Some good discussion points here.
I've done some
extensive modding of the Soviet/Russian OOB, and not so surprisingly, it looks like we got some concurring ideas.
Just for the sake of running it down
:
1)Three tank unit series is what I ended up with. There always has been a "reserve tank" series (using "obsolete tank" unit class). On top of that I switched the T-64/80/95/whatever top-notch tanks to a separate class, which is used only by "elite tank" formations (with sizeable morale/exp bonuses), which are only picked by the IA against Central Europe opponents.
Logical continuation is that I erased nearly all of the high-end tanks from the "standard" tank class (give or take some hybrids like T-72Bs or T-90s), which rightly serves as second-line tanks on the most prosperous theaters and as only tank available elsewhere.
Now that Marcello mentions it, I may switch most Far-East countries (at least Japan) to my "elite" opponent list or create a dedicated Pacific Theater picklist.
Now that's only my personal version, no idea if it would have any future in the game proper.
2) Talk about concurrent thinking
again...
There again, take a look at the Cold War Mod OOBs: I have given most WP countries two separate IFV classes and several formations. There's one IFV class that gets the full kit including missiles, and more chances of picking gun-heavy types like BMP-3s. Other are more roomy older types, generally with less or no AT weapons. Motor rifle platoons get a mix of both, from 0 heavy versions in third-line units or third-line countries like Libya, to 3 heavy and no light versions for GSFG troops and comparable. Morale bonuses as suited, of course.
Same with tanks, even the common "hybrid" models mentioned above get more missiles and high-end AT rounds in the elite formations.
3) I have to agree with Marcello on the Drozd tanks. I think we can assume from several sources that some T-55s and T-62s were equipped with Drozd modules from the mid-80s onwards (I have 1983, but who knows) for Afghanistan ops. Not much point doing field trials of such a system in 1988 when the war was almost over. Given that the next-generation Arena system was available at least from 1994 or so, 1983-85 sounds like the right timespan for the Drozd.
Also remember that most of the other upgrade packs (BDD armor, LRF, Bastion missiles) were available from the early 80s.
I agree that most or all of these tanks were from Naval units, which were heavily involved in Afghanistan. Now if you look at the formations available, you'll see there is no naval CS tank platoon. Since CS variants were bound to be overused in Afghan battles in the game (not much point in wasting heaps of perfectly good sabot rounds when they'd be so much more useful sitting in their depots in Germany) it's understandable that these (rare) variants be featured in the CS tank class.
4) Same as an M-72 LAW or similar. Actually, I've often read that Soviet sections carried both one RPG-7 and a lot of discardable RPG-18/22s, but go figure that in the game.
Given how the old RPG-7 is still a staple food of Russian infantry, I tend to give the one-shot weapons to lighter units (light infantry, scouts, low-end mech...) only.
Now about how to model the fact that LAWs can be fired by anyone at short notice, how about reducing the weapon size value? Should give more fire opportunities. Don't talk about raising accuracy (e.g. to represent two-shot volley fires or such tactics),there's been enough hot blood about how light nobrainer AT weapons were too much efficient at any range
Also, v3.5 upgrade allows units to fire HEAT weapons at infantry targets, save for the last 4 shots or at close-quarters ranges.
5) I'm not sure i get the idea here. You mean when firing in the general direction of a hidden target? To me "indirect" fire means lobbing shells at an out-of-LOS target through the eyes of a forward arty obs or something. There's not many ways a basic infantry unit can do that, except if you're talking mortars or other dedicated unit classes.
6) Good point, but I think the one-truck-per-squad is the surefire way of OOB designers to cope with unpredictable variations in squad size and truck capacity. That's if you don't want to spend hours building countless new motorized platoons for each time there's a new truck generation or a new infantry doctrine around the corner. And anyway the real Russian motorized platoons (assuming there are any left to this day) are certainly such an improvised mess there's not much point trying to figure out the variants.
7) Well, how about using two helos then? Are you sure you want to put all your SpetsEggs in the same basket when you have MANPADS and AAMGs lying around in dozens?
I'm thinking about adding a dedicated heliborne SpetsNaz platoon, and I'll probably squeeze it in one Mi-17 and one or two lighter helos carrying scout teams.
FYI, I have tweaked the BMD units so that a full 3-squad platoon complete with vehicles and infantry fits into one single Mi-26. I'm not that proud of the idea when one of them comes out a canyon to face a full SAM platoon...
8) Don't tell me about this... Among other things, I've also tried to rationalize the ATGM accuracy ratings over the whole of the OOBs, e.g. to prevent identical weapons to get 10-points differences from one country to another. You know when you start modding, you never know when it will end...
Anyway, using either average velocity or travel time (i.e. depending on range or not) I get about the same accuracy values for a Konkurs and an I-TOW (and a Fagot and a Milan and a HOT). TOW-2 and onwards get a bonus for better CCM (e.g. xenon bulb instead of IR flare).
SPATGMs of any kind are bloody sitting ducks if you don't spend your time micromanaging retreat routes and firing sites, which will make them available one turn in three at best. And since BRDM-2s have no armor to speak of and no TI, they're quickly limited facing US armor.