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

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

    • 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.
      "As long as there are sovereign nations possessing great power, war is inevitable." Albert Einstein

      "Giving up is not an option in war, for it proves one's incapability and incompetence as a leader." - Me (Little Racoon)

    • lol, you like moving goal posts, eh?
      When the fake daddies are curtailed, we have failed. When their roller coaster tolerance is obliterated, their education funds are taken by Kazakhstani phishers, and their candy bars distributed between the Botswana youth gangs, we have succeeded.
      - BIG DADDY.

    • K.Rokossovski wrote:

      Unbelievable... you guys are talking WAYS to include paratroopers... just DAYS after a poll clearly showed no one WANTS them!
      I didn't vote. I also don't want them unless they were limited in some way to prevent over powering the game. Having served in an Airborne Unit there is a lot of prep that goes into any jump.

      My suggestion would be separate unit similar to commandos, day 24-30 special unit including level 3 strat bomber required, same rough build and cost only built in the capital, can fly from airfield to airfield distance of tac bomber (1 hour re-fueling window) 2 day initial build time and a 4-5 day recharge to jump again. Need to be 90% strength to jump. Distance of attack is Tac Bomber lvl range.

      Upon entering a territory with Anti Air or Interceptors they take a 1 full hit to strength same as an attack but first damage is doubled to account for getting shot out of the air/loss of planes and men while their first attack is diminished by 1/2. No units defending 1% loss due to injuries (which is ridiculously realistic).

      That makes it a later game unit and doesn't hamstring the unit to the point of being worthless.
      :thumbup: :beer: - Living the dream!

    • Bro, this is a simple answer, make a special 3 day event with paratroopers. If the public doesn't like them don't keep them. Jeezus.



      -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      "War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength." -George Orwell

    • Iczz wrote:

      Bro, this is a simple answer, make a special 3 day event with paratroopers. If the public doesn't like them don't keep them. Jeezus.



      -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      "War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength." -George Orwell
      Boom - Wisdom!
      :thumbup: :beer: - Living the dream!

    • The problem, of course, is that paratroopers would require a huge programming effort, which would be lost in case of the predictable outcome.
      When the fake daddies are curtailed, we have failed. When their roller coaster tolerance is obliterated, their education funds are taken by Kazakhstani phishers, and their candy bars distributed between the Botswana youth gangs, we have succeeded.
      - BIG DADDY.

    • Svven78 wrote:

      I can understand the no capture province thing but para troopers are meant to capture and hold, maybe a 2 day no movement add on as well since they are supposed to grab and hold the area until relief comes or they die...
      Indeed, pParatroopers are supposed to "hold" strategic positions until the real army arrives - instead of capturing it outright and then moving to the next one. Even in Crete the Germans paratroopers were only supposed to take positions until the rest of the army (and later the Italians) landed by sea.

    • Geeesh, this thread is still up? I’m still missing an effective defense that will be affordable by this unit, all the ideas on how to use them are willy nilly but on defending it?. All I see is people doing logical jump hoops to implement them and figure out ways to make them still powerful with a smidge of nerf but no one actually showing any strategy to defend by them rather then “just place one AA ok each region” which is without saying the most double digit IQ solution I ever saw in this forum for a couple of years now and funny enough also then was in a para thread

      I love JCS DARRAGH idea that he suggest them not to be able to capture stuff, and get killed if dropped close to an AA, cost like a commando and move like a militia but immediately after he suggest that at day fricking 9 can just drop them on the AA, reconquer the region then slow down the tank etc etc. like, dude, do you even connect your synapses before posting? Day 9 there is sometimes problem of manpower and especially resources, how the hell you got research of strategic bomber lv3, para, build a barrack lv3 and a airstrip lv3 and still be in the positive to win without using gold(I’m assuming all in a alliance match where 95% of the times gold use is forbidden, in casual matche go nuts on spending)
      Like, I guess you hate actually using army to attack and like to turtle your way to day 40 before being steamrolled by even the lowest player? 8| And no. It’s not fun to talk about it if that’s the same logical argument and conclusion after >20 threads on them.

