Possible Soviet Union Based Faction. Need ideas.

[Darkness12]

I had ideas for making a Soviet union based Faction for battletech. I had also ha ideas to give them their own tech base to be as unique as possible. the faction is currently unnamed but I am working it out slowly now, my main problem is that I do not know technology wise where to start should I start with their weapons and equipment,their mechs,their vehicles or their warships. feel free to help out. this is a semi open-source project, so you are free to put some input and even suggest a name.

[Hawkeye Jim]

They have a faction. It's called the Clans.

[Dragon Cat]

They already have a faction, well a planet - Tikonov.  It is said to be the a last of the Union of Soviet States.

[Warpimp]

Since you are planning a new faction/tech base, maybe go with something to make your units more rugged or more numerous. There are quite a few TAC Ops rules/components that you could make faction specific. Maybe make armored components standard.

Another route is that the Soviets loved to make things bigger.

[Darkness12]

They have a faction. It's called the Clans.

Well I am sure that you already know that this new faction will be a nod to the clans and the old SL in some respects. But it will have it's differences.

They already have a faction, well a planet - Tikonov.  It is said to be the a last of the Union of Soviet States.

At least I got some information cbt universe wise to work off. thanks for notifying me on that.

Since you are planning a new faction/tech base, maybe go with something to make your units more rugged or more numerous. There are quite a few TAC Ops rules/components that you could make faction specific. Maybe make armored components standard.

Another route is that the Soviets loved to make things bigger.

Pretty good suggestion there, thanks.

[Red Pins]

You might look at the primitive battlemech rules from Blake Documents (I think).  As a nod to their past, it seems to me that you might use some of the primitive rules to reflect their slightly less advanced (?) components while still fielding battlemechs.

[Darkness12]

You might look at the primitive battlemech rules from Blake Documents (I think).  As a nod to their past, it seems to me that you might use some of the primitive rules to reflect their slightly less advanced (?) components while still fielding battlemechs.

Yeah and Thanks. This Faction could start with mostly introductory weapons then work their way up-to where the other factions are now.

[Hawkeye Jim]

As I recall from history, the old USSR was found of massing like units together foir mass attacks. Much like the SLDF did. An entire company containing just one type of mech/tank.

[Demon55]

I voted for custom mechs and vehicles.  I would see a soviet faction making vehicles for its own needs.  As for warships I would expect them to be slightly obsolete. 

I do like the idea of a Soviet faction (Ah, the memories of being an American military brat in Europe in the 1980s).

[Darkness12]

I voted for custom mechs and vehicles.  I would see a soviet faction making vehicles for its own needs.  As for warships I would expect them to be slightly obsolete. 

I do like the idea of a Soviet faction (Ah, the memories of being an American military brat in Europe in the 1980s).

Hmm I'm sure they would build jump ships as they would need to get around. Also I was thinking about giving them some technology that is exclusive to them like the clans have, such as triple heat sinks for example(They won't have access to the partial wings).

[Warpimp]

Are  you planning a large/powerful faction a smaller faction?

[Darkness12]

Are  you planning a large/powerful faction a smaller faction?

Large.reasonably(realistically) powerful faction similar to what the USSR used to be. I will keep fairly true to their influence but I may do some poetic licensing here and there. Keep in mind that I will make up alot of history and put alot of effort in to justify it.

[Warclaw]

Soviet Faction?  Interesting Idea.

Infantry heavy of course, with battalions of Penal infantry used for the dirtiest jobs.

I would tend to expect LARGE units of simple, durable tanks as the base of the mechanized portion of the army. (Po and Scorpion Tanks, plus quite a few IFV's)

The standard tactic would be attrition style warfare, throwing whole regiments at enemy battalions.  Accepting the losses to grind the opponent down.

Mechs would be less common, and used for special operations and high value targets.

[Darkness12]

Soviet Faction?  Interesting Idea.

Infantry heavy of course, with battalions of Penal infantry used for the dirtiest jobs.

