going to make it neccesary to put several decent defenders on oil wells, arent they?

going to make it neccesary to put several decent defenders on oil wells, arent they?

That depends on whether these units can move and do things after being paradropped.

Do we know how strong they're going to be yet?

That depends on whether these units can move and do things after being paradropped.

Well they can surely pillage a well. If its not defended and its your only one youre definitely going to have to defend it well. They could be very useful units to have for seaborne invasions

dont think so Monty Ni

Well they can surely pillage a well. If its not defended and its your only one youre definitely going to have to defend it well. They could be very useful units to have for seaborne invasions

I don't why you're so sure that they can still do things after paradropping. You could be right of course, but I haven't seen anything about that in any of the previews.

In Civ3, paratroopers couldn't do anything after a paradrop (lost all of their movement points with the paradrop) and that was one of the reasons that they were not that useful. So, I hope like you that they can still do something after a paradrop.

However, once you allow paratroopers movement after paradropping, they will be very powerful. You could bomb (or nuke) a city and then take it with paratroopers. I'm not sure if I would like that. It's very difficult to balance the power of a unit like the paratrooper in this game.

I never really used paratroopers that often either with later versions of Civ. I don't see what the big deal is about them and why they were wanted so badly. The do have a nice "coolness" factor... and the more units the merrier... but still.

I do remember those really cool units in Call to Power... the Wasps? Dropping down from space and reaking havoc everywhere... very cool.

I think it makes sense that they can't perform after landing. Afterall, when you land on the coasts from a ship, you lose all movement as well. Though, it's a game, anything is possible for the sake of balance.

They also really do have historical weight to them as well due to their heavy usage in ww2. ;)

Not that civ really reflects real life, but paratroopers are expected to attack immediately upon landing, at least in the immediate area.

Ingame, paras should be able to be dropped into an occupied tile (perhaps with a combat penalty). Intercept missions (fighters/sams/whatever) should reduce the strength of the para unit prior to attack.

Now that we have paratroopers, anyone want to start beating the drum for gliders? http://www.pointvista.com/WW2GliderPilots/index.htm

It is a must for paratroopers to be able to attack on the turn they are dropped. Failure to implement this means they will likely be useless in all but a few special circumstances. And as somebody said earlier, it gives you an incentive to guard those oil wells.

They must be able to move on the same turn they are dropped. However, since in my opinion I think the main purpose of them should be to perform a pre-invasion*, one thing I will demand is that they should not be able to attack a city on the same turn they are dropped OR their strenth is low enough that you wouldn't want to attack a city with it.

*such as taking out oil wells, pillaging roads to slow down reinforcements, etc.

How about giving them a 25% chance of attack after drop? Or make attack after drop a promotion..

They must be able to move on the same turn they are dropped. However, since in my opinion I think the main purpose of them should be to perform a pre-invasion*, one thing I will demand is that they should not be able to attack a city on the same turn they are dropped OR their strenth is low enough that you wouldn't want to attack a city with it.

*such as taking out oil wells, pillaging roads to slow down reinforcements, etc.

Good suggestion. That would balance the paratrooper while still allowing it be useful.

You don't want the winning strategy of the game to become
1) Bombard enemy city with bombers until the defense bonus is gone and the defenders are at half hitpoints.
2) Drop paratroopers next to the city.
3) Capture the city

Rinse and repeat.

It could become too effective and paratroopers historically were specialised units used for holding strategically important territory for a short duration until relieve troops arrived. I wouldn't like it if the game changed them into the most efficient city capturing units.

Options to avoid that:

1) Paratroopers can't move after a drop. This would make the unit fairly useless.
2) Paratroopers can move and pillage but not attack after a drop. This would change them into pillaging troops for undefended tiles.
3) Paratroopers can move and pillage and attack after a drop but the attack strength is severely reduced after a paradrop. This would allow them to pillage undefended and lightly defended tiles. It would also make them very capable at killing workers. It would allow them to capture cities which are weakened from bombardment but the losses would be horrendous.
4) Paratroopers can move and pillage and attack after drop but cannot attack cities after a drop. This would be a bit artificially limited version of 3. It would allow them to be more capable at attacking and pillaging defended tiles (as they have no combat penalty), but incapable of capturing cities.

