Rise of the Reds Update: Old Dogs of War Options

[MARS]

United States of America, Post-Zero Hour

With the haphazard abandonment of their overseas military bases and the Europeans in disarray after the GLA insurrection of 2028, the United States found themselves in a precarious position: Years of constant warfare against the GLA including full-scale military invasions of their "host countries" across Central Asia and the Middle East had taken a massive toll on the world's formerly leading superpower. Billions upon billions of Dollars had been invested, some would say wasted, into new, state-of-the-art weapons many of which turned out to be impractical, over-engineered pet-projects like the infamous "Laser Crusader". This exponential growth of military spending put a burden on the nation's troubled economy. In the meantime, America's home infrastructure was deteriorating, the educational system was no longer competitive and the economic interconnection with China led to further "stream-lining" of the American work force. Most cynically, thousands of jobless Americans were directly forwarded into the war effort for lack of alternatives, only to disappear from unemployment statistics and reappear as casualties. In addition, the bold GLA incursion in California which led to the theft of several bio-chemical weapon samples from an outposted facility of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory was further exploited by shady political figures in favour of increased government surveillance and control.

With the economy in shambles and the restless population rallying in protest, it came as no surprise that the federal government had to put a stop to the skyrocketing costs now that there was no GLA left to hunt and no noteworthy degree of geo-political influence left to be maintained. As a result, dozens of military research projects, including many "next-generation" aircraft, vehicles and weapons got axed. Only the Air Force made it through drastic budget cuts relatively unscathed by comparison, if only thanks to the clever political brokering of General Griffon, which still netted him a considerable degree of ire from the other branches. Meanwhile, the ground forces had to make cost-efficient modifications to existing weapon systems that were originally meant to be phased out altogether. Much to the chagrin of the Marine Corps which was left with no other option than to accept whatever the new doctrine-makers in Washington decided, the Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle, one of the Army's mainstay combat vehicles since the 1980s made a return as the M2A4: While the basic frame of the vehicle remained largely unchanged, the new version was equipped with an improved 25mm chaingun, advanced TOW missile launchers, modular composite armour and, most notably, the same point-defence anti-missile laser that was successfully introduced and field-tested by the Paladin Tank, making the "new" Bradley an ideal supplement in combined arms mechanised warfare thanks to its mobility, firepower, protection and infantry transport capabilities.

Above: The standard Bradley Fighting Vehicle. Below: The Bradley after it has been upgraded with Composite Armor. The M2A4 is armed to the teeth with its rapid-fire autocannon, manually targeted TOW missiles and a point-defence laser.
Bradley IFVs will later become an exclusive feature of Tank Command General Bradley, but we will give you an early opportunity to deploy them as part of the regular American tech tree in the upcoming version 1.7!

[Discharged]

Awesome! Can't wait to try this out in 1.7

[SpiralSpectre]

Love the renders, specially the rugged looking Composite Armor upgraded version. Gotta say it's great to see a US vehicle armed with so many different weapon systems for a change. Why should Ruskies get all the fun? Autocannon, ToW, PDL and drone - that's four weapons on one platform! Again it's great to see another unit utilising US's signature PDL. I am so happy to see it I even won't bring up that Bradley also appeared in ShW and possible overlap related stuff.

Just making sure - I take it will be able to use it's rapid fire autocannon and TOW missiles simultaneously like the original ZH Humvee, no? Is the Bradley gonna replace the Humvee in the coming version or will both be available?

BTW just asking for your opinion - can it be considered pretty much directly superior to the Russian BMP?

edit - Bradley's rank is only "general"? No stars added? BTW I love how you guys have made his tactics to be "armoured assault" instead of Kwai style "only tanks". Should make his style much more diverse and fun.

