Hi all. :)

I was just wondering what rules you thought an AI should work to in the instance of a paratrooper mission.

Specifics:
- Paratrooper unit is a seperate unit
- Paratrooper mission is active when paratrooper unit is in a city with an airport

So basically what I want to know is how you would make the AI decide if it should paradrop a unit or not.

Dale

I see it as a seperate unit :)
In my mod there's already paratrooper unit but not working cause it waits for miracle - part of code in sdk/python :)

Theres some trainsport planes already (by snafusmith), and paratroopers units models (by snafusmith and me). I see it this way - the unit could be loaded into transportplane and could be dropped anywhere - the transport plane could have the ability to drop loaded units - i think it's more realistic, but the second option is also interesting and would work fine.

Or perhaps you could airdrop a paratrooper onto an enemy city, and it ignores the city defensive bonuses and just attacks the units within the city?

Persoanly, I think paratroopers should be a promotion and not a unit, but thats kind of OT.

How does paratrooping work in your mod? Can you airdrop on an enemy unit and start fighting it straight away, or do you land next to the unit, but still have a movement point with which you can attack/pillage?

I like Graves idea.Or perhaps you could airdrop a paratrooper onto an enemy city, and it ignores the city defensive bonuses and just attacks the units within the city?

From Civ3, I tended to use them primarily to block resupply lines and grab resource tiles.

Assuming the AI has already targeted a city, the paratrooper would drop on a road tile going from the enemy city towards the center of the empire, or towards neighbor enemy cities; Best choice would be hill/wooded/wooded hill spots. Action would be to fortify mainly.

The other option is identify strategic resources in areas where the enemy doesn't appear to have a lot of strength, and drop on them. Action is probably to raze the tile completely, and either fortify (if remote from the target city), or move to join in an attack on a nearby target city, or move to more resource tiles and raze those (say anymore in 3 tiles). For this purpose, they'd mostly avoid moving adjacent to the enemy to avoid getting destroyed.

Also figure that paratroopers are a reserve that can fly far to any part of the empire.

So AI should paratroop if a land invasion would be too slow to grab a resource, to support an attack against a city, and especially if no marines available/or the target is not sea-based (within 2 tiles).

Thanks guys. :)

I can tell you straight away, that a paratrooper should NOT be dropping direct onto a city or unit. Lose city defense bonus? **** no! If anything, defense bonus should double if paratroopers are falling. They are extremely vulnerable during the drop, and remember, paratroopers do not have heavy weapons and nearly always drop without air/bombardment support (out of range). So those ideas are not going to work. :)

I like GoodGame's idea so far. Dropping paratroopers behind lines to harass and pillage. That's how they operate IRL.

As for how the concept works, well in short, they're a unit that paratroops from a city with an airport. They cannot drop onto enemy units (including occupied cities, though unoccupied is different), impassible terrain, nor a plot not of their movement domain (land/sea). Yes, from that statement you should be able to guess that I've coded it generically so even ships can paradrop if you want. :lol:

Once a paratrooper drops, that's their turn. There is a paratrooper specific promotion which allows the paratrooper to finish their movement and attack after they drop. So these paratroopers can drop/move/attack all in the one turn.

If there are any more ideas on what people think the AI should use paratroopers for, keep posting. :)

Dale

I've written a Paradrop mission a few months back, I use a seperate Air Transport and Paratroop unit. The Paratroop uses SPECIALUNIT_AIRBORNE. The Air Transport has a cargo capacity of 1. The Paratroop can only drop on owned plots if they are same player or enemy player. Cannot drop on enemy units or cities. For the future I want to replicate the amphibious assault code so they CAN drop on enemy units. Fun stuff! Will be in v2.0 of ChazMod (currently banging away at it).

EDIT: I removed the Airlift functionality, to move units by air you must load them on Air Transports and rebase to another city.