My preference would be version 3. The worker capturing (or killing) thing could be strong though. It would force you to guard all of your workers within the paradrop range of the borders and that range is probably significant.

By the way, it is realistic that paratroopers would have a combat penalty after a paradrop as they wouldn't have access to or support from heavy weaponry.

This close to BtS being released, our discussion is pretty much moot; however, I will add my two cents...

Giving the paratroops a comparatively low strength rating is a recipe for disaster. This would make them useless because you wouldn't be able to hold on to any tile very long. That was a big problem in Civ 3.

Disallowing attacks just after the paradrop would require SDK work. Now, while that's certainly within Firaxis' capabilities, it seems like too much for only one tiny feature, and doubly so this close to release.

A simple solution would take a cue from Horse Archers: add a -10% attacking cities tag (or however much you want) so they can't take cities effectively. That way, you don't actually cut down their strength, but you do eliminate any real chance of capturing a fortified city with a few paratroopers. They could also be dropped into an isolated city in the event you can't get other reinforcements there in time as a stop-gap measure.

Nuts!

Wow Gaius, the rest of us were trying to come up with ways to not overpower the paratrooper and completely forgot about the the simplist solution: negative city attack. :hammer2

I see no one here is old enough to have played Civilization 3 then...

Paratroopers use up there movement points being air dropped. For Civ 4 I imagine them to have a % defense to certian improvements or tiles to show the units importance at holding ground.

Just like airlifting a unti from a city with an airport, whatever it is you've transported its lost its movement for that turn.

The AI would go mental with Para's if they could move once dropped!

I see no one here is old enough to have played Civilization 3 then...


Dont be an egotistical ass, most of us are probably older then you even realize.

Even I've played Civ3, and I look like a fluckin 5 year old

Yeah exactly, I can remember the excitement of CivNet coming out on IBM compatible.

So no, you are wrong ZB2

Dont be an egotistical ass, most of us are probably older then you even realize.

And that is about what? HA to your insult slaruk I stand by what I said, and if you dont like it thats your fault.

I'd prefer something like:
Paratrooper is effectively attacking the square it paradrops into, but can not move or pillage after paradrop. Also, if there are several enemy units on that square, it would have to defeat them all in a row, or die. (Very effective against lots of low power troops, suicidal against stronger troops).

Conquests had the system were you dropped into an occupied tile.. it counted as a misdrop and it died :( if it attacked the unit as it was dropped like you say it would be a nice change.

A simple solution to prevent the AI from going crazy with lots of paratroopers would be to limit the number of them per civ, as with spies or missionaries. Might not be agreeable to many, though.

Will be interesting to see how this is implemented. I've only had maybe 2 CivIII games where I had a user for paratroopers. That said, those two games we're glorious! To use a unit that was collecting cobwebs game after game.

One of the games involved a war with a civ that had naval superiority and I used paratroopers to hop across islands and between continents. The other involved getting units quickly across mountains for some strategic attack. (Er wait... maybe I'm thinking of helicopters?)

Maybe paratroopers come with something on the order of a high Drill score to allow for 1st strike possibilities. Or maybe paratrooping onto fortified enemies reduces the fortification bonuses.


I see no one here is old enough to have played Civilization 3 then...
Funny... you should try reading the thread before posting - several posts before yours mentioned CivIII paratrooper functions specifically.
:spank:

A simple solution to prevent the AI from going crazy with lots of paratroopers would be to limit the number of them per civ, as with spies or missionaries. Might not be agreeable to many, though.

Well just to highlight what Firaxis said 'The AI knows how to use them'

:)

Well just to highlight what Firaxis said 'The AI knows how to use them'

:)

That's what we were worried about... ;) The AI would know how to use them so well your late game wars might turn into Paratrooper spams. I'm sure that won't happen.

Well I could see Paratroopers as primarily attack troops, they would take an area and then be reinforced with others. So I could see
Bomber/Paratrooper combos working in Isolated areas to take something that the enemy can't easily retake (because the Paratroopers are too weak to hold it.)