This post has been edited by SpiralSpectre: 18 May 2012, 5:53

[MARS]

The Bradley IFV is a completely standalone unit that doesn't replace anything. As such, it's a LOT better in all aspects compared to the Ironside-Bradley from ShW which really was just a souped-up Humvee due to being a faction-specific replacement for said vehicle. This on the other hand...Well, it cuts down infantry like there's no tomorrow and does a good job against light vehicles as well. The TOW missiles are manually targeted via an ability, so you'll have to micro-manage them. As a compensation, they do seem to be more effective than the Humvee TOW. I would say it's superior to the BMP by virtue of weapon variety and the fact that it will actually require a gen point, the unlock of which has been merged with the Paladin.

As for the MTG, we changed the format of these. For example, the Rank bit now has the actual terms used in the various countries and what is informally refered to as a 4-Star General actually translates to just "General" in most militaries. Three stars would be Lieutenant General, two stars is Major General and one star is Brigadier General. This is also the reason why General Orlov - as well as the other Russian generals - is refered to as "General Armii", which is their equivalent of a "4-Star General". And yes, that also means that we'll most likely do away with those odd triple-A designations for the Chinese as well.

[SpiralSpectre]

The Bradley IFV is a completely standalone unit that doesn't replace anything. As such, it's a LOT better in all aspects compared to the Ironside-Bradley from ShW which really was just a souped-up Humvee due to being a faction-specific replacement for said vehicle. This on the other hand...Well, it cuts down infantry like there's no tomorrow and does a good job against light vehicles as well. The TOW missiles are manually targeted via an ability, so you'll have to micro-manage them. As a compensation, they do seem to be more effective than the Humvee TOW. I would say it's superior to the BMP by virtue of weapon variety and the fact that it will actually require a gen point, the unlock of which has been merged with the Paladin.

Wouldn't this make the Humvee kinda redundant? Oh well, no point in me guessing too much before actually seeing how these work out in-game.

Anyway I love what I am seeing of this armed to the teeth US muscle. Maybe later we'll also see pinpoint Russian/Chinese precision!

[Massey]

As for units. Can not wait to drive these babies around the battlefield.
As for the "Meet the General" I like the story and fix quite nicely with the General-Uni.
I might add i like the Emblem design too.

Edit: Nevermind I withdraw this part of my commect.




This post has been edited by Massey: 18 May 2012, 6:27

[Mcbob]

Bradley's profile seems much inspired by Douglas MacArthur haha.

Marine Corps eh? Would Bradely's faction have Marines in place of Rangers as a result?

Otherwise, this is an infinitely greater improvement over the old shockwave model.

[MARS]

Truth be told, we did make him a Marine as a bit of an afterthought. When I wrote the characterisation a few weeks ago, it kinda crossed my mind that this guy is very gung-ho and since we didn't have any Marine representation at all prior to this, I just decided to make the most gung-ho of the US generals a Marine for the hell of it cos that's kinda part of their own self-image. After all, the USMC does have its own tank units. In-game, this is obviously a bit of a mess: Cobra helicopters will be exclusive to an Air Force General and the update acknowledges that the Bradley is not a Marine vehicle in RL. Still worth that bit of in-lore variety though, IMO. The Hover Crusader on the other hand is something that the Marines would probably like to use, being a fast, hard-hitting amphibious tank that would fit into their overall doctrine. As for the character, yeah there is a bit of MacArthur in there and the rivalry between Bradley and Kwai is an obvious reference to the one between Patton and Montgomery: Fighting for the same cause, but constantly trying to one-up eachother.

Wouldn't this make the Humvee kinda redundant? Oh well, no point in me guessing too much before actually seeing how these work out in-game.
Anyway I love what I am seeing of this armed to the teeth US muscle. Maybe later we'll also see pinpoint Russian/Chinese precision!

The Humvee is still significantly cheaper and faster than the Bradley, and available early on without any extra conditions.
Plus, when you upgrade them, they always fire their TOWs automatically whereas the Bradley needs to have its missiles micro-managed.

