Slitherine

Holy shit tried Eben and its so freaking bad guys either setup separate ruleset for multiplayer etc but revert this.

Kerensky wrote: ↑Sun Jul 11, 2021 7:30 pm Axis Operations already uses a separate ruleset from the base game, mostly for some minor changes like the rate that awards and medals are issued but also to disable time altering options that also break certain scenarios.

Perhaps that ruleset can be expanded to cover paratrooper mechanics so return them to how they used to be within the Axis Operations.

I'll inquire about it, but in the meantime, sorry about the problems this is causing to past scenarios.

Would be great. Some of them are pretty much unplayable.

I just finished the scenario Valkenburg Raid.
No problem with the new rules for paratroopers with this scenario. I prefer these new rules for paratroopers because I find them more realistic.

Just played Eben-Emael on GM with 1.2.0 rules.

It was neither terribly difficult nor did it play very differently. Sure, the heavy forts do hurt a little bit, but they are quickly surrounded and suppressed.

You're oc playing with Deadly Grasp? You should be.

BTW I typically play with Fear of the Unknown so I've always been unable to drop first turn.

I strongly support the paratrooper changes. I had to move them outside flak range, capture a forward airfield and base my escorts from there. Sounds perfect!

That said, this specific scenario might warrant a tweak so forts remain unsupplied 1 turn extra.

nexusno2000 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 22, 2021 6:21 pm You're oc playing with Deadly Grasp? You should be.

Well, in my opinion there should be an optional trait be half mandatory to play a DLC. Of course its doable with that change, everythign is doable. But is it enjoyable ?

That training mission for Eben is broken aswell due to this change, for example. You can start to train your paras after x rounds...

The AO campaigns were designed with another paratrooper ruleset in mind. And to be honest, before the change they were a mere, useless slotwaste outside of the missions designed for them. Now they are even worse.
Ican understand the changes for pvp, but pve needs the old ruleset for AO. Maybe a possible neg-trait for players who enjoy that change.

I just completed Eben-Emael with no issues on FM and I never play with Deadly Grasp. I was aware of the changes from this thread, however, and simply planned accordingly. I made sure everything was in place before I had them drop, made sure there was air support on the ready from nearby airfields, and had positioned a couple of Recon cars and a tank to cross the river south-east of them (though that didn't go off as I expected, it did draw away some of the pressure that otherwise would have been aimed at the FSJ troops. I also loaded them with as many good heroes as I could.

adiekmann wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 6:15 am I just completed Eben-Emael with no issues on FM and I never play with Deadly Grasp. I was aware of the changes from this thread, however, and simply planned accordingly. I made sure everything was in place before I had them drop, made sure there was air support on the ready from nearby airfields, and had positioned a couple of Recon cars and a tank to cross the river south-east of them (though that didn't go off as I expected, it did draw away some of the pressure that otherwise would have been aimed at the FSJ troops. I also loaded them with as many good heroes as I could.

^^ This

Bee1976 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 1:20 am

nexusno2000 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 22, 2021 6:21 pm You're oc playing with Deadly Grasp? You should be.

Well, in my opinion there should be an optional trait be half mandatory to play a DLC. Of course its doable with that change, everythign is doable. But is it enjoyable ?

That training mission for Eben is broken aswell due to this change, for example. You can start to train your paras after x rounds...

The AO campaigns were designed with another paratrooper ruleset in mind. And to be honest, before the change they were a mere, useless slotwaste outside of the missions designed for them. Now they are even worse.
Ican understand the changes for pvp, but pve needs the old ruleset for AO. Maybe a possible neg-trait for players who enjoy that change.

The Deadly Grasp ref was a joke... it makes things go faster. That's all. I use it because I'm an impatient man

The training mission could have its time limit increased by a round or two. Problem solved.

Even with only the 7 turns, I got 1 to 3.5 stars, 1 to almost 3 stars, and 3 to 2.5 stars. Good enough really.

I really really really do NOT want the old para rules back for campaign play. The new rules are a massive improvement.

Hehe, but there is truth in that joke

The best way to solve this problems is old ruleset for AO and a negative trait for the players who enjoy the new ruleset. But as mentioned, all para missions before 42 were designed for that old ruleset. But this is just my opinion.

I haven't played Eben Emael in 1.02. But I did play it twice in campaigns where I had no fallschirmjager at all. I managed fine. Was it hard? I definitely suffered more losses than I did in my cores that had paratroopers for the mission, but I wouldn't say it was hard - it's just a bloody business going head-on against prepared fortifications that use high-range artillery. But I managed to get encirclements eventually using brave recons and fast armor darting around the north and a specialized southern group using bridging units and concentrated heavy artillery. It was not perfect, nor was it flawless execution, and it definitely relied on my previous experience with the scenario. But I managed it just fine.

