What other unit types would balance this pen and paper war game?

[SeekerOfTruth007]

1 Tank > 3 Infantry

4 Infantry > 1 Tank

1 Jet Fighter > 2 Infantry

3 Infantry > 1 Jet Fighter (but it moves twice as fast, so avoids fair fights).

4 Infantry > 1 Mech

1 Tank > 1 Mech

1 Mech > 1 Jet Fighter

1 Jet Fighter >> Tank (Tanks can't hit air in this game)

1 Elementalist (spell caster) > 3 Infantry

4 Infantry > 1 Elementalist

Then I have a medical transport which can carry ground units and heals or repairs all inside units by +10HP per round they remain inside. It moves as fast as the Jet Fighter to bring ground troops around on the map.

I was considering having a heavy bomber air unit, but it might be redundant.

What do you think of this balance setup?

I realize infantry beating a jet aircraft is unrealistic, but they have slightly advanced laser weapons, not just small arms fire. Aircraft are primarily used either as Worker harass or to counter enemy Tanks when your opponent has over-committed to a tank heavy strategy.

[permanentem]

I think your numbers are a bit off... A typical tank has a 4 man crew (1 commander, 1 gunner, 1 loader, and 1 driver). So 4 infantry men or a fire team isn't going to be greater than a tank. Old studies basically assign a force multiplier value of 3 to a tank when attacking and 8 to a tank when defending. So 1 tank = 12 infantry men when it is attacking and 1 tank equals 32 men when defending. In reality with modern technology main battle tanks are even more powerful than that especially in combined arms doctrine where a tank commanders which operate a mobile radio platform can call in indirect fire from artillery and airstrikes.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

While I agree with you about this, the infantry may be viewed as "platoons of men", and not just individual men.

It's a game It's not meant to be a perfect simulation of combat.

[permanentem]

So one card is a platoon and the other isn't? That's inconsistent.

[permanentem]

A tank platoon consists of four main battle tanks organized into two sections, with two tanks in each section. An infantry platoon would have a weapon squad with two antitank launchers if they were expecting to face armor. You can try to put a hit miss ratio on those launchers, but generally it's not an extraordinarily high change of success in an engagement with a tank. Being generous you could say 50/50 hit miss, but it was more likely 20/80 hit miss in WWII for example when you had near peer armies facing off with similar antitank and countermeasure technologies. So maybe it takes 5 attempts to knock out a tank when you have similar armies with similar capabilities... 4 tanks in a platoon X 5 attempts each = 20 missiles fired. Divide that by 2 launcher per infantry platoon and you end up facing off against 10 platoons before being knocked out of the fight as a tank platoon in a real world scenario... If you go with the 50/50 as in the engagement could go either way then it's 4 tanks times 2 attempts to get 8 missiles fired in order for 4 infantry platoons to take out a tank platoon. That puts 1 tank equal to 30 to 40 men in a platoon which is kind of in that ball park of a tank defending from the old estimates. But in the actual war, successful knockouts were much lower. Tanks were far more powerful than planned for.