[Mcbob]

Truth be told, we did make him a Marine as a bit of an afterthought. When I wrote the characterisation, it kinda crossed my mind that this guy is very gung-ho and since we didn't have any Marine representation at all prior to this, I just decided to make the most gung-ho of the US generals a Marine for the hell of it cos that's kinda part of their own self-image. After all, the USMC does have its own tank units. In-game, this is obviously a bit of a mess: Cobra helicopters will be exclusive to an Air Force General and the lore acknoledges that the Bradley is not a Marine vehicle in RL. Still worth that bit of in-lore variety though, IMO. The Hover Crusader on the other hand is something that the Marines would probably like to use, being a fast, hard-hitting amphibious tank that would fit into their overall doctrine. As for the character, yeah there is a bit of MacArthur in there and the rivalry between Bradley and Kwai is an obvious reference to the one between Patton and Montgomery: Fighting for the same cause, but constantly trying to one-up eachother.

Well considering the Bradley is going to the Marines this time around, it does make sense as the Corps more often than not receive hand-me-downs from older or retired Army programs.

I actually find the new representation in ROTR very refreshing and even, surprising? Even though Alexander was lore-wise a Marine Corps general (and even had the dress uniform to boot) all she had that was Marine-esque was the Shatterer, which was even then, pretty high tech for someone in the Marines but still relevant to her doctrine. In the end, Alexander ended up not feeling like someone from the Marine Corps and such mention or acknowledgement of the Marines was overlooked, downplayed, and lost.

I very much feel the more gritty, improvised, and somewhat old-school/hand-me-down nature of the Marines be fitting that they should get the M2A4 and I appreciate that you've done that.

[Comr4de]

Wouldn't this make the Humvee kinda redundant? Oh well, no point in me guessing too much before actually seeing how these work out in-game.

Anyway I love what I am seeing of this armed to the teeth US muscle. Maybe later we'll also see pinpoint Russian/Chinese precision!

Humvees are VITAL to US early game in PVP - they're still faster and have more range with its variation of TOW missiles, they're still quite viable and non-redundant I find them simply because of that, speed - and quite cheaper than a Bradley =)

Think of the Bradley as a Light Tank because that's exactly what it feels like now.

[MARS]

Well considering the Bradley is going to the Marines this time around, it does make sense as the Corps more often than not receive hand-me-downs from older or retired Army programs.

I actually find the new representation in ROTR very refreshing and even, surprising? Even though Alexander was lore-wise a Marine Corps general (and even had the dress uniform to boot) all she had that was Marine-esque was the Shatterer, which was even then, pretty high tech for someone in the Marines but still relevant to her doctrine. In the end, Alexander ended up not feeling like someone from the Marine Corps and such mention or acknowledgement of the Marines was overlooked, downplayed, and lost.

I very much feel the more gritty, improvised, and somewhat old-school/hand-me-down nature of the Marines be fitting that they should get the M2A4 and I appreciate that you've done that.

Fair enough, especially with the Alexander comparison. Bradley's Marines will not cower behind overpowered EMP Patriots while firing Particle Cannons and launching Aurora strikes. They'll be out in the field with their tanks fighting and dying which, given the Corps' mythos, is a lot more appropriate in a warrior-kind of mindset than the former. Also, lore-wise, ShW doesn't exist in the ROTR timeline, which is based on Zero Hour instead. The projects are completely independent from each other and while it's obvious that people will point out similarities and differences in regards to gameplay, what little lore ShW had does NOT apply to Rise of the Reds, meaning that Deathstrike WAS actually the fat fuck from the GLA mission, Leang was an eccentric loon with a ridiculous mix-and-match arsenal and Alexander didn't actually have Shatterers. But yeah, gameplay-wise, that comparison is certainly valid.

[SpiralSpectre]

Thanks for clearing out that Humvee-Bradley redundancy confusion.