Just throwing my 2 cents in-

Paratroopers should be made like marines - A separate unit that you can build specifically for the task at hand, with the addition of a promotion that can be granted to other units with enough experience.

I also agree that they should not be able to land on enemy units. My main argument for this is not because they shouldn't be aloud to drop and fight in the same turn. Realistically speaking this could easily be the case. For gameplay reasons, I just don't see it happening. If there are say, 4 units in a tile and you drop a paratrooper onto it to attack them, what happens? If the paratrooper dies, but does damage, there's no problem... But what if the paratrooper wins the battle? It can't stay on the tile, because there are already units there. It also can't act like a marine in this case, because paratroopers wouldn't suddenly end up back at their airfield after an attack. Would it end up on an adjacent tile? Who's to say, but it seems odd that it would, that's not where it dropped after all.

Should they be aloud to drop and then fight? Only certain units - Examples include the various vehicles and armored equipment that can be dropped from aircraft and used w/in minutes of landing.

Paratroopers should be used to secure parts of the battlefield that are critical to an offensive. Historical examples include forts (WW2 German invasion of the low countries) and bridges (Operation Market Garden). To reflect this, paratroopers should get bonuses verses units held up in forts. Much of this though assumes that the AI knows how to use forts at all (which I've never seen them build).

Again, just my 2 Cents.

I can tell you straight away, that a paratrooper should NOT be dropping direct onto a city or unit. Lose city defense bonus? **** no! If anything, defense bonus should double if paratroopers are falling. They are extremely vulnerable during the drop, and remember, paratroopers do not have heavy weapons and nearly always drop without air/bombardment support (out of range).

So you're saying a Paratrooper shouldn't ignore Walls? That's what I was getting at. As a trade off they could be more vulnerable to Interception, like an air unit?

Good points, snafu. I agree very strongly that special-use units should never be just a promotion, but should have to be built from scratch - and as a side-bonus can then have their own artwork, etc. that really adds to the game.

The more detail and diversity the better, I say. And along the way trying to replicate the real world as closely as possible, at least in concept if not down to the exact scale is a good thing. You really can't get too worked up over exact realism in Civ4 because the game changes scope and scale dynamically.

In the end the most important consideration is play balance and the flow of the game - it is after all an entertainment medium - all else must subordinate to those major factors.

I'm thinking their should be a boolean on CvUnit for paratroop ability, a unit could be designated a paratrooper in its UnitInfo with a <bParatrooper> tag. Their could also be a similar tag on the Promotion Info allowing a unit to aquire the ability by Promotion. It is after all realy just special training, Paratroopers once on the ground are equiped and function much like comperable light Infantry units of their time period.

A second boolean could be used for the "no Drop Penalty" ability Dale describes, this would work much like the Ampibius promotion and the tag <bRapidParatrooper> or something like that could again be on UnitInfo and definatly on PromotionsInfo.

The use of a transport Plane sounds interesting both in Paratroop droping and in the Traditional transport role. Under such a design both missions would be performed by the AirCraft rather then the loaded unit, Transport mission requires the destination to be a friendly airport equiped city. Paratroop less restrictive landing requirments but requires that all loaded units have the apropriate boolean and have atleast 1 move left. The Droped units then check for their "Rapid" boolean and thouse that lack it lhave their movment set to zero. Likewise regular transport should require and consume movment of the of the unit being moved.

Just some real life reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airborne_forces

Obviously they can land inside walls, but they're very vulnerable to anything they land on top of (CIV3 did that I think---they die instanteous that way---they can't fight until they land really).

Pretty much, landing on top of a very heavily defended unit would be suicide for a paratrooper. They're best for attacking where the opponent is overconfident that no one can reach, but is weakly defending.

One other use for them---grab an enemy airport to allow reinforcements to be flown in and landed.

I'm not sure of using transports for paratroopers. Paratroopers are not just limited to aircraft, but gliders and helicopters as well.