I would tend to expect LARGE units of simple, durable tanks as the base of the mechanized portion of the army. (Po and Scorpion Tanks, plus quite a few IFV's)

The standard tactic would be attrition style warfare, throwing whole regiments at enemy battalions.  Accepting the losses to grind the opponent down.

Mechs would be less common, and used for special operations and high value targets.

Well there will be mainly tanks and infantry but there will be a few industrial mechs thrown in with them to keep the enemy battle mech lances distracted. Attrition style warfare definitely suits the soviets though guerrilla warfare comes under this as well. there will be a few exaggerations here and there but overall fairly realistic.

[Sir Chaos]

Lots of cheap units. Slow (for their size) Mechs with little fancy electronics. Lots of basic ICE powered vehicles (Scorpion, Vedette, Po, Zhukov (*especially* Zhukov, with that name...), Demolisher, LRM/SRM/AC2-Carrier, that sort of thing). Lots of infantry in cheap APCs. And, of course, lots and lots and LOTS of artillery.

[Red Pins]

...Have you considered taking a page from the chinese (or Capellan, here) and instigating guerrila warfare?  Political officers overruling military officers?

[Darkness12]

...Have you considered taking a page from the chinese (or Capellan, here) and instigating guerrila warfare?  Political officers overruling military officers?

Never thought of that If I can I might pick up or downlaod some cappelan tro's and see what I will use from there.

Lots of cheap units. Slow (for their size) Mechs with little fancy electronics. Lots of basic ICE powered vehicles (Scorpion, Vedette, Po, Zhukov (*especially* Zhukov, with that name...), Demolisher, LRM/SRM/AC2-Carrier, that sort of thing). Lots of infantry in cheap APCs. And, of course, lots and lots and LOTS of artillery.

Possibly make Armored components and turrets standard for them as well things like the HVAC's and Case less AC's. I.C.E Vehicles yes. Simplistic and reliable definitely. So expect things that will be more tougher to take down whilst retaining their simplistically.

[Lord Cameron]

They already have a faction, well a planet - Tikonov.  It is said to be the a last of the Union of Soviet States.

The system was named after Oleg Tikonov, the last leader of the Soviet Union.

And it was also home to a major Earthwerks factory, so you might consider using some of those designs.

I do like the idea of a Soviet faction (Ah, the memories of being an American military brat in Europe in the 1980s).

It's too bad that the Tikonov subplot (sons of Ridzhik) wasn't developed in the Chaos March era, it would have been interesting

[KlavoHunter]

I extremely doubt you would see any Dire Wolf-like sort of uber Assault 'Mech out of these Soviets, for the Soviets kept things like logistics and ease of production in mind at all times - They did not stop and start tank production to fit in the latest widget some egghead thought would work, they only allowed modifications that would make it easier to produce, and then only later when they had obvious needs, did they upgrade the T-34's turret to the /85 model.  Tanks like the T-72 and such have capped their weight based on what Soviet bridging units can support.

You will probably see, at largest, some form of Heavy 'Mech out of these guys.  But there will be LOTS of them!   ;)

[Darkness12]

I extremely doubt you would see any Dire Wolf-like sort of uber Assault 'Mech out of these Soviets, for the Soviets kept things like logistics and ease of production in mind at all times - They did not stop and start tank production to fit in the latest widget some egghead thought would work, they only allowed modifications that would make it easier to produce, and then only later when they had obvious needs, did they upgrade the T-34's turret to the /85 model.  Tanks like the T-72 and such have capped their weight based on what Soviet bridging units can support.

You will probably see, at largest, some form of Heavy 'Mech out of these guys.  But there will be LOTS of them!   ;)

They would have fielded mainly industrial mechs armed for military application, because they are cheaper to build then proper battle mechs. I would see them Fielding things like normal and ER Chemical lasers too they are in a realistic sense reasonably cheap to produce.

The system was named after Oleg Tikonov, the last leader of the Soviet Union.

And it was also home to a major Earthwerks factory, so you might consider using some of those designs.