They damn well should be able to attack and move. As an ex-paratrooper, I can tell you: we jumped with Humvees, mortars, anti-tank guided missile systems, belt-fed automatic grenade launchers, .50cal machineguns, M60s, and an assortment of small arms. Additionally, the Sheridan tank is an air-dropable tank and we would sometimes have a couple of those with us.

D Co. 3/505th PIR, 82nd Abn

If you ain't Airborne, you ain't ....

Your allegience to your uniform is noted but for gameplay, having the unit paradrop (which in most cases would use up its movement points) and then attak seams too powerful, as in line with bombers smashing the kapitals defenders to 1/2 Strengkth then moving on that turn to take it out.

How's that any different from doing the same thing and then launching an amphibious assault with Marines on a coastal capital? Or sending in tanks?

Actually, here's an exploit we haven't thought about:
Smash the city to 1/2 strength with bombers, then send in gunships to dispatch all of the defenders. Drop ONE paratrooper and take the city. :D

becuase tanks and marines cant attack any city there is.

if its like then no worries, ill learn to cope with movement and attack para tactics. but id rather see them use all movement points instead.

Neither can Paratroopers; they have to be within a certain range.

damn you! counter argument all of mine ¬¬ haha

Paratroopers with movement or without there still THE unit i wanted from civ.

*side note about the new units, why are there two units to counter tanks? the Anti tank gun, and an infantry as well?

Which infantry counters tanks? A new one? I thought gunships did that.

Its been anounced that the new Anti tank infantry have +100% attack against tanks, and a new 'Ambush Promotion' .. unless im thinking of the existing promotion against tanks.

That ontop of the Anti tank gun.

I think that is the anti-tank gun.

Thats what i thought, some typo, but Civilization Fanatics have posted it seperately too,.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=222075#NewUnit


Anti-Tank Gun: Is an inexpensive early counter to Tanks. You are no longer helpless if your enemy is first to Industrialism and has access to Oil.
Anti-Tank Infantry: They start with the Ambush promotion and have a 100% bonus against armored units.

One probably upgrades to the other. Anti-Tank Guns probably upgrade to Anti-Tank Infantry (the TOW infantry from Civ 3) to counter Modern Armor.

thee units counter another three haha. 'anti armor bonus' which can only be used on 3 units in the entire game.

Lol now all we need is a Railway Gun unit!

haha, and give that another bonus against tanks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_gun

Would be very interesting for Civ actually.

Well, if a unit like the Zeppelin is included, who knows what's next?

Well, if a unit like the Zeppelin is included, who knows what's next?

What's next is Railguns ;)

Id love to see more modern units, and a tech tree thats worth looking at. be able to fit in many of the diverse military units that came and went in the 100 years of flight being used... tanks being used.. paratroopers.. machine guns.. helicopter transports... space stations with planet destroying lasers...

space stations with planet destroying lasers... A bit dangerous floating around on my planet. That's it i'm moving to Mars. :|

Im only stating facts here. dont beleive me read this internet source

http://images.google.co.uk/images?hl=en&q=death+star&gbv=2

google has pictures so it must be true :P

Realy though, Paratroopers in Civ4 have made this expansion for me. they were the one unit I missed from Conquests

That's what we were worried about... ;) The AI would know how to use them so well your late game wars might turn into Paratrooper spams. I'm sure that won't happen.



I have two words for you......Red Dawn

Im only stating facts here. dont beleive me read this internet source

http://images.google.co.uk/images?hl=en&q=death+star&gbv=2

google has pictures so it must be true :P

Realy though, Paratroopers in Civ4 have made this expansion for me. they were the one unit I missed from Conquests

Death star... hmm

MIMAS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mimas_%28moon%29) IS ATTACKING!!!!!!!! AHHH

I have two words for you......Red Dawn

That's why guerrillas need to make a comeback.

Paratroopers should not have a range...

"18 hours, anywhere in the world, fight on arrival"

well there are free slots of unn anounced units :P

Damn i hope ones a railway gun.

