Paratroopers

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • @Mathex319 I think that key to the successful incorporation of a new paratrooper unit into the COW game is to place a formulaic limitation on the number of such units that any given country may field. If the new paratrooper unit can be spammed to an unlimited degree, we are going to see an even worse version of rocket-spam, with further distortions of gameplay. I want a paratrooper unit, but I don't want to see unlimited numbers of airborne units in the game, because it will make the game less realistic, not more realistic. The limitation on the number of airborne regiments/divisions in reality was the large number of transport aircraft required to deliver them to their jump zones. Even the United States, with all of its industrial power, could not produce and maintain enough transport aircraft to convey more than two airborne divisions into combat at a time, and even the largest Allied airborne operation of the war, Marketgarden, involved three divisions (2 American, 1 British) and one brigade (Polish) -- and they could not all be dropped on the same day. The United States actually had one trained airborne division that never left the United States because the joint chiefs realized they would never be able to use it in combat as an airborne division because of the number of aircraft already required to support the 82nd, 101st, and later the 17th Airborne Division. The 11th Airborne Division was active in the Pacific theatre as a part of McArthur's army. The 13th was sent to Europe in early 1945 but never saw combat, largely because the 82nd and 101st received priority in the assignment of transport aircraft.

      Bottom line: I want a paratroop unit, but I don't want unlimited numbers of them. They were truly an "elite" unit, and their number needs to be limited accordingly. If we take the U.S. Army as our primary example, which had no more than four or five operational airborne divisions at the same time, and no more than three operational divisions in the European Theatre, and we assume that an airborne division was composed of 3 or 4 parachute (or glider) infantry regiments, that means there should be an upper limit of no more than 9 to 12 airborne regiments in even the largest of armies. I am indifferent to how that limit is imposed; it could be (a) an absolute cap; (b) a percentage of a given country's total units; (c) a percentage of infantry units; (d) tied to the size of the country's air force; or (e) some combination of all of the above. Because airborne troops were highly trained elite units, the new paratrooper unit should also be expensive and slow to produce.
    • Mathex319 wrote:

      Paratroopers would change a lot how people would play, you wouldn't be able to just have your army at the borders and borders of sea, but even in cities, have airplanes watch over provinces, this would change a lot.

      I don't know if i would like that idea, but it my head it seems very cool
      It would completely change the game,and Marines would also throw everything up. At the moment, the game is stale as we all know what happens- light tank and Tac Bomber rush. Paras and Marines would throw new doors open, new ideas thought off and total game changing tactics.

      As to a cap, I think paratroopers (not so much marines) should be expensive, but when we talk about adding caps, most people would say other units are in more of a desperate need.
      "If the tanks succeed, then victory follows."- H.Guderian

      "Hit first ! Hit hard ! Keep on hitting ! ! (The 3 H's)" Admiral Jackie Fisher

      "The 3 Requisites for Success – Ruthless, Relentless, Remorseless(The 3 R's)" Admiral Fisher

      Crates: a Term used to define any unwanted and unneeded feature in CoW

      Game Username: LordStark01
    • Soldjer325 wrote:

      How about an anti-armor infantry unit?
      That's what the anti-tank units are supposed to be, per typical WW2 era doctrine. Tank destroyers were the self-propelled, fast, but lightly armored anti-tank tank. In the aftermath of the war, and with improvements in tank engines and speed, the concept of tank and tank destroyer largely merged in the concept of the main battle tank in the U.S. and Soviet armies, and most of the unit-separated, infantry-based anti-tank capability was folded into line infantry units as handheld anti-tank weapons became ubiquitous.
    • TankBuster wrote:

      Paras and Marines would throw new doors open, new ideas thought off and total game changing tactics.
      @TankBuster The difference in capabilities between paratroopers and conventional infantry is obvious and fundamental, but what special capabilities do you envision for a new in-game version of marines?

      The answer to my question above is not obvious, because regular U.S. Army infantry (and regular infantry of other major armies) often served as amphibious assault troops, and the U.S. Marine Corps was almost exclusively assigned to the Pacific Theatre. To my knowledge, no other major combatant had a specialized amphibious/naval infantry formation even one tenth the size of the U.S. Marine Corps.
    • MontanaBB wrote:

      TankBuster wrote:

      Paras and Marines would throw new doors open, new ideas thought off and total game changing tactics.
      @TankBuster The difference in capabilities between paratroopers and conventional infantry is obvious and fundamental, but what special capabilities do you envision for a new in-game version of marines?
      The answer to my question above is not obvious, because regular U.S. Army infantry (and regular infantry of other major armies) often served as amphibious assault troops, and the U.S. Marine Corps was almost exclusively assigned to the Pacific Theatre. To my knowledge, no other major combatant had a specialized amphibious/naval infantry formation even one tenth the size of the U.S. Marine Corps.
      Marines would, if they use the similar states I envision for paras (high attack, low def) allow generals to conduct rapid naval landings, enveloping the enemy from the sea, while paras envelop from the air. The Royal Marines saw extensive use on D-Day and served to open the British beach heads, compared to the standard Rangers used by the US (Of course, the US didn't have a choice as its marine forces had to push the Japs back, as you stated)

