What-If Cold War Mod (French Faction BETA)

[Mr War]

UPDATE - 1st September 2011

Less than 1 month to build. [big]FULL BETA RELEASE[/big] - requires MegaGlest 3.5.3-Alpha1 or latest SVN
DOWNLOAD from MEDIAFIRE http://www.mediafire.com/?y9o6yy86vuft9vk  (Sorry but free host!!!)

Complementary tile sets - Download http://www.mediafire.com/?6nfobqo4uu2mgo8

[big]TECH TREE[/big]


[big]BALANCING[/big] (% advantage per second)


PLEASE GIVE FEEDBACK, ESPECIALLY ON ERRORS OR BALANCING 


___________OLD Posts__________________

I might actually build a cold war semi-realistic mod. Test models...

Left to right, basic French AMX-13 light tank, AMX-13 DCA anti-aircraft tank, AMX-13 SS-11 upgraded light tank - not 100% accurate as I modeled by-eye, but fair likenesses I think

[wyvern]

AWESOME!!! Open a new topic for this, and I'll post some models as I finish them, also, each faction should have some sort of advantage over the others which would help them win. I think the USA should have good technology, decent tanks, good airforce and decent infantry. Russia should have decent spammable tanks, early IFV's decent infantry and a decent airforce. Britain should have expensive well trained troops but less technology then the USA.
Also the soviet union could get the ASU 57/85, that would give them a nasty early game ability to airdrop tanks
PS, how'd you do the textures, did you draw them, or did you use a side pic of the actual tanks?
Also, my exporter doesn't work so I'd have to send you my models and textures for finishing

[Mr War]

Ok. I'm just waiting for MG 3.5.3 release to put the Sci-Fi pack out, so this is kinda a holding pattern.

I draw all my own textures (parts of tile sets excepted)

I'm thinking cold war up to say 1980. After 1980 things get too powerful, and too familiar. There's a lot of interesting kit that is largely forgotten by peops who thing GW1 was how Cold war would have looked. So all real units although we can spice it up with some prototype/experimental types, but nothing that is completely made up or over the top,

And MG is easiest for me so no APCs/MICVs

Russia had the best tanks, well better than USA anyway. We can reduce this deficiency in USA by having MBT-70. What a lot of younger peops forget is that the reason the US introduced the incredibly expensive M1 Abrams, armed with a British, later German, gun, and defended by British armor, was because up until then the US tanks were decidedly weaker than Russian ones.

I thoughts for balancing are:

Soviets - best tanks, decent helicopters, good air defenses
USA - weaker tanks but generally best technology, excellent attack helicopters
Britain - excellent tanks, harrier jumpjet
Germany - excellent tanks, tank destroyers. weak helicopters but experimental jump jet
France - average in most regards, best anti-tank missiles, most units upgradable (common vehicle chassis)

Could also include, if someone made them:
Sweden - some interesting units but some gaps in unit classes
Japan - some cool kit but blossomed in 1980s so most too late?
Italy - um, I guess
China - kit was terrible back then, and mostly Soviet based so little uniqueness
Warsaw Pact state - variation on Soviet, some WP non-Soviet types

[Mr War]

This will be my next project after the Sci-Fi Pack go-live (awaiting MG 3.5.3 release). Basic idea is a semi-realism mod set in Cold War (1950s->1980) but not getting too modern. As well as main recognizable units, there can also be many prototype/experimental/cancelled types as-if they were in widescale service, so kind of a "what if" theme but nothing completely made up.

Open to suggestions, collaboration, contributions and discussions. Wyvern has already expressed interest.

We'll need all-new attack/ armor types:


We'll also want to rename, or maybe completely re-balance the resource types - will inquire with Devs re this as may be AI issues if we move too far away from current resource model.