It's too bad that the Tikonov subplot (sons of Ridzhik) wasn't developed in the Chaos March era, it would have been interesting

I may look into some of the Earthwerks designs and see which ones would be useful. If Catalyst would like to adopt something similar to this faction that I am making then they are more then welcome to. I'll take these ideas into account.

[martian]

Since you are planning a new faction/tech base, maybe go with something to make your units more rugged or more numerous. There are quite a few TAC Ops rules/components that you could make faction specific. Maybe make armored components standard.

Another route is that the Soviets loved to make things bigger.

First sentence is O.K., I would agree with that. However, the second part is more myth than reality. Soviet tanks were much smaller and lighter than average Western tanks. For example:
T-54/55 - 40.5 tons
T-62    - 41.5 tons
T-72    - 44.5 tons

And now Western tanks:
M48 - 52 tons
M60 - 60 tons
Leopard 1 - 42 tons
Chieftain - 55 tons
Challenger - 62 tons

As you can see, Soviet tanks were usually much lighter. (source: fas.org - numbers are a bit different than I remember, but let's believe them for now)

You might look at the primitive battlemech rules from Blake Documents (I think).  As a nod to their past, it seems to me that you might use some of the primitive rules to reflect their slightly less advanced (?) components while still fielding battlemechs.

Primitive components? For example Soviets were the first to use autoloader in mass production (T-64, T-72) ... Their T-34 used as main gun 76mm cannon in time when Germans were able to manufacture substandard 50mm gun and arm their PzKpfw IV with low-efficiency 75mm gun. Not to talk about KV-series tanks. There was nothing comparable in Western Europe.

Soviet Faction?  Interesting Idea.

Infantry heavy of course, with battalions of Penal infantry used for the dirtiest jobs.

I would tend to expect LARGE units of simple, durable tanks as the base of the mechanized portion of the army. (Po and Scorpion Tanks, plus quite a few IFV's)

The standard tactic would be attrition style warfare, throwing whole regiments at enemy battalions.  Accepting the losses to grind the opponent down.

Mechs would be less common, and used for special operations and high value targets.

Sounds reasonable.

...Have you considered taking a page from the chinese (or Capellan, here) and instigating guerrila warfare?  Political officers overruling military officers?

This system was abolished in Soviet army around 1943.

It's too bad that the Tikonov subplot (sons of Ridzhik) wasn't developed in the Chaos March era, it would have been interesting

I heard that writers just plainly forgot that Colonel Ridzik had any sons.  :-)

I extremely doubt you would see any Dire Wolf-like sort of uber Assault 'Mech out of these Soviets, for the Soviets kept things like logistics and ease of production in mind at all times - They did not stop and start tank production to fit in the latest widget some egghead thought would work, they only allowed modifications that would make it easier to produce, and then only later when they had obvious needs, did they upgrade the T-34's turret to the /85 model.  Tanks like the T-72 and such have capped their weight based on what Soviet bridging units can support.

You will probably see, at largest, some form of Heavy 'Mech out of these guys.  But there will be LOTS of them!   ;)

That part about manufacture and logistics is absolutely true. BUT, when it comes to T-72s weight, it was quite opposite. It wasn't that T-72 had their weight decided according bridging and transport, no. Bridges were designed and built to carry weight of Soviet tanks, but collapse when heavier Western tanks like Patton or Chieftain tried to use them. It was defensive measure.

Just a few personal opinions, so take them with a grain of salt.

[Darkness12]

First sentence is O.K., I would agree with that. However, the second part is more myth than reality. Soviet tanks were much smaller and lighter than average Western tanks. For example:
T-54/55 - 40.5 tons
T-62    - 41.5 tons
T-72    - 44.5 tons

And now Western tanks:
M48 - 52 tons
M60 - 60 tons
Leopard 1 - 42 tons
Chieftain - 55 tons
Challenger - 62 tons

As you can see, Soviet tanks were usually much lighter. (source: fas.org - numbers are a bit different than I remember, but let's believe them for now)

Agreed here. What about industrial mechs would they be built by them for military applications? theoretically speaking.

