New Cold War 2020 mod release! (RC 0.4)

[SGTGunn]

Hmmm...for some reason the images didn't show up. >

Well if you cut and paste those links into your browser, they'll show up. Anyone care to explain how to get images to show in the forum?

Thanks!

Adrian

[PlasmaKrab]

Thanks for the icons!

I think I can get a use out of the UCAVs, they are realy good.
I'm going to redo my Block-III tank icon series anyhow, and they should end up conceptually similar to the pedestal Abrams here. The upgraded Abrams I'm using remains visually much closer to the original.

IDK if you checked it out, but I think I'm still using your M-8 AGS icons, by the way.

I have no idea why your images don't show up, I have tried to trick the addresses up, to no avail.

[RecruitMonty]

I don't want to insult your intelligence, but did you leave the "[image]" part out of the address?

[maicol]

I liked this mod, I think it has really great potential. All those new icons, pics and soviet OOB changes are really nice! =)
I've noticed one little bug - T-62 icon is really messed up.

And a few balancing thoughts about soviets, will formulate them later.

[PlasmaKrab]

Quick update:

Latest DL link looks dead more or less, here's a RapidShare one for now.

Working on RC.0.5 for now, focusing on "peripheral theaters", hopefully I'll manage to get some campaigns in.

[Spike11]

Just another question/comment... You have fitted the Tu-160 with a decent load of 1000 lb bombs. Pounds? Russian bombs are metrical, are they not? There are 250 kgs, 500 kgs, 1000 kgs and even 1500 kg laser guided munitions.

Also, the Tu-160 is the largest bomber in the world and it carries - at least according to the sources I've read - a heavier bomb load than anything else on the planet. 32 1000 lb bombs equals roughly 15 000 kgs, quite a bit, but still less than what the Tu-22M carries. Is this a mistake, or is it really the case?

[PlasmaKrab]

Hi Spike, and thanks for the interest.

Regarding icon importing and exporting, better refer to these two threads where things have been dicussed and explained at length:

http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/thr...b=5&o=&fpart=1
http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/thr...b=5&o=&fpart=1

Russian 1000lb bombs corrected to FAB-500. I let that one slip as it is standard-default weapon linked to Greater Purposes like ammo explosions.

Now regarding bomb loadouts, that's an interesting point. As you mention, the Tu-160 apparently has the largest theoretical payload of all strat bombers in service. Now bear in mind that 1) there are other factors limiting the number of bombs carried IRL like bomb bay room and 2) there may be game-linked balance issues that mean bomb loadouts have been regarded as too large at some earlier point.
If you look closely, you'll notice that the Vietnam-era US B-52s have been given about 2/3 of the bombs they are able to carry, according to Greg Goebel's account.
Thing is, I can't find data on bomb bay layout in the Tu-160 (or earlier Tupolev bombers btw), so I don't know how many of which bombs you can fit in. Given the high-speed/low-observable profile of the aircraft, I'd tend to shun the underwing bomb racks for the standard variant.

Re. the T-95 and its gun, I know about the 152mm gun, but I have kept the 135mm as first intel suggested waaay back, on account of it being more compatible with previous Soviet tank design, mainly in tank size, ammo storage room and autoloader design. In other words, in a T-80-like hull like that of the early low-profile T-95, you could hardly stow 25 152mm rounds, and even then, they would be so short that you'd lose most of what you gained on APDS penetration. IMHO a much more radical tank design would be needed to accommodate a 152, and by the time I have such designs available, I have already switched to high-efficiency ETC 85mm.