      Its not about size, it would be more a reflection of the growing strategic options at the time of the early cold war and later WW2 years. As standard, and as the Community has stated, Marines would be faster at landing on enemy held shores- and speed is everything on this game
      "If the tanks succeed, then victory follows."- H.Guderian

      "Hit first ! Hit hard ! Keep on hitting ! ! (The 3 H's)" Admiral Jackie Fisher

      "The 3 Requisites for Success – Ruthless, Relentless, Remorseless(The 3 R's)" Admiral Fisher

      Crates: a Term used to define any unwanted and unneeded feature in CoW

      Game Username: LordStark01
    • What do you guys think about adding a small attack value to disembarking marines? I am thinking troops that can fight at say 50 percent of their strength when departing would be a neat Idea. Sorta like an actual assault force.

      Just an Idea

      "Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of war"




      "The best weapon against an enemy is another enemy."Friedrich Nietzsche
    • MontanaBB wrote:

      TankBuster wrote:

      As standard, and as the Community has stated, Marines would be faster at landing on enemy held shores- and speed is everything on this game
      So, their primary advantage would be faster disembarkation on hostile shores?
      Completely. Slightly edited attack/def status, but that would be their primary ability. Its simple and to the point. Not really much we can add to early Cold War Marines
      "If the tanks succeed, then victory follows."- H.Guderian

      "Hit first ! Hit hard ! Keep on hitting ! ! (The 3 H's)" Admiral Jackie Fisher

      "The 3 Requisites for Success – Ruthless, Relentless, Remorseless(The 3 R's)" Admiral Fisher

      Crates: a Term used to define any unwanted and unneeded feature in CoW

      Game Username: LordStark01
    • TankBuster wrote:

      Not really much we can add to early Cold War Marines
      Well, not sure if it is much, but in 1956 the British made the first Landing Helicopter Dock/amphibious assault ship. That could be worth thinking about, I think they were further developed in Vietnam by the US and now we have the Wasp.
      Forum Gang Commissar



      I changed it for you Dia <3
    • Quasi-duck wrote:

      TankBuster wrote:

      Not really much we can add to early Cold War Marines
      Well, not sure if it is much, but in 1956 the British made the first Landing Helicopter Dock/amphibious assault ship. That could be worth thinking about, I think they were further developed in Vietnam by the US and now we have the Wasp.
      I know that one, its just i didn't want to mention Helicopters. I've always supported Helis, and bring up Paras always seems to lead us down the rabbit hole to other great ideas
      "If the tanks succeed, then victory follows."- H.Guderian

      "Hit first ! Hit hard ! Keep on hitting ! ! (The 3 H's)" Admiral Jackie Fisher

      "The 3 Requisites for Success – Ruthless, Relentless, Remorseless(The 3 R's)" Admiral Fisher

      Crates: a Term used to define any unwanted and unneeded feature in CoW

      Game Username: LordStark01
    • TankBuster wrote:

      Quasi-duck wrote:

      TankBuster wrote:

      Not really much we can add to early Cold War Marines
      Well, not sure if it is much, but in 1956 the British made the first Landing Helicopter Dock/amphibious assault ship. That could be worth thinking about, I think they were further developed in Vietnam by the US and now we have the Wasp.
      I know that one, its just i didn't want to mention Helicopters. I've always supported Helis, and bring up Paras always seems to lead us down the rabbit hole to other great ideas
      Yeah. For some reason I don't think we would get heli's.
      Forum Gang Commissar



      I changed it for you Dia <3
    • Quasi-duck wrote:

      TankBuster wrote:

      Quasi-duck wrote:

      TankBuster wrote:

      Not really much we can add to early Cold War Marines
      Well, not sure if it is much, but in 1956 the British made the first Landing Helicopter Dock/amphibious assault ship. That could be worth thinking about, I think they were further developed in Vietnam by the US and now we have the Wasp.
      I know that one, its just i didn't want to mention Helicopters. I've always supported Helis, and bring up Paras always seems to lead us down the rabbit hole to other great ideas
      Yeah. For some reason I don't think we would get heli's.
      we'd get heli-creates
      "If the tanks succeed, then victory follows."- H.Guderian

      "Hit first ! Hit hard ! Keep on hitting ! ! (The 3 H's)" Admiral Jackie Fisher

      "The 3 Requisites for Success – Ruthless, Relentless, Remorseless(The 3 R's)" Admiral Fisher

      Crates: a Term used to define any unwanted and unneeded feature in CoW

      Game Username: LordStark01