As for a promotion to become a paratrooper, that doesn't work in a real context. Paratroopers are specialised units with specialised auxilleries. No normal infantry unit would have these auxilleries and thus should not be able to become paratroopers.

With city defenses, the reason I believe they should still be intact (and BTW, walls have no defense bonus versus gun units anyways, so that arguements out), and defending unit in the city will make use of buildings for cover. Machinegun nests, spotlights, etc. Any paratrooper unit landing in a city is asking for death!

So therefore, I'm sticking with a seperate paratrooper unit that can gain a promotion to eliminate the disadvantages. An unpromoted PT unit when it drops will finish its move, whereas the promotion will allow it to move and combat. With the right civics you could give this promotion to the unit on training.

There will not be a transport plane (heads in the direction of MM) especially since the current AI has no idea of air units anyways. That'd just be a massive advantage to humans.

Programming the AI to use them is going to be interesting though. ;)

Dale

EDIT:
At present, units are defined as able to use the paratrooper mission via iDCMParaRange in UnitInfos.xml (it also determines the range of the mission for that unit type) and buildings that paratrooper missions can start from are defined via bDCMParaBuilding in BuildingInfos.xml.

So in game terms, what would be the benefit of a paratrooper then? What advantage will they have that a regular gunpowder unit doesn't? I mean, if they can't attack cities, or directly attack units... what good are they?

I'm all for seeing them in the game... but they have to bring something to the table that the other units in the game can't.

The only thing I can think of is if they're based in a city with an airport, they can have a drop range within X amount of squares from that city... a mission looking like an artillery strike. You select the square you want them to land on, and they'll be transported to that square (providing it's not a city or enemy unit). From there... I don't know. Maybe have combat characteristics similiar to a Marine unit or something.

Basically using it to infiltrate enemy borders a little deeper than a regular foot soldier.

What should seperate a paratrooper from other units in the same class is that it should be able to (a) drop on any square within a range X-thus not being limited to being transported into cities with airbases; (b) unlike normal units, Paratroop units should be able to move/attack on the same turn they are transported. This will make them much more useful for operating behind enemy lines. Personally, I think there should be multiple Paradrop promotions-with the paratrooper unit automatically getting Paradrop I. Paradrop I would simply allow the unit to airdrop into an unoccupied enemy/friendly square within Range X (no city destination limitation). Paradrop II would allow the unit to move/attack after airdrop. Paradrop III would give a combat bonus to the unit IF it attacks in the same round as it paradropped.
Anyway, just spitballing here, so please feel free to use/reject any of the above ideas.

Aussie_Lurker.

I remember paratroopers from civ 2 and 3, where it took them a whole turn to land. That made them entirely useless, as they were wipped out before they could do anything. You can't even use them to block enemy reinforcements because by the lte game every tile has a railroad on it. The only possible use for them is as units to protect your tanks without slowing them down. But this means that a) you're not using artillery and b) you have enought paratroopers to launch a fresh wave every turn as the old ones fall behind.
To be at all usefull, they need to be able to drop&attack in the same turn. I also like Aussie's idea. Paratrooper 1 can be gained after combat 2, but paratroopers get it for free. That allows you to special between fast attack paratroopers (with para 1, 2 and 3) and heavy paratroopers (with para1 and combat 1, 2, 3).

As for stats I would make them slightly weaker that infantry and slighty more expensive:

strength 18 (compared to 20), cost 160 (same as marine), -20% city attack (due to lack of heavy weapons

drop on any square within a range X-thus not being limited to being transported into cities with airbases;

Ofcorse thats assuming their IN a city with AirPort, I dont realy see the point of creating another tag <bDCMParaBuilding> when you can simply key off of the Airports existing tag that gives it 3 air-lift missions per turn. Paratrooper drops should count against that limit. Also why do you insist on putting DCM in all of your new XML tags, its superflues, everyone is well aware of your authorship without sneaking int into the tag name.

