Slitherine

How many turn can paratroopers stay in the air? Can paratroopers still move in poor weather?

Dorky8 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:09 pm How many turn can paratroopers stay in the air? Can paratroopers still move in poor weather?

Indefinitely, and no. I think they did that because deep penetrating paratrooper operations (the only kind that are useful) would be impossible with a base tether.

But I have heard they can jump (disembark) if caught during a bad weather turn.

You realize this is a major flaw in the game. Why would it be indefinite when every other plane has to go back to base at the end of the turn? In large maps its ridiculous and in PBEM MP games there aren't enough units to cover all the key bases in the rear.

It was a very unrealistic part of PC1 and I had hoped it improved here. Moscow 41 (PC1) send a paratrooper up the side of the map to the back of the map take a city start placing units.

come on

No MP map is built so that one side had a paratrooper advantage over the other. Both sides should always have opportunity to perform these sorts of tactics.

If you're concerned about free roaming paratroopers... even the cheapest, weakest fighter will tear these defenseless units to shreds. Punishing paratrooper operations only requires detecting them.
If you don't garrison your rear, this is exactly when paratroopers should come into play. They open up new avenues of assault instead of forcing players to slam their heads into each other in a single narrow pass.

Paratroopers don't have unlimited range, and cannot attack the same turn they move/disembark.

Get serious why would a paratrooper have an limitless range and stay in the air "indefinitely". Really and you justify it. In a large map such as Steel there aren't enough units to cover the rear cities and attack. It doesn't matter how weak they are against fighters you have to find them. It was a poor part of PC1 and it should have been changed here.

Detecting them? Send fighters to the extremes of the map searching for paratroopers (in the air forever) instead of attacking your opponents air units think about how ridiculous that is.

I didn't set the rule, but I endorse it fully. I like the flexibility it offers for paratrooper units, which in past were maligned as being pretty useless.

https://steamcommunity.com/app/1072040/ ... 886886166/

Sneak attacks in MP are only a good thing, because it breaks up choke points, stagnate position fighting, and general camping.

You're free to disagree of course, I'm just trying to explain.

Dorky8 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:47 pm Get serious why would a paratrooper have an limitless range and stay in the air "indefinitely". Really and you justify it. In a large map such as Steel there aren't enough units to cover the rear cities and attack. It doesn't matter how weak they are against fighters you have to find them. It was a poor part of PC1 and it should have been changed here.

Detecting them? Send fighters to the extremes of the map searching for paratroopers (in the air forever) instead of attacking your opponents air units think about how ridiculous that is.

BC devs want it for MP. Same reason naval landing work the way they do.

It makes ZERO sense, but there is no point arguing.

In campaign paras are used by AI in some scenarios. It counts on you NOT using garrison units, bc frankly the campaign isn't designed with that in mind. So there is the novelty value in London & USA2 when they drop and grab a few hexes, but on the 2nd+ runs it's just tedious.

Love the game, hate the para implementation, and the naval landings.

nexusno2000 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 7:27 am

Dorky8 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:47 pm Get serious why would a paratrooper have an limitless range and stay in the air "indefinitely". Really and you justify it. In a large map such as Steel there aren't enough units to cover the rear cities and attack. It doesn't matter how weak they are against fighters you have to find them. It was a poor part of PC1 and it should have been changed here.

Detecting them? Send fighters to the extremes of the map searching for paratroopers (in the air forever) instead of attacking your opponents air units think about how ridiculous that is.

BC devs want it for MP. Same reason naval landing work the way they do.

It makes ZERO sense, but there is no point arguing.

In campaign paras are used by AI in some scenarios. It counts on you NOT using garrison units, bc frankly the campaign isn't designed with that in mind. So there is the novelty value in London & USA2 when they drop and grab a few hexes, but on the 2nd+ runs it's just tedious.

Love the game, hate the para implementation, and the naval landings.

Paras are weak enough as is, tethering them to airfield range would do nothing to help that.

nexusno2000 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 7:27 am

BC devs want it for MP. Same reason naval landing work the way they do.

It makes ZERO sense, but there is no point arguing.

Love the game, hate the para implementation, and the naval landings.

Thank You Nexusno & Karensky.

There seems to be an effort to expand interest in these WW2 titles by adding more unrealistic "gamey" aspects to MP platforms. IMO this is a big mistake, for every "gamer" who wants "indefinite" paras there are 3 who want historic based "what ifs" and are annoyed when they see the "gamey" result. SC3 (big fan) made a decision to add "gamey" aspects to the MP platform and IMO greatly diminished early interest. Like PC2 the SC3 devs are very proactive in listening to players and the SC3 "gamey" loopholes were closed over time but the damage was done.

The PC2 MP experience will be great enhanced over time by adding large map custom scenarios. There were some great one's in PC1. The large map custom scenarios (like '41 in PC1) magnify the absurdity of unlimited range paras when they make a paratroop drop on Murmansk from Paris.

There is no logical historic "what if" rational for paras that have indefinite range and IMO hurts the game.

Panzeh I'm not arguing to completely neuter paratroopers. They are an important part of the game and need the capacity to land behind enemy lines, just not the ability to fly from Paris to Murmansk.

panzeh wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 10:30 am

nexusno2000 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 7:27 am

Dorky8 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:47 pm Get serious why would a paratrooper have an limitless range and stay in the air "indefinitely". Really and you justify it. In a large map such as Steel there aren't enough units to cover the rear cities and attack. It doesn't matter how weak they are against fighters you have to find them. It was a poor part of PC1 and it should have been changed here.

Detecting them? Send fighters to the extremes of the map searching for paratroopers (in the air forever) instead of attacking your opponents air units think about how ridiculous that is.

