier-based Super Etendard of which only 80 or so were made
- Jabo IV - it also seems a bit strange to go from the Mach 1+ Thunderchief and Su-17 to the heavily-armoured turbofan A-10 and Su-25. If you have the space, suggest shuffling off the Warthog, Grach and Harrier to their own late-game Close Air Support category with special properties like anti-tank capability and ruggedness, while filling Jabo IV with the F-111, Su-24 and Tornado IDS for SEAD/deep penetration strike.
This should be doable and given initiateCombat I can definitely give them better properties such as AT capability.
- You may wish to give the aircraft that historically played or were designated for the "Wild Weasel" mission like the F-105, F-111, Su-24, and Tornado a boost when targeting SAMs
Good idea - they can handle the static AA (which I think should be a SAM site in this scenario - you're right).
- This is a tricky one. Strategic Bomber I seems to be prop-driven, and historically the last one used by the RAF was the Lincoln. But while it saw quite extensive service in colonial conflicts, it could hardly be said to be in the same category as the B-29, yet alone the B-36 or Tu-95, and while it might theoretically have been possible, never carried a nuclear weapon. Valiant and the other V-bombers were also much closer in range, payload, and overall performance to the Tu-16 than any of the US heavies.
My own inelegant solution around this would be to make a generic strategic bomber unit using the B-29 graphic for the Soviets/Europeans (representing the Tu-4 Bull/ leased B-29/50s), while the Yanks get the much better B-36 as a special unit and reward for having developed a plane to bomb Germany from North America before the war ended, then rework Strategic Bomber I-III like thus:
- B-47 Stratojet - Tu-16 Badger - Valiant
- B-52 Stratofortress - Tu-95 Bear/M-4 Molot - Vulcan
- B-1 Lancer (B-58 Hustler would also work) - Tu-22 Blinder/Tu-22M Backfire - Mirage IV
This way the Soviets and Europeans get the chance to catch up in later tiers.
Well I have a standard "strat bomber" that is basically the B-29 but would represent the Lincoln and Tu-4 as well. If there's space, having the B-36 would be cool, if there isn't, maybe I just replace it with the B-47? Even with 189 units, there's a limit (unless I feel like employing my lua-recycling method, but honestly, I'm hoping to have just one rules file here).
- If the generic Stealth Bomber isn't already one, Americans should get the F-117 Nighthawk as a late-game special unit to bomb Saddam with
That would be the generic one, most likely.
- No objections except possibly the T-64 - the T-62 was produced and exported in much larger numbers, while the former, while far ahead of its time, was really too expensive and complex for the Soviets to build in any great numbers (relatively speaking - they still built over 13,000 of the things). Perhaps make it a much costlier special unit the Soviets can unlock at Tank III alongside the T-62, to give the player the choice of churning out as many as possible and invading the West there and then while the USSR still has the advantage of superior tanks, or possibly going bankrupt even faster than historically. Once the US/Europeans hit Tank IV and V, this dynamic should reverse as superior Western electronics and armour start to tell.
We have art for both so the T-62 is fine if that is the better choice but perhaps the T-64 would be a good "unique" unit if it had that big of an advantage early on, and just have them both available at the same time as you suggested.
- If you have the space, I'd move AH-64 and Mangusta to Choppers III and give the Soviets the Ka-50 or Mi-28 as well. If chopper units are meant to represent attack helicopters exclusively rather than serve as an abstract for heliborne infantry in general, AH-1 Cobra and Gazelle may be more suitable than the Huey and Lynx in Choppers II alongside the Mi-24 Hind. Depending on when Choppers I is meant to be unlocked by the player, this could be filled by the H-19/H-34, Mi-4 and Alouette III (early 50s-60s) or UH-1, Mi-8 and Puma (early to late 60s.)
Well, the reason I picked the ones I did for chopper I was because they all seemed to have the capability to airlift in infantry. Chopper II is more of an attack chopper. I don't know that I'll have the space to get everything I want with these but I was thinking since the Soviets had such a vast helicopter fleet maybe they'd get a better one as a special unit, such as the Ka-50.
- If you don't go through with your idea of replacing the three Special Forces units with a generic one, I'd recommend using the Army Special Forces (Green Berets) instead of the SEALs - the former were established earlier and more closely fit the original Cold War mission of Special Forces in counter-revolutionary warfare (which include training and advisory of local forces) or "active measures" as the Soviets called it, than the contemporary Navy SEALs who are much more prominent in the kinetic role that we associate with Special Forces since the War on Terror. If the Special Forces units are meant to work with the new terrorism mechanics and represent the governmental response to the surge in activity in the 1970s and 80s, you can more specifically use Delta Force for the US and Group Alpha for the USSR, which were the dedicated CT units stood up by both nations. For the Europeans, Andy McNab's mob works for either purpose
I think with all your other suggestions I'm going to have to axe the unique special forces units, unfortunately.