So in game terms, what would be the benefit of a paratrooper then? What advantage will they have that a regular gunpowder unit doesn't? I mean, if they can't attack cities, or directly attack units... what good are they?

They should have all abilities (and promotions) of standard infantry. The benefit is they can drop behind lines to harass supply (pillage in game terms) or capture a chokepoint like they did in reality. Really, what benefit do other specialised units bring? Only one. Thus the paratrooper only bringing one special ability is in line with the rest of the game.

I'm all for seeing them in the game... but they have to bring something to the table that the other units in the game can't.

They can appear behind lines.

The only thing I can think of is if they're based in a city with an airport, they can have a drop range within X amount of squares from that city... a mission looking like an artillery strike. You select the square you want them to land on, and they'll be transported to that square (providing it's not a city or enemy unit). From there... I don't know. Maybe have combat characteristics similiar to a Marine unit or something.

Once they are dropped, they operate as standard infantry.

What should seperate a paratrooper from other units in the same class is that it should be able to (a) drop on any square within a range X-thus not being limited to being transported into cities with airbases; (b) unlike normal units, Paratroop units should be able to move/attack on the same turn they are transported. This will make them much more useful for operating behind enemy lines. Personally, I think there should be multiple Paradrop promotions-with the paratrooper unit automatically getting Paradrop I. Paradrop I would simply allow the unit to airdrop into an unoccupied enemy/friendly square within Range X (no city destination limitation). Paradrop II would allow the unit to move/attack after airdrop. Paradrop III would give a combat bonus to the unit IF it attacks in the same round as it paradropped.
Anyway, just spitballing here, so please feel free to use/reject any of the above ideas.

That's actually similar to the line I've proposed. Though, paratroop I is redundant as the unit itself is the paratroop ability. The paratroop promotion I'm implementing gives the move/attack same turn ability.

Remember, when paratroopers first appeared during WW2, they couldn't land/move/attack fast. It took them time to locate the whole company, establish a base and arm & equip. This is simulated by the one turn penalty. It wasn't till later (the 60's) when better training, hardware and procedures were implemented where this was possible. It's a fact, early paratroopers were dis-organised, and found it hard to move/attack effectively after landing. In WW2 only the Germans in Crete were able to use paratroopers effectively to complete the mission successfully. Can't say that about the Allies. Operation Market Garden? Failed its mission. And let's not forget the 101st in Normandy! Not really a success against the military goal eh? ;)

I remember paratroopers from civ 2 and 3, where it took them a whole turn to land. That made them entirely useless, as they were wipped out before they could do anything. You can't even use them to block enemy reinforcements because by the lte game every tile has a railroad on it. The only possible use for them is as units to protect your tanks without slowing them down. But this means that a) you're not using artillery and b) you have enought paratroopers to launch a fresh wave every turn as the old ones fall behind.
To be at all usefull, they need to be able to drop&attack in the same turn. I also like Aussie's idea. Paratrooper 1 can be gained after combat 2, but paratroopers get it for free. That allows you to special between fast attack paratroopers (with para 1, 2 and 3) and heavy paratroopers (with para1 and combat 1, 2, 3).

As for stats I would make them slightly weaker that infantry and slighty more expensive:

strength 18 (compared to 20), cost 160 (same as marine), -20% city attack (due to lack of heavy weapons

Yeah, paratroopers in those games were pretty useless due to that. But seriously, with barracks and certain civics you can get two free promotions on build. Thus the Combat I + Paratroop combo to get the free move/attack ability.

Ofcorse thats assuming their IN a city with AirPort, I dont realy see the point of creating another tag <bDCMParaBuilding> when you can simply key off of the Airports existing tag that gives it 3 air-lift missions per turn. Paratrooper drops should count against that limit.

For genericness. Basically, it allows a modder to allow any building to allow paratroop missions. Hey, you could use this concept for the future era and have "Spaceport" as the building with paradrop mission, and the unit "Space Marines" as the paratroopers. I don't want to limit what a modder can use the concept for.

