Modern paratroops

[geniemalin]

If the Crusaders and Rome scenario Legionaries, plus my admittedly brief squiz at the editor are anything to go by, you can indeed give only 'partial' worker functions to a unit.

I like the idea of building airfields

Paratroopers jumping into the middle of enemy territory will indeed get creamed. But if you take out enemy railroad connections with bombers and stick them onto a peninsula, building airfields (and being able to defend it at least for a little while) would give them a nice offensive use.

[Jaybe]

I like the idea of building airfields

Don't forget it will cost you the unit to do so. Also, you cannot build it in enemy territory.

[geniemalin]

Originally posted by Jaybe
Also, you cannot build it in enemy territory.

Oops, I had forgotten that bit (haven't actually built an airfield myself in a long time....)

Which kind of destroys the usefulness of the role as I had envisaged it (penetrate enemy territory and provide a landing site for planes.)

Back to the drawing board....

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by nbarclay
I like 8 and 10 as well. My impression (and granted, it's only an impression since I'm not an expert) is that the planes used to transport paratroops aren't generally geared as much to maximize range as bombers are.

I meant attack.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by geniemalin
If the Crusaders and Rome scenario Legionaries, plus my admittedly brief squiz at the editor are anything to go by, you can indeed give only 'partial' worker functions to a unit.

Yes, you can. However, the AI won't use them.

[Theseus]

Something interesting to play around with... I could see both Marines and Paras upgrading to a general Special Forces unit with a WIDE variety of capabilities. Heck, I could even see a SW for this...

[nbarclay]

I think boosting the attack values to 8 and 10 goes too far. That's especially true of boosting the attack value of the paratrooper to 8, which makes it just as good an attacker as AU-Mod-enhanced infantry and guerillas.

[Kuciwalker]

Why shouldn't it be? It is primarily an offensive unit. It may cost the same as infantry, but it has 1 less defense and requires Oil.

[nbarclay]

I suppose one could take the view that since the paratrooper's appearance is closer in the tech tree to TOW infantry than to infantry and guerillas (at least following the usual research priorities), an attack value matching infantry and guerillas could be rationalized based on the idea that although the paratroops' weapons are lighter, they are also a bit more technologically advanced. Still, I have enough interest in history that I'm not fond of rationalizing high attack values just because a unit is considered offensive.

[lockstep]

A special forces unit instead of the Modern Paratrooper ... I like the idea.

Altough it would need an attack strength of at least 12 (like Marines).

[pauli]

i've got this odd vision in my head of upgrading marine expeditionary forces by attaching parachutes to the landing craft

(that said, i love the idea.)

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by lockstep
A special forces unit instead of the Modern Paratrooper ... I like the idea.

Altough it would need an attack strength of at least 12 (like Marines).

It would probably need an attack much greater than that. Something around 16, probably, or 18.

[Theseus]

I've been thinking about the idea all day (I am a former Marine ).

It really does make sense for the Marines and Paratroops to merge into a Special Forces unit. Pretty much most of the "paratroops" units now do report into Special Operations Command, and the Marines consider themselves as being Special Operations-capable as a whole (not to mention Force Recon).

[Chemical Ollie]

The little I have played in the modern age, I have found helicopter insertation of TOW Infantry much more useful than Paras. They can take islands and remote cities isolated by rough terrain. These remote cities are normally not so well defended either, which compensate for the lower attack value of TOW compared to tanks and MA.

One option could perhaps be to give the Paras strike ability at the same turn as they drop, so they can be used for sabotage of critical resources. As it is now, a bunch of Paras dropped on grassland will get run over by tanks, or even Cavallery, before the can do any harm.

[MattPilot]

paratroopers are not offensive units - they are defensive! Their main purpose is to bypass enemy defensive lines, take strategic targets, and DEFEND (HOLD) until reeinforcements arrive. E.G. D-Day, Paratroopers were inserted to hold key road points to stop enemy advance. Operation market garden - they were used (or tried) to take a bridge and HOLD it.

Of course one would have to attack an objective to hold it, though i do not believe that paratroopers engaged in offensive combat verses 'armies'.