I actually find the new representation in ROTR very refreshing and even, surprising? Even though Alexander was lore-wise a Marine Corps general (and even had the dress uniform to boot) all she had that was Marine-esque was the Shatterer, which was even then, pretty high tech for someone in the Marines but still relevant to her doctrine. In the end, Alexander ended up not feeling like someone from the Marine Corps and such mention or acknowledgement of the Marines was overlooked, downplayed, and lost.

The Shatterer and those sonic blasts were one hell of a thing of beauty. *goes teary eyes*

[Panzer4life]

Love the lore for General Bradley and the US decline from the international spot-light, it kind of mirrors the British after the Second World War. Now, wouldn't the BMP fare better against the Bradley, since they carry still an auto-cannon plus a 100mm cannon? Also, the BMP can get stealth finding conscripts inside of it, as well as being able to drive through water.

[GDIZOCOM]

This is SO awesome I can't wait for 1.7

[TheSpudd]

...whereas the Bradley needs to have its missiles micro-managed.

I feel World in Conflict has a little inspiration for this Bradley, and any reference made to WiC/SA definitely has me buzzing!

[Claine]

what!! with point-defence laser. awesome

[Warpath]

PDL, TOW and a 25mm autocannon, damn thats one powerful IFV.

Anyways how many troops can the Bradley carry?

[MARS]

I think like five or six, not entirely sure off the top of my head.

[aeroth]

Nice !

But I am still waiting for the airforce general. I love airpower more then tank rolling

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKg05F5_FBY

[Anubis]

Nice update but kinda dissapointing for me. I understand the whole lore behind using old units, but by 2040 alot of other us army units could be considered old as hell. Personaly i think the striker would've made a much better addition for 2 reasons - it has a much more high tech design while still being an old vehicle and from reason 1 you would still have a more techy feel for the USA, which they are really starting to lack heavily atm. For the high tech faction of this game, USA feels more like a glorified GLA ( i could say the same about their hvy AA - the THAAD is actualy becoming old as we speak and by 2040 it would be considered old tech as well - so it would imo make a better choice as hvy AA ).

My point would be - there's plenty of military vehicles atm in the entire us army that feel at least semi high-tech. Using the ones that are really frekin old and shoe-box looking will never help with the whole high-tech faction design. The human brain works mostly with visuals - you can have the highest tech lore behind something, but if that something does not look like it has that tech, in the mind of a human it will not feel that way.

Can't wait to see what you guys have cooked for china though.

This post has been edited by Anubis: 18 May 2012, 10:28

[MARS]

Thing is, we aren't actually giving the USA these old units for the sake of it. The lore mostly acts as an in-universe justification, but design-wise, this is actually due to the fact that we simply LIKE these old vehicles a lot better than the stuff that'll replace them in real life. We -like- the iconic design of the Nighthawk better than the Raptor-esque smoothness of the F35. We -like- proper, piloted aircraft better than a bunch of utterly expendable UCAVs devoid of in-game personality. We -like- the rugged features of the Bradley IFV better than the modularity of the Stryker which is just another wheeled vehicle that wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for the RL US military's post-911 doctrine of quick global deployability against fifth-rate Middle Eastern militaries. But unlike this or the in-universe war against the GLA, the Russo-European war is an old school total war between two post-industrial superpowers with vehicle-heavy combined arms engagements that are a lot more akin to what would have happened during the Cold War. So yeah, we do realise that we're kinda stretching the "US economy is in the shit which is why they have to upgrade and reintroduce old stuff"-handwave, but the main reason we're doing this is actually because of personal preference and because we just didn't jump on the bandwagon alongside every other "let's have every killer robot, space age design and network-centric, super-deployable Nth generation plane and vehicle from Future Weapons because 'merica fuck yeah" kinda mod.