Primitive components? For example Soviets were the first to use autoloader in mass production (T-64, T-72) ... Their T-34 used as main gun 76mm cannon in time when Germans were able to manufacture substandard 50mm gun and arm their PzKpfw IV with low-efficiency 75mm gun. Not to talk about KV-series tanks. There was nothing comparable in Western Europe.

I would agree with that personally they would have had some form of advanced tech.

This system was abolished in Soviet army around 1943.

That I believe is true.

I heard that writers just plainly forgot that Colonel Ridzik had any sons.  :-)

I might consider using the taknov incomplete subplot as a base to work from for my new faction.

That part about manufacture and logistics is absolutely true. BUT, when it comes to T-72s weight, it was quite opposite. It wasn't that T-72 had their weight decided according bridging and transport, no. Bridges were designed and built to carry weight of Soviet tanks, but collapse when heavier Western tanks like Patton or Chieftain tried to use them. It was defensive measure.

Just a few personal opinions, so take them with a grain of salt.

Speaking of Logistics what is cheaper long term Industrial mechs or battle mechs?

[martian]

They would have fielded mainly industrial mechs armed for military application, because they are cheaper to build then proper battle mechs. I would see them Fielding things like normal and ER Chemical lasers too they are in a realistic sense reasonably cheap to produce.

Please, don't take this personally, but it seems to me that you are under influence of TV stereotypes when it comes to Soviets. During WWII Soviets used armed civilian equipment (armed tractors and such), but only as desperate improvisation. Otherwise, Soviet leaders understood extremely well the importance of solid industrial base (especially when it produced military equipment and weapons). They spared no expense to build such base. That's the big difference against German incompetence and corruption during WWII. And they kept this base even after the war ended. There was no transformation to peace economics.

Why did I write this? Simply because I can't see the need for armed industrial 'Mechs. If you wish to engineer your new Soviet Union closely to Soviet paragon, then your state will never suffer the lack of weapons. But we don't have a history lesson here, those things wouldn't be interesting for you.

[Sir Chaos]

I would agree with that personally they would have had some form of advanced tech.

If you´re basing them on the WW2 era, then no. The T-34 was cheap, rugged and plentiful, but technologically fairly primitive - they didn´t even have a radio in each tanks. Their purpose was to survive the weather, the poor road network and poor or no maintenance in the field, and then bury their opponent by weight of numbers.

[Darkness12]

Please, don't take this personally, but it seems to me that you are under influence of TV stereotypes when it comes to Soviets. During WWII Soviets used armed civilian equipment (armed tractors and such), but only as desperate improvisation. Otherwise, Soviet leaders understood extremely well the importance of solid industrial base (especially when it produced military equipment and weapons). They spared no expense to build such base. That's the big difference against German incompetence and corruption during WWII. And they kept this base even after the war ended. There was no transformation to peace economics.

Why did I write this? Simply because I can't see the need for armed industrial 'Mechs. If you wish to engineer your new Soviet Union closely to Soviet paragon, then your state will never suffer the lack of weapons. But we don't have a history lesson here, those things wouldn't be interesting for you.

If you´re basing them on the WW2 era, then no. The T-34 was cheap, rugged and plentiful, but technologically fairly primitive - they didn´t even have a radio in each tanks. Their purpose was to survive the weather, the poor road network and poor or no maintenance in the field, and then bury their opponent by weight of numbers.

More gearing towards modeling them after the cold war era with abit of modernization to some extent.

[Sir Chaos]

More gearing towards modeling them after the cold war era with abit of modernization to some extent.

Then they´d still be purpose-built BattleMechs, not Industrials. I´d lean towards models on the slow side for their weight, definitely with standard engines rather than XL (for cost and survivability reasons), perhaps even with 3025-era technology across the board, and going for quantity rather than quality. The Soviets had high tech, of sorts, IIRC they were the first to use anti-ship missiles on surface vessels and submarines for example, but their technology tended to be inferior to contemporary Western equipment (with a few exceptions - look up the Tu-22M Backfire on Wikipedia).

