Currently, there are only two factors which effect the way a country plays: the geography around the country, and the doctrine of the country. Since geography can't really be changed much given the game's setting, the doctrines are the only current path to creating any sort of unique opportunities from country to country. So, this is what I'd like to focus on.
Most of the countries that were historically a part of the "Allies" fit under a single umbrella largely dominated by a tech tree that focuses on U.S. hardware. I think the French, British, and other nations deserve their own trees, and some edits be made to the the current "Allies" tree.
I see that there's already a pinned thread for the British. I'd like to take a crack at it, as well. My iteration of the tree would be called "Commonwealth," so as to encompass more than just Britain. It would apply to the United Kingdom, Canada, ANZAC countries, India, Egypt, and any other nation that was a part of the British Empire or Commonwealth at the start of hostilities.
Bonuses and context
Britain's army was troubled by several factors. While its infantry was perfectly capable for the day, its tank development can be best characterized as sluggish and behind the times. Much of this is because of a rigid doctrine that proved to somewhat miss the mark, and difficulties in procuring guns and engines suitable for their armored aspirations.
All that aside, though, their navy performed well given its situation, and its air force was top-notch. In particular, they were a pioneer in the use of Special Forces as far as the Western Allies go, and this should be reflected as part of their character. In fact, Britain was responsible for a great deal of technological innovation in the interwar years, much of which was exchanged with the United States for war material.
My proposed faction bonuses would be as follows:
Commonwealth: Empire
Research Cost/time: -25%
Aircraft Cost: -15%
Naval Cost: -15%
Upgrade Cost/time: +25%
Using these bonuses/penalties, commonwealth countries are always on the technological cutting edge, being able to capitalize on a strong naval and aeronautical tradition. However, their slow upgrade speed and high cost harkens back to the industrial troubles plaguing these powers as, in one form or another, they often had issues with getting sufficient quantities of the latest equipment into the field.
In addition, the tree itself should allow for hastened access to airborne infantry as well as commandoes. The ordnance branch should give quicker availability of early artillery upgrades. In contrast, there would be a considerable lag in the development of armored vehicles, heavily armored infantry, and tank destroyers. As such, Commonwealth armies are more likely to resemble a higher proportion of foot infantry supplemented by motorized units and a high reliance on artillery on the ground. Where possible, naval and airforces will be used to support them, as they would otherwise have a rough time in waging modern warfare against enemies with a higher investment in a powerful ground army.
A note on equipment
Given that the goal of adding hypothetical new doctrines would be to help add some variation to the game, I personally think that any reference to Lend Lease should be subdued and kept to a minimum except where it is necessary. If Commonwealth equipment is to be almost universally American equipment in a number of sectors, then what's the point?
Changing the current Allied tree
With commonwealth influences removed from the existant tree, it is now free to take on a more American or "New World" personality. This would involve the removal of the Spitfire sprite for the doctrine interceptor, perhaps replaced by a P-40 followed by a P-51. The research cost/time bonus should be replaced by a manpower bonus, reflecting that countries using this doctrine (presumably ones that have broken away from their European ancestries such as America, Mexico, and some South American countries) have vast pools of manpower relatively untouched by European and Asian wars.
Most of the countries that were historically a part of the "Allies" fit under a single umbrella largely dominated by a tech tree that focuses on U.S. hardware. I think the French, British, and other nations deserve their own trees, and some edits be made to the the current "Allies" tree.
I see that there's already a pinned thread for the British. I'd like to take a crack at it, as well. My iteration of the tree would be called "Commonwealth," so as to encompass more than just Britain. It would apply to the United Kingdom, Canada, ANZAC countries, India, Egypt, and any other nation that was a part of the British Empire or Commonwealth at the start of hostilities.
Bonuses and context
Britain's army was troubled by several factors. While its infantry was perfectly capable for the day, its tank development can be best characterized as sluggish and behind the times. Much of this is because of a rigid doctrine that proved to somewhat miss the mark, and difficulties in procuring guns and engines suitable for their armored aspirations.
All that aside, though, their navy performed well given its situation, and its air force was top-notch. In particular, they were a pioneer in the use of Special Forces as far as the Western Allies go, and this should be reflected as part of their character. In fact, Britain was responsible for a great deal of technological innovation in the interwar years, much of which was exchanged with the United States for war material.
My proposed faction bonuses would be as follows:
Commonwealth: Empire
Research Cost/time: -25%
Aircraft Cost: -15%
Naval Cost: -15%
Upgrade Cost/time: +25%
Using these bonuses/penalties, commonwealth countries are always on the technological cutting edge, being able to capitalize on a strong naval and aeronautical tradition. However, their slow upgrade speed and high cost harkens back to the industrial troubles plaguing these powers as, in one form or another, they often had issues with getting sufficient quantities of the latest equipment into the field.
In addition, the tree itself should allow for hastened access to airborne infantry as well as commandoes. The ordnance branch should give quicker availability of early artillery upgrades. In contrast, there would be a considerable lag in the development of armored vehicles, heavily armored infantry, and tank destroyers. As such, Commonwealth armies are more likely to resemble a higher proportion of foot infantry supplemented by motorized units and a high reliance on artillery on the ground. Where possible, naval and airforces will be used to support them, as they would otherwise have a rough time in waging modern warfare against enemies with a higher investment in a powerful ground army.
A note on equipment
Given that the goal of adding hypothetical new doctrines would be to help add some variation to the game, I personally think that any reference to Lend Lease should be subdued and kept to a minimum except where it is necessary. If Commonwealth equipment is to be almost universally American equipment in a number of sectors, then what's the point?
Changing the current Allied tree
With commonwealth influences removed from the existant tree, it is now free to take on a more American or "New World" personality. This would involve the removal of the Spitfire sprite for the doctrine interceptor, perhaps replaced by a P-40 followed by a P-51. The research cost/time bonus should be replaced by a manpower bonus, reflecting that countries using this doctrine (presumably ones that have broken away from their European ancestries such as America, Mexico, and some South American countries) have vast pools of manpower relatively untouched by European and Asian wars.