Also why do you insist on putting DCM in all of your new XML tags, its superflues, everyone is well aware of your authorship without sneaking int into the tag name.

Because it will be part of "Dales Combat Mod". Plus, makes it easy to search in the files for the tags, just search on "DCM" and everything I've added will appear. Maybe if more modders worked like this, then it would be easier to combine mods..... don't you think?

Aside from the fact I've been using a tag in all mods I've been doing since 2000. For Call to Power 2 I used SAP (Super Apolyton Pack) and WAW (World at War). For Simcity 4 they're all MULC (Melbourne Urban Living Collection), and of course the recent AOD (Age of Discovery) and DCM (Dales Combat Mod).

Besides, what's wrong with putting my tag on my work? It's my bloody work, I want the credit and recognition for it. :) I've already found on "other" civ4 sites some modders using some of my work and claiming it as theirs. I proved it via the tags. :(

Dale

Heh Dale, I agree that a modder should absolutely tag their work and get credit for it. It's a hell of a lot of brain-twisting to do mod work. I comment my SDK changes '// Chazcon' and when I use a line of someone else's code I comment '// Chazcon - Dale Kent - Ranged Field Bombardment' for example, or '// Chazcon - TheLopez - Air Forces'. I also credit all mod components and artwork in a readme.txt file included with my mod.

I feel that if you use someone else's work, you have a responsibility to maintain the original authors' connection to that work. It's not only good manners but the right thing to do. And it enables the next guy to study modified code and advance the state of the art, if you will.

Another idea you know how fighters have the patrol option when thats set the person paratrooping can't paratroop until next turn.

That's sometimes easier said than done though, Chazcon. For instance, Arbitrary guy wanted a whole bunch of mine and TheLopez's code merged into a single .dll Now because this was for his new EE3 deluxe mod, I tagged all the changed material as // < EE3 Deluxe Mod Start > and // < EE3 Deluxe Mod End >, not to deny people their due credit, just because its easier to find the modifications in the .cpp and .h files!

Aussie_Lurker.

Aussie, exactly why I comment '// Chazcon - Dale Kent - Ranged Field Bombardment' rather than '// Dale Kent - Ranged Field Bombardment', so I can search by 'Chazcon' and find everything in the code that has been changed, or 'Dale' to find only his work.

/shrug

It's just different styles. Blake doesn't comment at all, and you'd think he would be the most anal about it.

Hey, as long as we're having fun enjoying our hobby, that's what it's all about, eh mate?

Absolutely spot on Chazcon. Its all about having fun and giving a little something back to this fantastic community!

Aussie_Lurker.

In my code I've also set it up so I can search on either "// Dale" to get everything I've written, or just the concept such as "Field Bombard" to get just that code. Nice and clean, that's how I like it.

It just REALLY pissed me off when I saw someone claiming credit for my CASA work!!!!! But that's been fixed up now. :)

Dale

Another idea you know how fighters have the patrol option when thats set the person paratrooping can't paratroop until next turn.

I actually prefer just a simple intercept test. If the paratroopers are landing in the city-plus, any fighter patrols in that city have an intercept test. I'll be looking into that.

Dale

Another idea you know how fighters have the patrol option when thats set the person paratrooping can't paratroop until next turn.

....Or if a paratrooper is air intercepted have them receive bombard damage ( a couple of first strikes from the fighter?) and then land randomally 1 tile away from where they intended to land.

The main advantage is the element of surprise---they're hiding out in a city with an airport, and then instantly showing up within aircraft range, anywhere, without walking or unloading from a boat. Don't underestimate that walking in enemy territory without a Commando promotion is time consuming (turns and turns). A paratrooper rush is instanteous, and swamps the enemy from unexpected directions.