[martian]

If you´re basing them on the WW2 era, then no. The T-34 was cheap, rugged and plentiful, but technologically fairly primitive - they didn´t even have a radio in each tanks. Their purpose was to survive the weather, the poor road network and poor or no maintenance in the field, and then bury their opponent by weight of numbers.

Primitive? Seriously? If you are saying T-34s were primitive, I ask in comparison with what tank? For your information, T-34 prototypes were built in January 1940 and the mass production started a few months later. At the time Germans had only PzKpfw III Ausf. E (100 tanks), Aus. F (435 tanks) - all armed with 37mm gun, some of them re-armed with still insufficient 50mm weapon. Main weapon of PzKpfw IV (first series) was 75mm gun more akin howitzer with very low velocity. The majority of German tanks (2 000 or so) were ancient light tanks PzKpfw I and PzKpfw II armed with machine guns and 20mm light cannons - crap. The rest of world used much worst crap.

Powerful main gun, better than the rest of world had - check
Powerful diesel engine, better than the rest of world had - rugged, reliable, using less flamable diesel fuel against Western gas engines using highly flammable petrol - check
Sloped armor/hull (how many Western tanks were shaped like this?) - check
Sloped armor/turret (how many Western tanks were shaped like this?) - check
Wide tracks for mud or snow- check

I agree that there that not all T-34s were equipped with radios - but it was partly because radios weren't deemed necessary for intended task T-34s were to be used for.

More gearing towards modeling them after the cold war era with abit of modernization to some extent.

I say you should use modern 'Mechs and tanks without XL engines. Otherwise, you can use what you wish excluding the most advanced rare technology.

... their technology tended to be inferior to contemporary Western equipment (with a few exceptions - look up the Tu-22M Backfire on Wikipedia).

Could you remind me who launched the first satellite? I heard it was called Sputnik 1 or something. And do you know who was the first cosmonaut? Surely American, right?

If you like Cold war, Soviets had many great fighters, for example MiG-15 in Korean War (praised by American pilots), MiG-19s and Mig-21s in Vietnam War. Or MiG-29s and Su-27s from later years?

Or were Soviet guided missiles inferior? Israeli soldiers on Sinai peninsula didn't think so.

[Lord Cameron]

First sentence is O.K., I would agree with that. However, the second part is more myth than reality. Soviet tanks were much smaller and lighter than average Western tanks. For example:
T-54/55 - 40.5 tons
T-62    - 41.5 tons
T-72    - 44.5 tons

And now Western tanks:
M48 - 52 tons
M60 - 60 tons
Leopard 1 - 42 tons
Chieftain - 55 tons
Challenger - 62 tons

As you can see, Soviet tanks were usually much lighter. (source: fas.org - numbers are a bit different than I remember, but let's believe them for now)

Well it really depends on what era you are talking about, in WWII they certainly did have the biggest tanks, especially early in the war.

Soviet
T-34 (1940) - 26 tons
KV-1 (1940) 45 tons
T-34-85 (1943) - 32 tons
IS-2 (1944) - 46 tons

US
Stuart (1941) - 15 tons
Sherman (1942) - 30 tons
Pershing (1945) - 42 tons

British
Matilda II (1940) - 27 tons
Cromwell (1943) - 28 tons
Churchill (1942) - 38 tons

The Soviet & Western design theory changed radically after WWII, as the Soviets built large numbers of medium tanks, and accepted that there would be heavy casulties.
Meanwhile the west (with smaller numbers of tanks) built very heavy and expensive tanks, wanting the maximum survivability in each tank.

In the BT world you might have a Russian(Soviet style) army with large numbers of simple, cheap yet heavily armed & armoured tanks, while the invader might have a smaller number of better capable but costlier top of the line mechs.