BC devs want it for MP. Same reason naval landing work the way they do.

It makes ZERO sense, but there is no point arguing.

In campaign paras are used by AI in some scenarios. It counts on you NOT using garrison units, bc frankly the campaign isn't designed with that in mind. So there is the novelty value in London & USA2 when they drop and grab a few hexes, but on the 2nd+ runs it's just tedious.

Love the game, hate the para implementation, and the naval landings.

Paras are weak enough as is, tethering them to airfield range would do nothing to help that.

Just give their planes longer range.

But I think the actual para units too weak. Give them suppression as they land, but let them move at half speed and attack if they want to.

And fighters and flak should fire on dropping paras.

There is nothing appealing about they way they are implemented now.

nexusno2000 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 7:27 am BC devs want it for MP. Same reason naval landing work the way they do.

It makes ZERO sense, but there is no point arguing.

In campaign paras are used by AI in some scenarios. It counts on you NOT using garrison units, bc frankly the campaign isn't designed with that in mind. So there is the novelty value in London & USA2 when they drop and grab a few hexes, but on the 2nd+ runs it's just tedious.

Love the game, hate the para implementation, and the naval landings.

I'm 99% sure that paratroopers were implemented as designed, and then scenarios were based on that implementation. Look at Crete scenario for example. Those fake airfield islands exist as a necessity of design, not because the map maker choose to plop them in the Mediterranean.

And while I understand some grumbling over paratroopers, I personally like them. They have a niche role as opposed to having basically no role in the previous game. They fail as combat units, because you are air dropping unsupported infantry behind enemy lines where their entrenchment ratings and maxed out and also where all their armored reserve is hiding. Of course they're going to get slaughtered.

But using them for anti-supply and entrenchment and encirclement tactics... amazing unit, way better than recon phase movement.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/ ... 2034627696

After that event, I'm evening using them in the campaign. You know those chokepoints on the Sedan map? Drop a fallschirmjager behind the narrow roads of the Ardennes, and instant encirclement of those annoying roadblocking forces!

Kerensky wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 9:59 pm

nexusno2000 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 7:27 am BC devs want it for MP. Same reason naval landing work the way they do.

It makes ZERO sense, but there is no point arguing.

In campaign paras are used by AI in some scenarios. It counts on you NOT using garrison units, bc frankly the campaign isn't designed with that in mind. So there is the novelty value in London & USA2 when they drop and grab a few hexes, but on the 2nd+ runs it's just tedious.

Love the game, hate the para implementation, and the naval landings.

I'm 99% sure that paratroopers were implemented as designed, and then scenarios were based on that implementation. Look at Crete scenario for example. Those fake airfield islands exist as a necessity of design, not because the map maker choose to plop them in the Mediterranean.

And while I understand some grumbling over paratroopers, I personally like them. They have a niche role as opposed to having basically no role in the previous game. They fail as combat units, because you are air dropping unsupported infantry behind enemy lines where their entrenchment ratings and maxed out and also where all their armored reserve is hiding. Of course they're going to get slaughtered.

But using them for anti-supply and entrenchment and encirclement tactics... amazing unit, way better than recon phase movement.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/ ... 2034627696

After that event, I'm evening using them in the campaign. You know those chokepoints on the Sedan map? Drop a fallschirmjager behind the narrow roads of the Ardennes, and instant encirclement of those annoying roadblocking forces!

I love the concept of paras, and what's ALMOST done with them, but:

1. The air movement thing. My OCD-light can't accept one type of plane abiding by a different set of rules.
2. No flak when you drop. Essentially paras can't be intercepted and cannot be AAA against, so must be weak as units.
3. Full movement when you land. First, you have the chance of dropping in the wrong hex, but 99% of the time this doesn't matter You can fully move, and also can't attack anyway, so what's the point. Set MP to 50% or something.
4. No attack possible. A better idea would be that paras get a number of suppression points when they drop. So your attack won't be as effective, but the possibility is there.

Something similar could be said for naval landings. You land, but can't fully move, get suppressed, but can attack.

But this is all just wishful thinking. Like more granular logistics

My 2cents on paras -
1) so far they seem to be incredibly strong. I assume enemy fighters can intercept, but they haven't so far, even when my transports were unprotected and were in the ememy's LOS.
2) Planes can fly into a drop zone, and the paras can jump in the same turn so if there are any AA, they are useless.
3) They also have A LOT of movement points....once they drop, they should prob be stuck with their landing hex BUT be able to fire (perhaps at reduced accuracy). Now they can jump/land and move all without being harried or fired upon.

Seems incredibly safe for them when in fact it was one of the riskiest jobs....

Paratroopers are broken imo..

way too OP..

fly in the back of the ennemy. Drop. Move to objective Hex. Buy stuff to hold the city.

sure we both can do it.. but its senseless.

but in MP in a way it balances the fact that holding cities earns you prestige per turn. Defend or not defend? So i don't mind except for the buying stuff immediately as you take an encircled city in the back of ennemy lines...

Mordan wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 3:04 pm Paratroopers are broken imo..

way too OP..

fly in the back of the ennemy. Drop. Move to objective Hex. Buy stuff to hold the city.

sure we both can do it.. but its senseless.

but in MP in a way it balances the fact that holding cities earns you prestige per turn. Defend or not defend? So i don't mind except for the buying stuff immediately as you take an encircled city in the back of ennemy lines...

Thanks Mordan.

Unfortunately paratroopers aren't of equal importance to both sides in the MP game. In the MP "France" scenario for example the Germans paratroopers have tons of French cities/airfields far behind enemy lines and the French have very few.

Impossible for French to monitor possible paratroop attacks on all those cities and airfields. Ruins the scenario.