[SpiralSpectre]

Thing is, we aren't actually giving the USA these old units for the sake of it. The lore mostly acts as an in-universe justification, but design-wise, this is actually due to the fact that we simply LIKE these old vehicles a lot better than the stuff that'll replace them in real life. We -like- the iconic design of the Nighthawk better than the Raptor-esque smoothness of the F35. We -like- proper, piloted aircraft better than a bunch of utterly expendable UCAVs devoid of in-game personality. We -like- the rugged features of the Bradley IFV better than the modularity of the Stryker which is just another wheeled vehicle that wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for the RL US military's post-911 doctrine of quick global deployability against fifth-rate Middle Eastern militaries. But unlike this or the in-universe war against the GLA, the Russo-European war is an old school total war between two post-industrial superpowers with vehicle-heavy combined arms engagements that are a lot more akin to what would have happened during the Cold War. So yeah, we do realise that we're kinda stretching the "US economy is in the shit which is why they have to upgrade and reintroduce old stuff"-handwave, but the main reason we're doing this is actually because of personal preference and because we just didn't jump on the bandwagon alongside every other "let's have every killer robot, space age design and network-centric, super-deployable Nth generation plane and vehicle from Future Weapons because 'merica fuck yeah" kinda mod.

It's understandable that you like the older unit designs and looks more than the designs of the units that have replaced them/will replace them in the near future. Personally I prefer Nighthawk's design over F35's design.

Yeah you guys might be stretching the economic crisis thing in the more but the lore and the looks in-game are two separate things and should be judged separately. So yeh from a gameplay PoV - it's completely fine to use renders if they're unique and likable even if lorewise you can't find very good reasons for implementing them.

However that gives rise to some relevant questions like,

If you just like the designs and looks of the comparatively older units then why don't you keep the looks while presenting them to be fictional successors to the successors of the original in real life? You know, why not make them turn out to be units that look like the older units but are future-esque units that have actually succeeded the RL successors? Why specifically tell everyone that it's the old vehicle from the 1980s? Why not at least consider changing the name to give it a different feel?

Secondly why chose a timeline that's way further in the future than the original ZH if you wanna apply older units? Is that just for lore related reasons? Making the mod take place n the 2040s make the older units much harder to accept. Obviously it gives a comparatively much stranger feel when using old gritty units in a mod set in 2040s then in a mod set in 2020s.

And I realise you don't wanna join the "merica fuck yeah" kinda mods list, and I truly respect that. But it's also a fact that according to what we know so far - the same kinda return/continuous use of old hardware is is being applied/will be applied for the other factions as well, perhaps except for the ECA?

Mind you these are just some relevant question that spawn from what you guys have said earlier. I am asking them just cause I am curious to hear your opinions on those points. They ain't suggestions, so no need to treat them so. Personally I don't agree with all the points either.

This post has been edited by SpiralSpectre: 18 May 2012, 13:12

[Anubis]

Thing is, we aren't actually giving the USA these old units for the sake of it. The lore mostly acts as an in-universe justification, but design-wise, this is actually due to the fact that we simply LIKE these old vehicles a lot better than the stuff that'll replace them in real life. We -like- the iconic design of the Nighthawk better than the Raptor-esque smoothness of the F35. We -like- proper, piloted aircraft better than a bunch of utterly expendable UCAVs devoid of in-game personality. We -like- the rugged features of the Bradley IFV better than the modularity of the Stryker which is just another wheeled vehicle that wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for the RL US military's post-911 doctrine of quick global deployability against fifth-rate Middle Eastern militaries. But unlike this or the in-universe war against the GLA, the Russo-European war is an old school total war between two post-industrial superpowers with vehicle-heavy combined arms engagements that are a lot more akin to what would have happened during the Cold War. So yeah, we do realise that we're kinda stretching the "US economy is in the shit which is why they have to upgrade and reintroduce old stuff"-handwave, but the main reason we're doing this is actually because of personal preference and because we just didn't jump on the bandwagon alongside every other "let's have every killer robot, space age design and network-centric, super-deployable Nth generation plane and vehicle from Future Weapons because 'merica fuck yeah" kinda mod.