If it is, they would've announced it earlier because it would be way to interesting to wait for the end.

haha yeah if i was making a game to release 25 new units and one of them was a Railway gun i think I would have released a screenshot of it blowing a crater into someone.

That's a RailGun. I'm talking about a Railway Gun used in World war 2.

According to that wikipedia page they are the same thing.

Except one's bigger then the other ;)

haha railgun and railway gun i use for the same weapon. Sorry for confusing you, but the idea of spending how long Firaxis has on BTS and making a Railway gun and not post about it blowing a crater away with a 203mm shell itches my skull.

More planes in Civ wouldnt have killed them neither. we have 5 aircraft now. or better yet, more helicopters, we only have ONE OF THEM! HOW GREAT IS THAT! ¬¬

cant paratroppers get shot down though? so enemy airforce and sam missle type of units will be a deterrent to the mass use of paratroopers.

I think they would be good for destroying strategic resources, wells, uranium mines etc. In Civ 3 their drop range was fairly decent, so lets say you are invading a country on a broad front, they have only one well and your spies tell you theyre bulding an ICBM in the capital, send in 3 paratroops to each resource, destroy it, and presto changeo your invasion has become significantly more easy.

I'm aware spies can destroy mines and wells but its ridiculously expensive.

Paratroopers can be shot down en-route to their destination in BtS.

haha railgun and railway gun i use for the same weapon. Sorry for confusing you, but the idea of spending how long Firaxis has on BTS and making a Railway gun and not post about it blowing a crater away with a 203mm shell itches my skull.

More planes in Civ wouldnt have killed them neither. we have 5 aircraft now. or better yet, more helicopters, we only have ONE OF THEM! HOW GREAT IS THAT! ¬¬

Railway gun would be great :)

I used to play a game called Historyline 1914-1918 by BlueByte, wich featured the mighty railway gun, and it would demolish anything it could hit, but it was slow moving and expensive. Anyone else played this game? Great implementation of the gun in that game.

A bit on-topic, I never had much use for the paratrooper in Civ3, just a cool toy to harass the AI with (drop 60 paras and pillage them back to 4000BC) at a point where the game was already won or lost....

But a railway gun.....:D :goodjob:

I'm making a Petition for Railway Gun for Civ 5 :)

Actually I could see the Bomber+Gunships+Paratrooper+Infantry being Ideal for taking+holding cities

haha, not when AI has 20 tanks within 10 tiles of the city (Railroads)

modern warfare can get reall hard :(

Now do you see why the enemy can't use your roads like they can their own? ;)

With the anti-tank gun, however, I suspect many of your problems will be solved.

And as so a land invasion will now jump up to about 50 units (I like big wars :D )

haha, not when AI has 20 tanks within 10 tiles of the city (Railroads)

modern warfare can get reall hard :(

Well the idea is
Bombers/Nukes weaken units in all cities within 4 tiles of border
Gunships remove those units
1 Paratrooper takes each city
your Garrison Infantry move Into the cities on the railroads that are now neutral/yours

i wonder what will happen if a Railway gun shot a rock at a paratrooper?

I see no one here is old enough to have played Civilization 3 then...

Paratroopers use up there movement points being air dropped. For Civ 4 I imagine them to have a % defense to certian improvements or tiles to show the units importance at holding ground.

Your post and your sig make you look like an elitist fool.

Para-drop attack, +25% vs. all (see: surprise attack), no move or pillage afterwards.

Thats my guess, looking forward to using them.

Your post and your sig make you look like an elitist fool.

As opposed to your username? :p ;)

It works both ways...

As opposed to your username? :p ;)

It works both ways...

lol nice one. :lol:

Recently I read that the paratroopers cant be dropped near enemys. Which makes me wonder what firaxis is defining as "near"?

Paratroopers should not have a range...

"18 hours, anywhere in the world, fight on arrival"Well, there's probably only one country in the world, the United States, that can reliably and repeatedly and in significant numbers carry that out - other countries just don't have the air assets to get it done.

I might like to see a superparatrooper produced by a wonder (like the Knights Templar of Civ3) that could drop anywhere in the world.