      And about the poll, I can assure you, it’s a tiny percentage of player but surely they all are player with experience. You can’t ask this idea to lv5 player that still have to figure out how to use a fighter without direct attack an AA.... I trust more people here that are maybe 10% of all the cow player than any player that isn’t on the forum :tumbleweed:
      You merely adopted the shitposting. I was born in it, molded by it. I didn't see a proper post until I was already a man, by then it was nothing to me but blinding!

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Spiffolo ().

    • Oh no, when my intentions were to have a decision about things and hope people be quiet for a while, and here it goes again. Full circle. I have failed myself.
      "As long as there are sovereign nations possessing great power, war is inevitable." Albert Einstein

      "Giving up is not an option in war, for it proves one's incapability and incompetence as a leader." - Me (Little Racoon)

    • Captain Steiner wrote:

      Not to change the subject but why don't Nuke Subs launch Nuke Missiles??? Yeah I know they can't launch ICBMs but then again that would mean a new type of missile like a Polaris etc. Just asking.
      Cool, Steiner! Gotta love you! This is the coolest forum hijack I ever saw!!
      When the fake daddies are curtailed, we have failed. When their roller coaster tolerance is obliterated, their education funds are taken by Kazakhstani phishers, and their candy bars distributed between the Botswana youth gangs, we have succeeded.
      - BIG DADDY.

    • Captain Steiner wrote:

      Not to change the subject but why don't Nuke Subs launch Nuke Missiles??? Yeah I know they can't launch ICBMs but then again that would mean a new type of missile like a Polaris etc. Just asking.
      1942 - no nuke subs (even though we have them), no subs launching missiles, but I wondered the same question but then remembered... 1942... back to Paratroopers.


      Spiffolo wrote:

      Geeesh, this thread is still up? I’m still missing an effective defense that will be affordable by this unit, all the ideas on how to use them are willy nilly but on defending it?. All I see is people doing logical jump hoops to implement them and figure out ways to make them still powerful with a smidge of nerf but no one actually showing any strategy to defend by them rather then “just place one AA ok each region” which is without saying the most double digit IQ solution I ever saw in this forum for a couple of years now and funny enough also then was in a para thread

      I love JCS DARRAGH idea that he suggest them not to be able to capture stuff, and get killed if dropped close to an AA, cost like a commando and move like a militia but immediately after he suggest that at day fricking 9 can just drop them on the AA, reconquer the region then slow down the tank etc etc. like, dude, do you even connect your synapses before posting? Day 9 there is sometimes problem of manpower and especially resources, how the hell you got research of strategic bomber lv3, para, build a barrack lv3 and a airstrip lv3 and still be in the positive to win without using gold(I’m assuming all in a alliance match where 95% of the times gold use is forbidden, in casual matche go nuts on spending)
      Like, I guess you hate actually using army to attack and like to turtle your way to day 40 before being steamrolled by even the lowest player? 8| And no. It’s not fun to talk about it if that’s the same logical argument and conclusion after >20 threads on them.

      And about the poll, I can assure you, it’s a tiny percentage of player but surely they all are player with experience. You can’t ask this idea to lv5 player that still have to figure out how to use a fighter without direct attack an AA.... I trust more people here that are maybe 10% of all the cow player than any player that isn’t on the forum :tumbleweed:
      Timers is the easiest way I see to nerf it enough to not make it absurd.
      2 times the build, so produce in capital only with a 2 day timer
      1 hour refuel vrs 15 minutes
      tac bomb radius but requires lvl 3 strat to build
      90% health to jump
      2 day timer between jumps
      Once a unit arrives at an airfield to jump, 6 hour timer to jump that resets if unit is attacked or moves

      Defending units hit x 2 against air on first attack then its normal inf defense


      Paratroopers are supposed to be better trained than infantry but fighting light
      So maybe 75-80 of a commando related to stats same cost to build.


      Holding up troops truly serves their purpose, not capping territory.

      Airborne units present purpose usually involves taking an airfield and bringing in more troops and supplies or hampering / holding key locations and elements.

      Usually not taking or holding entire provinces without support.

      Maybe a 3-5 day timer as well, if the enemy units don't attack the unit in 3-5 days, a unit being left alone long enough will accomplish a lot, so maybe the owner of the province looses access to build units and looses the province if enough time passes without action.
      :thumbup: :beer: - Living the dream!