The thing is i never suggested ucav's or any space technology stuff. Not really a big fan of them myself tbh. And while i like the nighthawk design alot, i simply think you guys should rely less on RL stuff and more on your own cool designs. You have some really cool units you guys created yourselfs or based on custom made designs ( the gla interceptor or the ECA fixed wing plane ). Along with that i respect the fact that you like this designs and at the end of the day it's all on the mod team's taste. However if the current usa is considered both ingame and lorewise to be the highest tech fation then i have some serious concerns about how ECA will be. Cause atm USA simply doesn't have the slightest feel of high tech at all. Everything they have is so outdated designwise, than as i said they look like a glorified GLA. Atm the only 2 units usa have that have a slight high-tech feel are the hover crusader and the xerox on treads - mw tank. In the end it is your choice and your mod, however based on the faction design you yourselfs created and even based on lore stuff, USA atm feels prety much the exact oposite of it's description. They have humvees, bradleys, ancient chaparrals, a abrams wanna-be paladin tank and planes and gunships that are as basic and boring as they can get design-wise. At least this is the way i see it.

This post has been edited by Anubis: 18 May 2012, 13:43

[SpiralSpectre]

@Anubis - Just felt like pointing out that in all honesty this Bradley can very well be considered a very good custom made design with all it's new weapons, custom modifications and carefully fine tuned details.

Personally I also think it would be very cool if the designs relied less on RL stuff and more on the team's own cool designs. But that's the team's decision to make and like you said, we need to respect that.

[MARS]

If you just like the designs and looks of the comparatively older units then why don't you keep the looks while presenting them to be fictional successors to the successors of the original in real life? You know, why not make them turn out to be units that look like the older units but are future-esque units that have actually succeeded the RL successors? Why specifically tell everyone that it's the old vehicle from the 1980s? Why not at least consider changing the name to give it a different feel?

Personally, I'd find it a bit cheap that way: If we want to have a unit in-game that looks and acts exactly like a Bradley, we should also call it that in order to keep things intuitive. Made up names should only be reserved for units that are either based on truly fictional designs or follow an overly boring, formal naming convention in real life. Case in point: The Russian Kodiak tank. It's obviously meant to be a T-80 or T-90, but we decided to call it the Kodiak because it just sounds more interesting than the typical Russian designation. Same deal with the Chinese which, in real life, use equally generic Type-# and ZTZ-# designations. The Bradley on the other hand, much like the Abrams or other non-US units like the Hind, the Havoc or the Tunguska are known and recognisable by actual names. Hence, we use these names for the sake of recognisability, because calling a Bradley a Shmadley just to pretend that it's somehow new and different even though it largely looks and behaves the same wouldn't be intuitive. Although in this particular case, the lore does actually refer to it by a fictional M2A4 designation, which doesn't actually exist (yet), because at least the fluff describes it as an overhauled Bradley rather than today's.

Secondly why chose a timeline that's way further in the future than the original ZH if you wanna apply older units? Is that just for lore related reasons? Making the mod take place n the 2040s make the older units much harder to accept. Obviously it gives a comparatively much stranger feel when using old gritty units in a mod set in 2040s then in a mod set in 2020s.

That is an issue that arose in the early stages of development, when the end date of Zero Hour was incorrectly placed as early as 2016, even though what little official Generals/ZH fluff there is places the conflict in the 2020s. Therefore, the current, retconned timeline places the end of ZH in 2028, and in order to keep things somewhat plausible from a time frame, we had to stretch out the various events leading up to the war all the way to 2045, about 20 years later. If we compressed the years further, the official timeline, which will also be presented to you in graphic form, would become too convoluted and messy. In addition, it places the various events far enough into the future to avoid the problem you had in old 80's movies which presented the dystopian hell-hole world of *dun-dun-duuunnn* 1999, because realistically speaking, the final version of the mod WILL come out before 2028.

And I realise you don't wanna join the "merica fuck yeah" kinda mods list, and I truly respect that. But it's also a fact that according to what we know so far - the same kinda return/continuous use of old hardware is is being applied/will be applied for the other factions as well, perhaps except for the ECA?

