Paratroopers are bad

[Kuciwalker]

I dislike them. Not based on what they do in the game, just the fact that they exist as a distinct unit. It's too specialized. Instead, I propose:

Remove the Paratrooper.
Rename Marine to Commando.
Commandos start with the Amphibious Assualt and Airborne Assault promotions (the latter can't be used without Flight).
Rename the Commando promotion to Infiltrator.
Give Commandos flank attacks vs. Machine Guns.

The latter especially would make the Commando an essential part of the industrial-era combat equation, rather than just a specialty unit.

Also, SEALs would make a bit more sense with this.

[snoopy369]

Too bad you can't make a mod for that

(You can... it wouldn't be hard at all... really... )

[Kuciwalker]

I can, but it should be part of the main game

[Brutus66]

Kuci, I often agree with you, but not this time. The fault I find with paratroops is that their range is too short- they should be like ICBMs and go anywhere.
If I had designed the unit, they would have been a little like helicopters in Civ2- as long as they are in enemy territory they would lose a little HP every turn, to model the fact that paras are supposed to be lightly armed and have limited supplies. But they should be able to attack the turn they land.
With my military background, I'm probably biased towards paras though.

[Brutus66]

And while we are talking about this, I am still bummed that mountains remain impassible to all units - stupid!. Where are the alpine units??

Sorry, didn't mean to hijack the thread....

[jkp1187]

Originally posted by Brutus66
Kuci, I often agree with you, but not this time. The fault I find with paratroops is that their range is too short- they should be like ICBMs and go anywhere.

Yes, but only after discovering the "Air-to-Air Refueling" technology and building several KC-135s.

I think the problem is that, like all units, their movement range is balanced for either the "small" or "standard" maps. Honestly, a range of 5 squares on "huge" is an embarassment... That's actually a big reason why I tend to play on either of those two maps, and not large or huge.

[Will9]

Originally posted by Brutus66
Kuci, I often agree with you, but not this time. The fault I find with paratroops is that their range is too short- they should be like ICBMs and go anywhere.
If I had designed the unit, they would have been a little like helicopters in Civ2- as long as they are in enemy territory they would lose a little HP every turn, to model the fact that paras are supposed to be lightly armed and have limited supplies. But they should be able to attack the turn they land.
With my military background, I'm probably biased towards paras though.

I say airdropping (as in moving from city to city) shouldn't cause any lost movement and when you paradrop you should be able to attack on the same turn. This way you could get them to any city of your own then paradrop and attack all in the same turn.

[Wiglaf]

US Airborne was/is a distinct division of the army that has different commanders and different training.

[Kuciwalker]

So? I'm talking about in terms of game mechanics.

[nbarclay]

I think BtS got it right in having paratroops and marines be separate units. Both types of units can function as extra foot soldiers when they aren't being used in their special role (airdrops or amphibious assaults), but they don't normally train in each other's specialties.

Regarding whether or not paratroops should be able to attack the same turn they land, the best solution might be to allow them to do so, but with a penalty akin to amphibious assault if they do (reflecting the fact that they haven't had time to get fully organized). That would give paratroops a chance to do some damage before the enemy has a chance to swarm them, but only to targets that aren't too heavily defended.

Regarding range, I think the rule ought to be based on distance from the nearest non-paratroop land unit unit. Paratroops won't want to go on suicide missions so far beyond any other units that there is no realistic hope of friendly forces meeting them in a reasonable amount of time. But they ought to be able to support conventional forces wherever the conventional forces are.

[Kuciwalker]

I think BtS got it right in having paratroops and marines be separate units. Both types of units can function as extra foot soldiers when they aren't being used in their special role (airdrops or amphibious assaults), but they don't normally train in each other's specialties.

The problem with this gameplay-wise is that both are pretty special-purpose units (paras even more than marines). You're not really going to want to build them unless you know you'll need them; and to use them effectively, you need to build them in sufficient numbers to make a difference. Thus, as you add more special-purpose units the human is less likely to get to use any one of them.

The solution is to bundle them together. I'm not really going to build a paratrooper army because a large army is a significant investment and a small army isn't terribly useful. I won't build that many marines, unless I'm planning an amphibious invasion, because they're just not as useful as Infantry. But I would build Commandos every single time, because a decent-sized Commando force is almost guaranteed to be useful, if only to counter a wall of machine guns.

[Wiglaf]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
So? I'm talking about in terms of game mechanics.

Oh. Well this is a pretty good idea. Don't marines get bonuses vs. artillery? I thought they did. If so, they're more versatile than you give them credit for, and adding paradrop ability would risk making them super units.

[tsubame]

I'll say this, Paratroopers won me one game already- got flight, had an inferior navy, their army wasn't that great- using a combination of fighters and paratroopers I was able to get my beachhead and that won it for me.

[Will9]

During WWII, the Marines experimented with airborn divisions, called the Paramarines. They airdropped in a few missions, but we stopped using them since training them as both Paratroopers and Marines was to much.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
Oh. Well this is a pretty good idea. Don't marines get bonuses vs. artillery? I thought they did. If so, they're more versatile than you give them credit for, and adding paradrop ability would risk making them super units.

Marines get +50% vs. Machine Guns and Artillery, but if you have Infantry in the stack the Marines will fight the Infantry (which have +25% vs. gunpowder units), not the Machine Guns. If you attack with Infantry, they fight the Machine Guns first. Thus, if you give the Marine (or Commando) flank attack against Machine Guns (the idea being the commandos sneak behind enemy lines and take out the guns from there), they become useful as part of a combined arms force.

(And it goes without saying that the new unit would have to be more expensive.)