If you´re basing them on the WW2 era, then no. The T-34 was cheap, rugged and plentiful, but technologically fairly primitive - they didn´t even have a radio in each tanks. Their purpose was to survive the weather, the poor road network and poor or no maintenance in the field, and then bury their opponent by weight of numbers.

Remember that the T-34 came out in early 1940
Compared to what Germany had in the begining of 1940 (mostly Pz II's) or the USA (no tanks at all) the T-34 & KV-1 were hardly primitive.

Consider the problems that the West had with tank/antitank guns vs the Soviets.

Right from 1941 the Soviets had the excellent F-34 (76mm) gun, which fired both AP & HE shells. (in both Zi-3 AT guns, T-34 & KV-1 tanks)
They also had the Zi-2 57mm AT gun, very effective vs German tanks in the first 12 - 18 months of the war.
In 1943 they introduced the 85mm gun for tanks

The US 75mm gun used on the Sherman had much weaker penetration, and was clearly out matched in an antitank role by 1943. The 90mm gun was much better, but didn't arrive until the last few months of 1944.
The US was still using the 37mm  AT gun until 1943, and when it became clear that it wasn't capable of dealing with newer German tanks, the British designed 57mm was rushed into service

The British 6 pdr (57mm) was probably the best Western tank/AT gun in 1942, but early models lacked HE shells.

So it was really the "technologically advanced" Western Allies that were playing catch-up design compared to the Soviets

[Darkness12]

Then they´d still be purpose-built BattleMechs, not Industrials. I´d lean towards models on the slow side for their weight, definitely with standard engines rather than XL (for cost and survivability reasons), perhaps even with 3025-era technology across the board, and going for quantity rather than quality. The Soviets had high tech, of sorts, IIRC they were the first to use anti-ship missiles on surface vessels and submarines for example, but their technology tended to be inferior to contemporary Western equipment (with a few exceptions - look up the Tu-22M Backfire on Wikipedia).

Primitive? Seriously? If you are saying T-34s were primitive, I ask in comparison with what tank? For your information, T-34 prototypes were built in January 1940 and the mass production started a few months later. At the time Germans had only PzKpfw III Ausf. E (100 tanks), Aus. F (435 tanks) - all armed with 37mm gun, some of them re-armed with still insufficient 50mm weapon. Main weapon of PzKpfw IV (first series) was 75mm gun more akin howitzer with very low velocity. The majority of German tanks (2 000 or so) were ancient light tanks PzKpfw I and PzKpfw II armed with machine guns and 20mm light cannons - crap. The rest of world used much worst crap.

Powerful main gun, better than the rest of world had - check
Powerful diesel engine, better than the rest of world had - rugged, reliable, using less flamable diesel fuel against Western gas engines using highly flammable petrol - check
Sloped armor/hull (how many Western tanks were shaped like this?) - check
Sloped armor/turret (how many Western tanks were shaped like this?) - check
Wide tracks for mud or snow- check

I agree that there that not all T-34s were equipped with radios - but it was partly because radios weren't deemed necessary for intended task T-34s were to be used for.

I say you should use modern 'Mechs and tanks without XL engines. Otherwise, you can use what you wish excluding the most advanced rare technology.

Could you remind me who launched the first satellite? I heard it was called Sputnik 1 or something. And do you know who was the first cosmonaut? Surely American, right?

If you like Cold war, Soviets had many great fighters, for example MiG-15 in Korean War (praised by American pilots), MiG-19s and Mig-21s in Vietnam War. Or MiG-29s and Su-27s from later years?

Or were Soviet guided missiles inferior? Israeli soldiers on Sinai peninsula didn't think so.

I would say I'll lean more in favor of martians and Lord Cameron's advice I never liked XL/XXL's as a standard anyway I gear more towards things like regular and compact fe's and Gyro's. Also Martian And Cameron What would you suggest for faction Specific components for a a soviet based faction?

[martian]

Lord Cameron, I am glad to see that you know what are you talking about.  O0

The OP is more interested in Cold War than WWII.