Well, let's take a look at the various factions in detail:

USA: The stuff that currently stands out as old (off the top of my head) is the Bradley, the Humvee, the B-52, the B-1, the B-2, the Nighthawk, the Chaparral (although in this case only the actual platform), the Cobra (which isn't even the new Z-version introduced in 2010) as well as arguably the Black Hawk and Little Bird. What stands out as truly advanced however is the omnipresence of armed and recon-equipped drones available for all vehicles, the Sentry Drone, the F-22, the Osprey, the Microwave Tank, the Comanche (which, as an interesting inversion, was actually cancelled in real life), the Particle Cannon, the Hover Crusader (i.e. a tank that basically flies), the various laser systems, the sophisticated sensory and computer equipment that's obviously required to achieve the US' degree of precision and the fact that their power plant is somehow a fusion reactor.

Russia: Their weapons are actually the most heavily based on real life equipment. The only vehicles in their arsenal that are truly entirely fictional are the Sentinel and the Tesla Tank. Everything else might as well be a real vehicle designed between present day and the 1980s. One thing you do have to consider about the real life Russian military today is that its been plagued by insufficient funding since the end of the Soviet era, which is why their equipment is quite diverse in regards to what is still considered useable or in other words: Not every tank in the Russian army is a proper, top-of-the-range T-90. However, by the time ROTR is said, this problem will actually be solved due to their economic recovery in-universe. Russia will basically BE at the point where it would LOVE to be by the end of this decade as far as the basic platforms are concerned and they too will obviously modify the various sub-systems of their vehicles and planes to remain competetitive. This, however, is stuff that wouldn't warrant the inclusion of an entirely new vehicle, because then, they'd be stuck in the exact same transitional phase as they are now. Bottom line: Russia also uses a lot of stuff that would seem 'old' on paper by the time ROTR happens but they too went into lengths to keep it updated while also creating some truly advanced pieces like Tesla tech, rocket rifles, the Sentinel or the PAK-FA

China: They are an odd case because most of their in-game vehicles are based on fictional designs, with no RL analogue being readily apparent. Their Battlemasters could be anything between a T-55 and a T-62 but even THOSE seemingly ancient pieces can still be upgraded with compact nuclear engines (!) but then there's stuff like the Gattling Tank, Dragon Tank, the Overlord, the Han or Nuke Cannon that don't have a clear real life counterpart. The Hellfire is based on a MiG-21 while the Fighter is a MiG-1.44, a technology demonstrator from 10 years ago that, much like the Comanche and Berkut, never went into production. The basic designs of their vehicles are generally not pretty and more leaning towards the crude, but they're fictional so we have to assume that they're relatively new in-universe as well. What does give them a bit of a high-tech feel is stuff like EMP, ECM and nuclear tech, which will actually be a lot more limited once the generals come into play. Right now, the fact that all of this is part of the same tech tree kinda creates the wrong image that such complex technology is extremely common.

GLA: Not much to write home about here: Their equipment is not as heavy on the WW2 relics as it was in Shockwave but the most advanced stuff they could aqcuire still amounts to outdated Scud missiles, 1950's era British tanks, French recon choppers from the late 60s and a ton of converted civilian vehicles. Suspension of disbelief is pretty much the only thing that makes them able to destroy something as basic as a Kodiak.

ECA: They are comparable to China in the sense that much of their stuff will be based on fictional concepts which, in turn, took design inspirations from existing weapons with a few elements added to make them look like advanced variants. Overall, I would place them somewhere between Russia and the US: More sophisticated in looks and lore than Russia with the occasional piece of prototype high-tech but nowhere NEAR the USA when it comes to deploying directed energy weapons and (especially) unmanned vehicles.

PS: I should probably point out that I started making this reply about an hour ago, so don't get the wrong idea that I was consciously ignoring you, Anubis.