This scenario looks great. It would be interesting if you could implement a power projection aspect through the different navies. Napoleon scenario had attrition for french ships, you could do the same thing here for all powers but US. The US Navy partially won WWII from being able to re-supply and support ships while at sea without needing friendly ports to be based out of. So the US has an advantage for its naval power, which in turn makes force projection that much easier. The USSR and Europe would be more reliant on their naval bases in proxies/colonies (which is historically accurate). This could make the USSR control of Kuba and/or places like Angola or Syria that much more important if they want an ability to screw with the US ability to control the seas in a conflict. You might consider some units, like USSR submarines having a longer amount of time before attrition sets in to model the USSR attempt to fight a third 'battle of the Atlantic'. I know alot of people don't like the unique units route (I do, especially when it means you can use Fairline units), but Europe could have several of them that have an advantage fighting partisans or proxy- eastern forces. Basically think of how Brits have SAS, SBS, Paras etc or French have Foreign Legion and they used those units (to some success) fight their de-colonialization wars. The US and USSR eventually went this route also in their conflicts with partisans (Spetznaz and Green Berets) but maybe that is a tech they have to research and Europe starts off with those units. To be clear those units wouldn't be really useful in a WWIII scenario fighting tanks, but they would have advantage taking on partisans and fighting in the proxy wars, especially on rough terrain. Maybe their support is super high to reflect the investment of creating 'elite' troops. This could mean in your example of Vietnam that it is possible to hold Saigon but only by sending best units at high cost for a long period of time. Just some thoughts. Really looking forward to this scenario.