P A R A T R O O P E R S

You can make paratroopers in FP maps and try how it goes. Also you can make it optional, so you can have maps with and same maps without paratroopers so people can choose what one they want to play.

FP maps are used for technical bug testing, not for functional testing.

I am against para only because they can not be ballanced well.

Fair ballanced paras would be "useless peace" for para fans. And no one need another unfair ballanced unit. Provincehopping, trolling, headhunting throw different games, any other destruktive uses of paras are not wellcome, point.

May be if paras have 5 hp till 10 hp while airtransport and have attack tick while landing, so you could using ASF, AA or whatever you want against them. With droptime over 59 minutes and low stats, then, maybe, it would not destroy ballance.

What? Have you not read any of the suggestions about airborne? Literally, you are saying you are against them because they can do what airborne did.

Again, Here is what I (And a few others) want:

- Limit of 5 AIRBORNE UNITS, In order to prevent "Spamming" or "trolling"

- ONE AIRBORNE DROP EVERY 24 HOURS In order to prevent "Provincehopping"

- Drop time is around 10 - 15 minutes, as it doesn't take an hour for an airborne force to get on the ground..

The unit its self would have the ability to be air dropped, not loaded up onto a plane, so, in this scenario:

- 5 airborne units

- you want to do an airborne drop

The limit is one drop every 24 hours for ALL units, You can either drop one battalion, or the entire division (being the 5 units) and then you have to wait for 24 hours. Then, after 24 hours you can chose to drop again or wait, honestly the CoN airborne mechanics work pretty well (Sorry again for the CoN mention) and that's what I think airborne units in CoW should be like. Then, after another 24 hours you can drop again, etc, Airborne shouldn't be a unit that can't survive any engagement because that's not what happened at all, they were able to fight their way out of most situations.

As the glorious and god-like MontanaBB stated,

MontanaBB wrote:

And the new airborne unit needs to be a viable combat unit ---- not an emasculated unit that is weaker than every other unit on the board, that disappears after five days (or whatever), that cannot capture provinces like every other ground unit in the game, or that otherwise includes some form of "poison pill" that makes it worthless.

Which pretty much sums up what I have been saying, The airborne units have to be equal to, if not stronger than regular infantry, and as they level up they have to reflect that. Plus, Why do people not want airborne units to be able to take provinces? A regular infantry Battalion/Brigade can capture a province on their own, which is about 1,500 troops. A tank Battalion/Brigade can capture a province on their own as well, and that is only 58 - 126 tanks (Respectively) A normal airborne battalion consists of around 1,000 troops too, the same size as an infantry battalion (Minus 500, but it isn't really that much) Even commando units can capture provinces, and their Brigade size is 139 people (Just counting enlisted men, they had +7 officers in the HQ company, but I doubt the HQ company is going to be doing much fighting) So, with people saying "It's illogical", etc when pro-airborne people say they should be able to capture a province, a single airborne battalion is the same size, if not larger than, a regular infantry, tank, and Commando regiment, and all of those units can capture provinces.

When are you people going to learn? Bytro's developers are stubborn people. They are never going to have paratroopers just like they are never going to get rid of Gold.

Just accept it. They won't listen to reason. It is what it is. If you don't like a heavy golder in your match, quit and join a new one. If you don't like the lack of paratroopers, play Conflict of Nations, instead.

What a tired argument this is...paratroopers...just like the gold argument.

JCS Darragh wrote:

- ONE AIRBORNE DROP EVERY 24 HOURS In order to prevent "Provincehopping"

1 drop each 24 hours, enough time to build airfield on province and hopping next one...

5 different enemies could make 5 Drops each day, sweet...

From >> forum.callofwar.com/index.php?thread/16614-on-suggesting-paratroopers << :

freezy wrote:

Everyone suggesting the implementation of paratroopers should keep in mind that they also can be used against you. Imagine having conquered some of your neighbouring countries already,

so having quite some territorial area, but you are still surrounded by

several enemies. Now with paratroopers in the game you could wake up

with all your core territory being conquered over night by your enemies,

as they are able to avoid your defending army stacks on the border.

They could conquer a province, build an airport and continue their

flight or even recruit more troops from there (keep in mind that our

game supports speeding up production with gold, and no, we won't limit

that), which makes taking provinces even faster than with an armored car

running through your country. The mere possibility of this would

probably shift the meta strategy to all players needing to leave

defending troops in their provinces, creating a much greater resource

drain.

To make this unit balanced and not break the current gameplay there

would need to be severe restrictions in it's implementation, but too

harsh restrictions would also make it quite useless. Unfortunately also

most of these restrictions and functionality would need serious design,

balancing and programming work. Probably also the rest of the game would

need to be rebalanced.

..

Jesus christ,

I K N O W T H E Y C A N B E U S E D A G A I N S T M E

I A M F I N E W I T H T H A T

Y O U A R E S I M P L Y N O T U N D E R S T A N D I N G T H E L E V E L O F B A L A N C I N G

T H A T I A M F I N E W I T H

It's like the wage gap button that sh0eonhead has.. maybe I need that..

f118 wrote:

You are disqualified to make any sentence "pro para", since you are not accept, that "provincehopping" would be a true problem.