First go at defining possible sides. Blue highlights are types that were prototypes or limited service only ("What-if"):

[wyvern]

Definitely need an APC and basic transport helicopter class with M113's, chinooks, hueys, Mil 10's etc in there as well as a flame attack type so you can get the M132 Zippo
What happened to the Sheridan?
Could add the lynx heli and A-10s to scare all that armor. The frogfoot would also be lovely.
I think Reccoilless rifles should be separate from man portable AT weapons.
What about the Saladin Armored car.
I also think the light class should be divided between light tanks, armored cars and APC's/IFV's
BTW: I'm working on the ASU-85, got any hints on how to make the texture so its as nice as the one you have on your AMX-13
Keep up the good work on quality mods
Edit:Failed to notice your first post in the mod ideas board before writing this, so no APC's I suppose, still if MG and GAE merge..........(hint hint hint to developers)

[wyvern]

I'd give britain the best infantry with the USA in second and the USSR in third
Israel would be a fun faction, with modified shermans and WWII gear as well as modern tech

[Mr War]

Sheridan is a pretty poor light tank I think.

Well french tanks are easy to model, once you have one, you can distort it into another

AMX-30 MBT

[will]

Keep it small, simple and paper rock scissors.

Do France vs soviets.  Soviets have tanks and hind, France has focus on man portable missiles and amx and stuff?

If you add usa, don't give the good tanks, compensate in other classes.

Fixed wing doesn't work well in glest but harrier can hover

[wyvern]

The sheridans fast, air portable, can float with the right equipment, has a great weapon vs infantry, though a little slow in rate of fire, and a rocket for AT work

[Omega]

We'll need all-new attack/ armor types:

My only concern is that this seems rather unbalanced-ish. For example, only against foes without armour does attacks actually receive a positive modifier, otherwise they are weakened or the same. As well, some of the armour types seem overpowered, such as the Chobham, which reduces most attacks to a fraction of their original damage. Bearing in mind that most units will likely have a armour value too, isn't that a bit strong? Not to mention a strong tank in Chobham armour would probably have plenty of HP to soak up damage. Probably pretty realistic, though will it be practical in the rapid battles of Glest?

The art looks fantastic, and the mod's idea is great. Awesome! Love the tileset too.

Also, merged the posts from the "Mod Ideas" thread that belong here.

[wyvern]

ASU 85 almost done just need to texture,
I personally think the French should be the worst and cheapest since they lacked much stellar technology but most of all training and morale, Germany should have good technology and possibly be something like a beefed up america minus the airforce advantage. GBR should definitely focus on a small elite army like it always has throughout history while the USA should have a decently trained well equipped and large army. The USSR should have ground advantages and the great Mi24 not to mention good rocket tech but its infantry and general training shouldn't be so good, possibly make leveling up harder. I wish the buildings in the tileset were garrisonable, it would definitely open new possibilities 

[will]

French dominated missile development in the late 70s.

[BruceM]

In the late 1970s, the missile program became a national priority in USA and SSSR, as I know. French dominated in late seventies, it's true but also  North Korea’s missile development programme began in the 1970s and is totally predicated on reverse engineering. To begin with, it reverse engineered Frog-5 missiles and Soviet made Scud-B missiles between 1981 and 1985.
Soviets have also dangerous missile programs in seventies..

[Mr War]

Interesting discussion. I think the fields of missile tech where did have something of a lead were battlefield ones like ATGW, but then the soviets too had good stuff (ask the Israeli tank commanders). USA was behind and bought French kit at times, but later caught up, notably TOW.

French is hardest to balance I think, they are generally weakest. They had great elite troops up to 1960s but after the coup attempt those were weakened, although true SF remained top class.

I think we can make French light tanks better than Russian ones, even though that could be argued both ways. MBTs are weaker, although we can keep sone 1950s heavy tanks in (amx50, ARL44) to at least match the soviet T10.

We can give their ATGW the edge, and make Roland slightly better than SA-8, again open to debate but subtly done not a big deal. Pluton can be better than SCUD too, like quicker rate of fire.

Soviets have better MBTs and aircraft, plus MANPADS and slightly better static defenses

[wyvern]

Considering how many failures the French suffered I wouldn't consider them top class, though I suppose their missiles were some good, two things that definitely have to be in is the RPG2 and RPG7. I think the French should remain cheap and have it harder to level up and gain a sort of veteran status to reflect their poor training and morale, their rockets should be able to make up for that. I know this is somewhat stereotypical but considering how poorly the French fared in every major war in the 20th century I think it wouldn't be unfair.
Also, look through stats on penetration power and range before giving any rocket an advantage, I think the difference needs to be made in upgrades and cost as well as speed to level up, not in the quality of the attack ability, armor and HP.