So in game terms, what would be the benefit of a paratrooper then? What advantage will they have that a regular gunpowder unit doesn't? I mean, if they can't attack cities, or directly attack units... what good are they?
<snip>
Basically using it to infiltrate enemy borders a little deeper than a regular foot soldier.

GoodGame:

Good point. A paratrooper rush would be a very powerful weapon. That's a reason to not have drop/move/attack in one turn. It would be too powerful then. I'll also link paratrooper mission to the airlift limit of cities. That'll stop dropping 50 paras in one turn behind lines.

All you have to do is limit the total number of Paratroopers a player is allowed to build.

That's what I'll do once this component is made available.

BAAA !! Arbitrary unit ownership limits are the WORST means of balance, the airlift limit is far better as it only caps the amount of activity in a small geographic area.

;4948364']BAAA !! Arbitrary unit ownership limits are the WORST means of balance, the airlift limit is far better as it only caps the amount of activity in a small geographic area.

I totally agree.

;4948364']BAAA !! Arbitrary unit ownership limits are the WORST means of balance, the airlift limit is far better as it only caps the amount of activity in a small geographic area.

Then explain why -- don't just blow me off. It's uncalled for and somewhat disrespectful.

Besides, it wasn't an arbitrary thought at all. The concept was that a paratrooper is an elite unit, requiring special time and training to become effective. There simply aren't enough qualified instructors to go around. The number I had in mind wasn't just "3" or "4".

Impaler, I disagree. Units limits are a useful tool in acheiving play balance. They are not arbitrary, by definition.

For example I use Commando units with a limit of 4 and Special Forces units with a limit of 2. My Paratroops have a limit of 10. Real armies create elite units by selecting above-average men and incurring a great deal of expense giving them specialized training. Real nations are not composed of large numbers of elite units simply because the manpower is not available, and the cost is prohibitive. You can churn out Tank units, for instance, because that relies simply on production and technology. But you can't 'churn out' above-average people.

Wouldn't it great if every man in the U.S. Army was a highly trained, highly motivated Special Forces soldier? Sure, but that is a fantasy. Civ4 is not always 100% realistic, but a 'sense of realism' is what a game designer tries to acheive, not an exact nuts-and-bolts representation of reality. Allowing an entire Civ4 army of paratroopers is just silly. But, everyone is free to edit their own XML files, of course, you can set your unit limits to zero and go at it if you wish.

A cap on the total % of your whole military composition being of a particular type makes sense and I would like to see such a feature. Or perhaps something a bit like the way Cathedrals are limited so you could have 1 Paratrooper per Airport or AirBase you control (hard to learn the skills without airports), but thats not how Civ unit limits work. The current system Civ 4 has is totaly arbitrary, you put any integer you want on the XML file and out side of scaling for map size its completly ridgid. Control the whole Planet or just one city and its always the same cap. I always prefer a system in which I can get more of Z by jumping through hoops W, X and Y (incressing in dificulty as you aquire more of Z so theirs eventualy a cut off ware YOU deside its not worth it) rather then just being flatly denied it for no real logical reason other then the fact the designers made a broken unbalanced unit. Paratroopers are not not inherently broken (like SMAC crawlers for instance) with the right stats and costs the unit should be easily balanced.

Still that doesn't give you the right to be rude to another over your pet peeve. You're also making the assumption that the mod maker using the concept is not going to try and balance that unit in the context of the mod.

That's neither here nor there, though.

A national unit limit would easily solve the 50 man rush described in the posts above. In addition, it would lend some credibility to the military system as it is presented in Civ.

On the other hand, an airlift style limitation to the total number of units is a bit harder to swallow than an "arbitrary" unit limit. If you've only got three airfields, you can only drop three units? That doesn't work -- Normandy dropped many, many planeloads of paratroopers and glider troops from a smaller number of airfields. It was due to training and logistics, not because the US had a bunch of bushpilot fields dotting the midwest.