1 drop each 24 hours, enough time to build airfield on province and hopping next one...

5 different enemies could make 5 Drops each day, sweet...

JCS Darragh wrote:

It's just a strategy too, Like, I'm pretty sure you can figure out which province a unit is going to be dropping in on.. Province hopping, I'm saying 1 drop for ALL airborne units, if you drop one division then that's the airborne drop for that day, not 5 different drops..

You know, i suspect you violate against Term of use number 3.2

Aren't you?

I said 5 enemies, not one enemie with 5 units...

What? I don't think I'm in violation of any rules..

My proposal for balanced paratroopers is easy :

- They need barracks level 3 and Airport level 3 (making these useful at last)

- They are as expensive as commando (incl. rare materials)

- They have terrible anti-armor skill (militia level)

- They move slowly on foot (like infantry)

- They cannot capture territory

- They get damaged if they drop close to enemy AA.

This way, paratroopers could be use to stop reinforcements from coming to an area or get rid of unescorted artillery (or at least disable it for a while). IF they cannot capture territory I am willing to consider them. Else - no.

The Paratrooper poll has been out there for a week. Link Below if you have not voted yet.

Paratrooper Poll

Right now the 'No' votes are in the majority by nearly a 2:1 margin.

Chimere wrote:

My proposal for balanced paratroopers is easy :

- They need barracks level 3 and Airport level 3 (making these useful at last)

- They are as expensive as commando (incl. rare materials)

- They have terrible anti-armor skill (militia level)

- They move slowly on foot (like infantry)

- They cannot capture territory

- They get damaged if they drop close to enemy AA.

MontanaBB wrote:

There are going to be new "paratrooper" threads until a new airborne infantry regiment is finally added to the game.

And the new airborne unit needs to be a viable combat unit ---- not an emasculated unit that is weaker than every other unit on the board, that disappears after five days (or whatever), that cannot capture provinces like every other ground unit in the game, or that otherwise includes some form of "poison pill" that makes it worthless.

I find it remarkable that several players who believe that the ridiculously over-powered commando battalion is a perfectly acceptable addition to the game ---- which is twice as strong as an ordinary infantry regiment, even though it is half the size in terms of personnel ---- also believe that having an airborne infantry regiment is somehow going to wreck or otherwise "unbalance" the game.

The Commando is the Airborne unit, I could drop him on that territory to recapture/defend it from this unit, then drop him on the anti-tank unit preventing my tanks from moving. While yes, this could happen to me, it doesn't really matter, It would be an interesting experience.

JCS Darragh wrote:

Chimere wrote:

My proposal for balanced paratroopers is easy :

- They need barracks level 3 and Airport level 3 (making these useful at last)

- They are as expensive as commando (incl. rare materials)

- They have terrible anti-armor skill (militia level)

- They move slowly on foot (like infantry)

- They cannot capture territory

- They get damaged if they drop close to enemy AA.

They cannot capture territory? Well oh boy, let me get a quote from the god-like montanaBB that essentially says what I was going to say.

MontanaBB wrote:

There are going to be new "paratrooper" threads until a new airborne infantry regiment is finally added to the game.

And the new airborne unit needs to be a viable combat unit ---- not an emasculated unit that is weaker than every other unit on the board, that disappears after five days (or whatever), that cannot capture provinces like every other ground unit in the game, or that otherwise includes some form of "poison pill" that makes it worthless.

I find it remarkable that several players who believe that the ridiculously over-powered commando battalion is a perfectly acceptable addition to the game ---- which is twice as strong as an ordinary infantry regiment, even though it is half the size in terms of personnel ---- also believe that having an airborne infantry regiment is somehow going to wreck or otherwise "unbalance" the game.

For example, my current game (Day 9 I believe)

The Commando is the Airborne unit, I could drop him on that territory to recapture/defend it from this unit, then drop him on the anti-tank unit preventing my tanks from moving. While yes, this could happen to me, it doesn't really matter, It would be an interesting experience.

My point was how Airborne units could be used to quickly defend a province, a QRF (Quick Reaction Force), if you will, and then be able to attack another enemy unit.

Unbelievable... you guys are talking WAYS to include paratroopers... just DAYS after a poll clearly showed no one WANTS them!

K.Rokossovski wrote:

Unbelievable... you guys are talking WAYS to include paratroopers... just DAYS after a poll clearly showed no one WANTS them!

K.Rokossovski wrote:

Unbelievable... you guys are talking WAYS to include paratroopers... just DAYS after a poll clearly showed no one WANTS them!

Still fun to talk about it, plus, how many people voted on that thread out of how many that play CoW? Not an accurate poll, Many forum users don't want them.

Um, please. I thought we agreed to at least not talk about it for some time. True that this isn't an accurate poll, but what is? If you're asking citizens of a million-people city do they like their mayor, would you interview all of them or just a handful of them? Maybe 10,000? Realistically speaking, you know the answer.