[will]

Your stereotype shows your poor research or grasp of history.  You can start, for example, by reading Churchill's books covering periods that you reference.

[wyvern]

What makes you say that, I read Arthur Bryants book on Allan Brookes war diaries and commentaries and it completely says how incompetent the french were, they had more tanks then the Germans yet were unorganized, lacked morale and with a few exceptions like Charles De Gaulle their leadership was terrible. They didn't cooperate with the British, and in the end the brits had to start locking them up in Calais so that they wouldn't cause too much trouble, the only place they gave decent resistance was to the allied invasions of North Africa and Syria. Or look at WW1, they would have been defeated in a month had Britain not sacrificed her BEF to stem the tide. Or Vietnam, they couldn't take on the Viet Cong and don't say the americans failed too since the americans almost never lost a battle, they lost the war because of problems back home. Also, South Vietnam never fell while the americans were their to stiffen its backbone.
These are roughly all of the major conflicts of world importance the French participated in. I'm not saying they were all terrible soldiers but in comparison to other nations they were not comparable, they were better in technology in 1940 as they were in 1954, they had a large well built army in 1914 yet none of this helped.

Also there has to be some sort of difference between the factions and unless you want to edit damage, armor and HP unrealistically, the best way to go is to make upgrades different and slower, make differences in speed of leveling up by adding larger kill requirements and so on.

[Mr War]

lets not bash the cheese eating surrender monkeys. The French of the Cold war were much more determined, they knew the cost of freedom. French units fought to the death in Indo-China, no surrender. But infantry, generally speaking, isn't their strong point.

Balancing thoughts, Frances versus USSR. Orange highlights show relative strength of advantage.


More AMX-30 variations, Roland SAM and Pluton tactical nuke.

[wyvern]

I love your models but how many vertices do they have, considering that you even have wheels in the treads I think its probably a lot. Otherwise, looking good. Also, I think the T-54/55 really needs to be in there somewhere considering its importance in teh USSR.
BTW: could you send me your tread textures so I can use them on the Shilka, ASU-85 and T-62 I have, the models are done but I'll have to change the treads so they have road wheels like your models. , Also, can I do the Hind, its one of my favorit helicopters next to the Lynx so...

[John.d.h]

Those cylinders do look awfully high-poly and they could be greatly reduced with no real perceptible loss of visual quality, but it really comes down to how they perform in the game.

[Ishmaru]

Man u work fast... looks good!

[Mr War]

Well we could swap T62 with T55, no big difference from a glest perspective. Don't want to have too many units without level changes between them. T55 and T62 are too close IMO, but IT1 is different enough and then T64 gives them a top tank. We could add a T64 late model upgrade with ERA, gun launched missiles etc, but limit availability. also T64 could have better Secondary AA capability. I think most tanks should only use main gun for gameplay reasons though.

yep agree they are too high poly. I usually get over 100 FPS but with just a few tanks I get 33. Will see about rationalizing the models. The Oil drums are he placeholder for Oil resource.

[wyvern]

What I've been working on is making the tracks a single cylinder piece rather then road wheels+treads, you get nearly the same quality but in Glest the difference is near invisible, just look at Omega's military, his tank has one piece treads, I think, so that should be fine, right.

[John.d.h]

You've got six units, a couple piles of resources, and a few odd shrubs, and your debug shows a poly count of... 57 thousand!?   Yeah, I'd definitely see about redoing those cylinders.  The smaller ones could easily get away with five or six sides, and I'd use no more than twelve for even the biggest of them.  Eight would probably do, but it may or may not be noticeable in-game.  You could keep the high-poly version for baking a normal map, in case those ever get support in MG.

[Mr War]

Yeah I'm normally quite disciplined with poly counts, just this time I got lazy, I can fix. I will try to keep wheels as I used one-piece tracks in sci fi pack and found it a pain to align the skins, but that's just me.

Re your t62, can u make an IT1 version?