Actually, only three paratrooper divisions dropped in Normandy. The British 6th Airborne, the US 82nd Airborne and the US 101st Airborne. As it's generally agreed that a unit in Civ4 represents a division, that means only 3 paratrooper units constitute the entire Normandy force.

Dale

It's up to you since you're the one coding the component, but I do feel that the national unit function could accomplish the function more elegantly than trying to shoehorn the mission into the airlift function.

I'd rather not have military strategy forced to rely on a nation-wide airport building campaign...

My biggest gripe was Impaler's approach to disagreeing with my suggestion rather than the disagreement itself.

doronron: I dont realy see how any of my posts here have been rude, I did not attach you personaly in any way, rather I stated my distate for a particular rule and gave a reason although brief for my opinion. And then elaborated on in the subsequent post. Perhaps you found the oppening "BAA!!" offensive, I was trying to convey my distaste as quickly as efficienty as possible you shouldn't take it personaly, it was not ment as an insult.

Perhaps starting with "I disagree" could've been just as efficient. The overall tone of your post was more along the line of "your idea is ****!"

Still -- Airports in the game are useful only for moving an occupation force to another continent quickly. They're too expensive by themselves with all the other modern buildings required during that timeframe to go on a bout of massive construction. Having the paratrooper mission act exactly the same as the airlift mission pretty much destroys the overall usefulness of the paratrooper unit. One or two guys, unable to attack after landing, a waste of resources. Especially when Civ4 doesn't have the cocept of Zone of Control.

...

Anyway. It's Dale's mod component. He's got the final say.

I think that a limit (on the amount of paras) and a airlift limit are both good ideas.

There's just one problem as I see it with the national unit limitation.

If you have a limit of 5 paratroopers, that may be good for standard size maps in the full game. But what of a WW2 scenario on a huge map? In this instance to only have 5 paratroopers is useless.

The arguement of airports being expensive is minor. Just change the cost. :) Similarly with the national unit limitation and airlift limit. They're all easily modified. So whichever path is taken, is easily modified in the end by whoever is using it. :)

So the problem lies in, how to limit paratrooper numbers to stop a 50 unit rush, whilst leaving it dynamic enough to adjust to the size of the map. The only way I see this occuring is via linking into airlifts.

With an airport, whether it's allowing an airlift or paratrooper mission, there is still only going to be a certain number of planes that can takeoff/land in that turn. By using the national unit limit it'll allow unlimited paratrooper missions to originate from that airport. That's too unrealistic, even for Civ4.

I will stick with linking it into airlift missions, but if people later feel they want to limit paratroopers via national unit limits just adjust the setting in Civ4ClassInfos.xml.

Dale

I was planning between 15 to 20, depending upon balance issues with the other stuff I'd like to compile. I was also expecting a maximum range for paradropping units -- say the rough equivalent of the fighter plane of the era.

Dropping the value of the airport wouldn't work so well as then you'd also have to look at the costs of the other contemporary buildings as well -- another balancing act.

If you're truely 'airlifting' them, would that mean unlimited range?

I like the idea of linking it to airlift---i.e. number of airport cities, but even that is a bit restrictive. The Civ3 natural limit on paratroopers was their weak attack and the relatively short range they could drop in (not airlift exactly----anywhere you could put an airfield improvement, they could drop from). Allowing them to be intercepted by air patrols will further weaken them, so no need to cripple it further by setting a unit limit like national units.

I would give them a weak overall strength, say 14 or 15 (and maybe a generous percent bonus against gunpowder units or a combo hill-forest defense), to keep them from being rushed ridiculously.
That and don't make a Paratrooper promotion (that way no Marine/Navy Seal paratroopers), just a special unit which would imply Flight (and instrinsic transport aircraft that they need to do their mission). It's not totally realistic---there are Seals that do everything, but it keeps with the idea of grunt paratroopers.

They could then upgrade to a Modern Paratrooper (a la civ3) and get bonus vs. armor also.

