All the suggested NATO designs are butt ugly. Sorry, I'm just giving my honest opinion as an experienced designer, none of them come even close to the excellent work of the person who designed the GUI and graphics of this game, heck they even seem to be totally out of place, since the designs don't even match the overall look of this game.
I never understood this ultimate need for NATO symbols anyways, they're not aesthetically pleasing to begin with and just confusing to people who are new to this genre and who often don't even buy the game because of that. Oh well...I guess some people want to avoid losing respect in the community of die-hard old-timers, after all it seems to be blasphemy to them to move heads instead of NATO symbols! It reminds me a lot of web designers who want to sound professional by claiming that they only use "notepad", while funny enough a more professional code editor like PhpED would save them a lot of time or offer numerous other advantages!
Well done 2x2 games for dumping these ugly NATO symbols and not creating (from a graphics design point of view) yet another boring looking Gary Grigsby’s War look-a-like, those who want the symbols will get them anyways, since even a child can make those. Now you present yourself at least to potential customers as a "new kid on the block", you sure got my attention because of this, that eventually resulted in buying this game.
1. That's your opinion but that doesn't make the rest of us wrong. It's a mod discussion, not a change to the base game. If you don't like it, don't download it.
2. A lot of players (mainly ex-mil or old school war gamers I suspect) prefer the NATO symbols because they say more to us than a 'head'. After 40 years of army service and war gaming, I would like to stick to what I know. If a sizable segment of the potential customer base feels that way, then a smart developer would cater to it.
3. Most everyone posting here said quite clearly that they were just playing around with the graphics files to see what's possible.