I think there's a strong case to be made that some AO scenarios need to be tweaked (or the ruleset altered, as Kerensky suggested). But I don't think paratroopers should go back to how they were. There was essentially no downside to using paradrops, and it felt very open to abuse, especially against the UI, which doesn't handle being encircled very well. Is the current implementation of paratroops perfect? Maybe not, but I think something needed to be changed. I'd be interesting in reading more suggestions from the the "this is unacceptable" crowd about what might be a decent compromise between the too-powerful paradrops of the past and the current situation.

nexusno2000 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 6:26 am

Bee1976 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 1:20 am

nexusno2000 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 22, 2021 6:21 pm You're oc playing with Deadly Grasp? You should be.

Well, in my opinion there should be an optional trait be half mandatory to play a DLC. Of course its doable with that change, everythign is doable. But is it enjoyable ?

That training mission for Eben is broken aswell due to this change, for example. You can start to train your paras after x rounds...

The AO campaigns were designed with another paratrooper ruleset in mind. And to be honest, before the change they were a mere, useless slotwaste outside of the missions designed for them. Now they are even worse.
Ican understand the changes for pvp, but pve needs the old ruleset for AO. Maybe a possible neg-trait for players who enjoy that change.

The Deadly Grasp ref was a joke... it makes things go faster. That's all. I use it because I'm an impatient man

The training mission could have its time limit increased by a round or two. Problem solved.

Even with only the 7 turns, I got 1 to 3.5 stars, 1 to almost 3 stars, and 3 to 2.5 stars. Good enough really.

I really really really do NOT want the old para rules back for campaign play. The new rules are a massive improvement.

Not only do I never choose Deadly Grasp, I also always choose Trench Slog as one of my automatic negative traits. That's largely because I do not like trying to capture everything. I find that boring. Plus, I think it is a result of me being an old veteran of Panzer General I, II, and Panzer Corps 1 where you largely have to just smash and go everything. Once in a while there is a juicy or difficult enemy unit or target and you have no choice in the matter, but that's boring and I am an impatient man too!

The new FSJ rules are more like they were in PC1 which I thought was fine. In fact there are actually an improvement because at least here you can still move your paratroopers whereas in PC1 you could not, plus they were automatically 1/2 suppressed. I think the problem is the scenarios that we are discussing/criticizing here were originally designed with the old rules in mind. So in the training mission I totally agree you are now basically "losing turns" because of the new rules, and that means you aren't getting as much experience on your units as you used to get. Now this affects me because I have always bought 2-3 new FSJ units for this map as well as converting a couple of my regular infantry. But still, I now know that there are lots of training scenarios still to come and still exp to be gained the old fashioned way of reg combat so I am still okay with it.

For me, the greater issue is the lack of differentiation between types/classes of infantry and country. Standard infantry of all nations all have basically identical stats. Really? I liked it much better in PC1. Reg French, Polish, Italian, British, etc. and German infantry were all different. I used to like using FSJ units a lot even as ground troops in PC1 because they had such high attack and initiative that would offset their low ammo and GD. Get a + attack heroes on them...and you were in business. This is also different here because the new accuracy trait is now arguably more important than even initiative now.

The Crete scenario is a good example of how bonkers paras are vs AI.

https://youtu.be/_1c8BcBYUCw

If I were to replay with new rules it would be much improved.

Edit: as in a bit more challenging.

nexusno2000 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:26 pm The Crete scenario is a good example of how bonkers paras are vs AI.

https://youtu.be/_1c8BcBYUCw

If I were to replay with new rules or would be much improved.

I think you'll be surprised - Crete is the most affected mission due to AI paras doing AI things...on the other hand, it depends on what you mean by "improved".

IceSerpent wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:50 pm

nexusno2000 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:26 pm The Crete scenario is a good example of how bonkers paras are vs AI.

https://youtu.be/_1c8BcBYUCw

If I were to replay with new rules or would be much improved.

I think you'll be surprised - Crete is the most affected mission due to AI paras doing AI things...on the other hand, it depends on what you mean by "improved".

Less super easy = improved

nexusno2000 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:59 pm Less super easy = improved

Try it.

Related but not sure if it's something before this patch:
I noticed that I couldn't use those mobile airport to disembark the paratroopers. Is it something related to the patch or it was like that before?

gadflyjs wrote: ↑Mon Aug 02, 2021 5:09 am Related but not sure if it's something before this patch:
I noticed that I couldn't use those mobile airport to disembark the paratroopers. Is it something related to the patch or it was like that before?

It's a ground unit that occupies the hex. No room to land.

Btw so many are talking about realism and it is more realistic now for using paratroopers - well I have a surprice for you, its not. No transport aeroplanes ever circled DZ to let paratroopers jump (it is that the new 1.02 patch simulates) and risk for getting hit by flak.
So the old rule worked better, simulated the actual drop. Perhaps after landing at DZ the unit only could move one hex and attack with reduced strength, simulating assemblingtime at DZ.

Btw my own flak didnt even have a single shot at enemy fighters while trying to protect my transport - why ?

SirAllan wrote: ↑Fri Aug 13, 2021 8:35 am Btw my own flak didnt even have a single shot at enemy fighters while trying to protect my transport - why ?

Read the description of Anti-Air Support.

Yeah you are right antiair units only protect ground units - my mistake.