If you do limit it to airlift strictly, then I'd give them a base strength of a Marine, since there won't be very many used in a turn.


Side idea: Why not let Forts double as Paratrooper airbases?

I'd keep them with stats equal to their infantry contemporary (ie WWII Paratrooper vs. Infantry), but give them a 50% penalty vs. Armor, Helicopters, and possibly Artillery. This represents the lack of heavy weaponry inherent to paradrops, and allows any real counter attack effort to be likely successful. In short, they're raiders.

In addition, the paradrop range could be equivalent to the range (or less) of the fighter unit.

EDIT: Part of the problem is the lack of an airport tile improvement. There is buried here or on Apolyton, a work-around in a land unit capable of carrying fighters, but this might not be useful.

I think paras should not be droped onto a city but next to one it should also have one movment point left when landed. It would be cool if you could air drop onto a unit though and fight it straight away although it would need more coding to do so but your the code master Dale and I'm sure you'ld have no problem sorting that out, for those that are new check out Dales last mod at http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=168966

There's just one problem as I see it with the national unit limitation.

If you have a limit of 5 paratroopers, that may be good for standard size maps in the full game. But what of a WW2 scenario on a huge map? In this instance to only have 5 paratroopers is useless.

I don't know if this is possible but I think using python you could make it so that it allows you like three paratrooper per city that you own this way you can defend your country.

That could be interesting, SEAL. How difficult would it be to implement, though?

There's just one problem as I see it with the national unit limitation.

If you have a limit of 5 paratroopers, that may be good for standard size maps in the full game. But what of a WW2 scenario on a huge map? In this instance to only have 5 paratroopers is useless.

Well, I think this raises an issue that's always true with any nationally limited units and maybe the real solution is simply to mod it so that nationally limited units above 1 would be based on map size... so the value you enter is based on a standard map (with 1 being assumed that only one of these units can ever exist) and that number is raised or lowered by a value set somewhere else... so you could say that it would allow 50% fewer units on a tiny map, 25% less on a small, 25% more on large, 50% more on huge etc. and it would be rounded to the nearest whole number greater than 0.

I want to do the same thing with movement points and air range too since I find the movement points of ships on large and huge maps to be too small and on small and tiny maps to be too large.

Don't forget the AI unit load... I would like to see a few M113 pull up to a war and unload 6 ground troops per vehicle. I like the idea where you are going with this and I hope you can complete it, at least soon :D

what about setting the limit to S + N where S is an integer based on map size and N is the number of city you own ?

See what imposing a limit does? It hijacks the discussion. A dynamic limit based on in game components that naturally flows is best- IOW: no limit. They cost x amount and are x effective versus this unit and -x effective versus that, countered by x, once they land they can only sit there a turn so I'll need to expect x amount of losses in order to ensure they can pillage the reosurces I'm landing them on, and so I'll build X of them given my circumstances... discussion over.

Otherwise you'll be tweaking the "limit" forever as people say NOT ENOUGH of them to do X job, TOO MANy of them and I got wankified by the AI using them so LWOER the limit... (I should so wish) and on and on...

skip it I say.

That doesn't solve the 50 man rush brought up earlier, though.

Yes it does if you limit the unit somehow- no action past landing on a jump turn.

And besides, if you think your opponent is going to do a mass paratrooper landing, you react with *strategy* and tactics, not imposing limits.. there are counters to a bunch weak-lightly armed infantry troops dropping all over your land... guarding important places WITH a unit, ghaving a mobile force to wipe them out should they come, air interceptors to take out the first few landing attempts in order to force your opponent to waste MORE $$ building so many that he neglects other untis (like a navy?) and you clean up the waterways then land a truly hardened invasion force of *heavy* units... how the AI handles all of this is another problem, but modding the AI is entirely possible in this game.

I mean c'mon... do you want a strategy game?

Have you read any of the material I've posted above? Ya might want to.

Have you thought about any of the material you're writing? You might want to.