Looking at the videos from one of the "hands-on" sites, the range definitely appears to be too small. Even if it is not around the world, a range of 12-15 spaces doesn't seem too unreasonable (sorry if I missed the exact figure here in this discussion but I remember seeing 5 on the video). Of course you then have to worry about getting intercepted along the way but so it goes in real life too. So both realistic and fun to play; seemingly a good combination.

Oh, and the 18 hours/ anywhere in the world quote... nice. My first unit was 2/325, 82nd. Brings back some good memories. And some not so good memories like being on DRF (Division Ready Force)-1 where we were pretty much locked down for a month or so in order to be able to meet that time line. What a hoot. :rolleyes: )

maby we can make a new uu for america, the screaming egals.
make the old uu specal forces avilibale to all civs.

im thinking specal forces chould be a 2 movement unit, with lower strength compered to other units of the same time... and invisable unless within 2 spaces of an enamy unit.

Your post and your sig make you look like an elitist fool.

I thought I was alone, there are other elitist fools out there?

lets form a club, we can bring little sandwitches

Oh, and the 18 hours/ anywhere in the world quote... nice. My first unit was 2/325, 82nd. Brings back some good memories. And some not so good memories like being on DRF (Division Ready Force)-1 where we were pretty much locked down for a month or so in order to be able to meet that time line. What a hoot. :rolleyes: )

I was drf1 during blackhawk-down.

Couple of memories: Speeding to post pre-christmas to start drf1-3 and getting let off for it; a thanksgiving at plat.sgt. house during some event.

We should have jumped on Somalia.

Well, there's probably only one country in the world, the United States, that can reliably and repeatedly and in significant numbers carry that out - other countries just don't have the air assets to get it done.


Really there is no need for MASS paratrooper drops nowdays, and helicopters are better troop transporters :).
Moving on to the quote.. Has every other Country stagnated and gone backwards with Airborne forces? In the 1930s Soviet Union had the biggest Airborne forces, and that was nearly 80 years ago :lol: Are you forgetting D-Day aswell? Operation Market Garden is another great example, that i remember from playing Medal of Honor hehe :mischief:
The Soviet Union maintained the world's largest airborne force during the Cold War, consisting of seven air assault divisions. Multiple countries can reliably and repeatedly carry out Airborne assaults with Paratroopers not just the USA.. Its not really that complex to carry them out.. go wikipedia about Paratroopers/Airbone force.

I didn't read the whole thread, so someone may have mentioned this, but, imo, a paradropped unit should behave like a mounted unit that used its first move to attack: it can pillage, but it can't attack. This would make it useful for late-game pillaging, but would require more strategic foresight when using them to attack. For instance, dropping them deep in enemy territory while its forces are clustered around a distant front where you have it engaged in battle.

Really there is no need for MASS paratrooper drops nowdays, and helicopters are better troop transporters :).
Moving on to the quote.. Has every other Country stagnated and gone backwards with Airborne forces? In the 1930s Soviet Union had the biggest Airborne forces, and that was nearly 80 years ago :lol: Are you forgetting D-Day aswell? Operation Market Garden is another great example, that i remember from playing Medal of Honor hehe :mischief:
The Soviet Union maintained the world's largest airborne force during the Cold War, consisting of seven air assault divisions. Multiple countries can reliably and repeatedly carry out Airborne assaults with Paratroopers not just the USA.. Its not really that complex to carry them out.. go wikipedia about Paratroopers/Airbone force.Well, I was responding to a quote about paratroopers being deployed anywhere in the world in 18 hours. Perhaps the USSR could have done that, and perhaps Russia can still do that today. But there are very few countries that have the air assets (especially in-flight refueling tankers) to get their paratroopers anywhere in the world. A number of EU countries and Austrailia might have the transports and tankers to get to the target, but how many troops can they realistically send to the opposite end of the world?

Furthermore, if they need to fly through hostile airspace, do they have the combat aircraft (and the additional tankers to refuel them) to reach the target?