- I'd definitely hate to be the poor b*stard who has to go up in a Sea Harrier or the even more hopeless Forger against an F/A-18
But since both were actually pressed into the fleet defense role this is absolutely accurate - its hardly the USN' fault they're the only ones with supercarriers. The unit stats should reflect this mogging.
You know, I didn't realize that only the United States had nuclear powered carriers at the time. I see France eventually built one but it probably makes sense that they get this special unit. Having the Soviets and Europeans rely on the conventional carrier will save a unit slot.
If you want to level the playing field, you can give the Europeans the Rafale instead and put the Eurofighter in Fighters VII, while the Soviets can get the Su-33. If you want to squeeze the F-14 back in here, you can create a new category of Naval Jabos and put the F/A-18 here with the Forger and Sea Harrier.
I originally was trying to give everyone the same stuff but it might be more fun if each of the big three had a distinctive advantage in "something," so I don't think I necessarily need to even things out. The US, by geography, needs their super carrier and naval aviation arm to project power. I'm still thinking about what the others are. From a gameplay perspective, having those S-300's as payload nuclear weapons that are invisible until attack will mean that the U.S. is going to have to scour to find them, and they can move around. The U.S. on the other hand will need to keep their ICBM and MRBM in known cities, so only 2/3 of the triad is mobile as opposed to 3/3 for the Soviets. That could get interesting in first strike calculations.
- For the Soviet special units, S-300 or some other sophisticated air defence system would definitely be an ideal counter to American air superiority. Another option would be the Kirov-class large nuclear powered missile cruisers which were scary enough to make Reagan bring the Iowa-class BBs back into service. Maybe also a cheap missile boat to stop all that battleship spam that the playtesters were complaining about
I mean if the Kirov-class was interesting enough was there any European missile cruiser that would be comparable? Just asking because I already have the Ticonderoga Class as a unique unit (mainly for my affinity with the town), so if the Kirov class is there too I might as well make this one of the "The Big 3 each get one."
- Exocet is a good choice and definitely has a lot of brand recognition, though I'd say that's largely due to Falklands being overly-represented in the popular consciousness - there were plenty of equivalently deadly anti-shipping missiles around like the American Harpoon, Chinese Silkworm, and Israeli Gabriel. Given the diversity of nations that the European civ is supposed to represent, one option could be to use the spare slots for flavour units (e.g. a cheap Bundeswehr/Euro conscript army unit you get as a bonus for the decision to rearm West Germany or forming NATO, a mountain/arctic infantry for aligning Norway, or maybe even continued access to colonial troops if you manage to hang on to your possessions)
Yeah, I need to think about that European one more. Giving them access to diverse infantry is fine so long as those infantry are better at something than everyone else's, otherwise they get the short end of the stick.
- Might want to rename Stinger to something generic like AA Missile or MANPAD to cover earlier or equivalent missiles like the Strela, Blowpipe, Redeye etc
Done.
- RPGs (the bane of my playthroughs) seem to be much more powerful and decisive than their real-life record would suggest, being able to clear out entire cities, kill aircraft and ships in port - maybe to reflect this, they could be replaced by mortars, another insurgent favorite?
I could probably tone them down a little too - we'll have to see how prestige and such play out in terms of how many of these units are out there.
- Some suggestions for units to flesh their tech trees out - the suggestion that they be weaker than the equivalent Western/Eastern units at comparable levels is a good one:
- Type 69 - Chinese Tank III. Type 85 can be in Tank V. If there is space, you could squeeze the Type 79 or 80 in Tank IV.
- Q-5 Fantan - Chinese Jabo III.
- JH-7 - Chinese Jabo IV.
- J-10 - Chinese Jet Fighter VI or VII. J-8 should be in IV.
- WZ-9 - Chinese Chopper II or III
- Vijayanta - Indian Tank III. Arjun should be Tank V; if there is space, Vijayanta Mk1B/C in IV
- Ajeet - Indian Jet Fighter III. HF-24 Marut can be Jabo III
- Tejas - Indian Jet Fighter VI
It mostly comes down to what art is available. There's nowhere near enough spaces to have more than 1-2 new units for each of these tribes and the "gimmick" behind both of them is that they need to procure favor/weapons from patrons, but depending on what there is, I'd like to give them each one more "home grown" unit. I don't know that they necessarily need to be the same type of unit. One could have a helicopter, another could have a fighter or bomber. We'll see.