The US, UK, and France have bases in various regions of the world, so it would be easier for them. But the US airforce is so much larger (and has more auxillary infrastructure, like more numerous airborne radar aircraft to help protect air assets) that the US seems to clearly have a superior capability to repeatedly move paratroopers around the world in significant numbers. :king:

Too bad paratroopers in large numbers aren't really needed much anymore...

Too bad paratroopers in large numbers aren't really needed much anymore...

Ya, but 'Merica can do it! Take that, world!

Well, I was responding to a quote about paratroopers being deployed anywhere in the world in 18 hours. Perhaps the USSR could have done that, and perhaps Russia can still do that today. But there are very few countries that have the air assets (especially in-flight refueling tankers) to get their paratroopers anywhere in the world. A number of EU countries and Austrailia might have the transports and tankers to get to the target, but how many troops can they realistically send to the opposite end of the world?

Furthermore, if they need to fly through hostile airspace, do they have the combat aircraft (and the additional tankers to refuel them) to reach the target?

The US, UK, and France have bases in various regions of the world, so it would be easier for them. But the US airforce is so much larger (and has more auxillary infrastructure, like more numerous airborne radar aircraft to help protect air assets) that the US seems to clearly have a superior capability to repeatedly move paratroopers around the world in significant numbers. :king:
First i will achnoledge the fact that in any confrontation between Greater powers/Superpowers Paratrooper units would be utterly useless.. Therefore Airborne assaults via paratroopers will be only use by Great powers plus against Medium powers/Lowly Regional powers. Therefore if you are fighting one of these powers Iraq for instance which was/is :confused: a lowly regional power you have will have already established air supremacy in hostile airspace. So no need to further discuss that.

Look at the Falklands war, Britain was able to fly its Bombers all the way from its airbases in Gibraltar to the falklands, by series of in flight refuels, and the bombing run was the longest ranged in history! Consider also the bombing planes used (Avro Vulcan)s were designed for medium ranged nuclear conflicts in Europe, basicly against USSR..:scan:

So consider the Falklands war has been the only fight since WWII involving major Air and naval combat operations, i would expect that every Greater power have deeply analyised the Logistics of the situation, among many other things, and they have incoperated better logisitic systems into their personal stratergies.

So we have already established in my first post that Numerous countries have significent numbers of Airborne forces trainned, The logistics of the situation are hard to prove, but if Britain was able to fight in the falklands using Medium ranged Bombers 25 years ago, Any nation who consider themselves a great power should be able to the same.

So in conclusion multiple countries have the capability to deploy large airborne regiments similar maybe even better to that of America's speed.
But evidently who cares.. Paradrops are only used now to deploy Elite teams like the SAS, and not Regiments of troops..
I also think this sums up by aim in this post :lol:

Ya, but not just 'Merica can do it! Take that, 'Merica!
:king:

They may no longer really have a place in modern warfare. But with the strong historical usage they had in WWII I am assuming in game they will come about at the same time as rifles, tanks, fighters and bombers. Seeing as how all those units (the first tier versions) are from the general wwI-wwII era of military usage.

Well, I would imagine that without transport helicopters, Paratroopers will remain viable for a most of the later game.

Two Words.........................red Dawn

Too bad paratroopers in large numbers aren't really needed much anymore...

Of course there are reasons to paradrop battalians and even regiments: Panama, Afganistan and Iraq, for examples.

There is a bomb that does not kill women and children - infantry. Either use it or quit complaining about collateral.

Any nation "great" or otherwise can be occupied, with the paratroop primary objective being the capture of an airport, thus providing access for the rest of the military. You only take land with people, air assest don't cut it. Marines take beaches, paratroops take airports. I think that an invasion requires access to an airport near objectives (as well as the classic 'cutting of supply lines and elimination of other stronghold positions).

In the spirit of taking airports, of course they can take cities. I'm glad to see they are str 24.

My only question is whether paratroopers will only be able to drop from your cities/forts, or if they can drop from ships off the coast. If a was close enough to one of my cities/ forts in civ III I seldom bothered to drop paratroopers, it was easier and more effective to move armies.

I did use them from time to time AFTER the war was underway to drop troops behind the next city on my list. Mostly to weaken and isolate that city while the main body of my troops moved in at a slower pace.

If paratroopers can be dropped from ships though they may be very useful for actually penetrating enemy landmasses.

By the time you are building str 24 units, will range 5 be sufficient to leave your own cultural borders?? Can they drop from a city, with an airport only, or cultural borders?

If I'm building strenght 24 units five squares from any of my cities is probably ocean or more of my lands. LOL

Forts have an airport function now, so you can drop them from the borders of your empire if you build a fort there.

Of course there are reasons to paradrop battalians and even regiments: Panama, Afganistan and Iraq, for examples.

There is a bomb that does not kill women and children - infantry. Either use it or quit complaining about collateral.

Any nation "great" or otherwise can be occupied, with the paratroop primary objective being the capture of an airport, thus providing access for the rest of the military. You only take land with people, air assest don't cut it. Marines take beaches, paratroops take airports. I think that an invasion requires access to an airport near objectives (as well as the classic 'cutting of supply lines and elimination of other stronghold positions).

In the spirit of taking airports, of course they can take cities. I'm glad to see they are str 24.
Infantry still have collateral, and id rather see collateral then have all my troops dieing trying to take the airport.
Falklands war, Argentina, Main airport for aircraft, had an entire regiment of troops there, Britain's SAS considered landing their via parachute but all the SAS Men refused to do it saying it was sucidal.. If they did do it, it would of probably been the worst source of British losses during the war! It would also had a great cultral impact and would inspire many first person shooter games :king:
Wars between great powers will not be like any other war you have seen before.. cruise missile spam ftw?!?!

If you want to make paras have a WWII realism, then they should have 75% chance of landing somewhere they weren't supposed to and then becoming completely lost, and a 25% chance of losing all their kit and weapons on the way down....:mischief:

Throwing men of out of airplanes was in its infancy then, and yes of course the world's armies do it better now.

methinks you play too much call of duty.

--

5 range is awful for a paratrooper. 8 is more like it (Civ3 had it at that high)

I hope you DON'T need a border city or fort to do paradrops. After all WWII Europe was SOOOOOOO close to the Borders of North America. So were all those pacific islands.

If paradrop is going to be a decent strategy you need to be able to drop from either:

1. planes; anywhere in the area your fighters/bombers are patrolling
2. less powerful (lesser area) from ships that could carry those planes; from
carriers.

If I can only drop 5 squares from my border . . . I might as well move an army in. You haven't given me a "paratrooper" but instead the equivalent a "horseman" who can use enemy roads. But only for a few squares.

I'd prefer the horse, he'd start on my border, ride five squares down the enemies roads, and then CONTINUE, rather than being stopped and then having to move one square at a time like infantry. Paratroopers are a great idea, but totally silly if they are slower and less effective than upgraded cavalry.

Where is this five square range coming in anyway? Is that from one of the screenshots?

I hope you DON'T need a border city or fort to do paradrops. After all WWII Europe was SOOOOOOO close to the Borders of North America. So were all those pacific islands.

Well, they also didn't take off from North America either ;)

If paradrop is going to be a decent strategy you need to be able to drop from either:

1. planes; anywhere in the area your fighters/bombers are patrolling
2. less powerful (lesser area) from ships that could carry those planes; from
carriers.

Can transport planes take off from carriers? Also, the problem is that the Paratroopers should be kept in a transport as they are infantry, but they should have to be paradropped from a Carrier which transports on Air units.

The question, I guess, is will you be able to paradrop from friendly foreign cities and forts (that is after all what the Americans did). Also raises the question: if you move the max amount of your planes into a foreign city, can that civilization have any planes in the city? And if you max out the number of planes in the city, can you still paradrop?

Good points all around. Like the ex-"All American" said, the main purpose of large paratroop units is to jump onto an occupied airfield way behind the lines in hostile areas, take it, and then push out far enough to secure it for follow on forces to fly in and take the fight over from there. How that translates into the game... who knows. I'd much rather have "fun" over absolute reality because, after all, there really isn't anything fun about dropping paratroopers into combat (for anybody involved).

I would like to see a pretty hefty range on paratroops though- or have the range contingent on what kind of technology you have. Maybe 6-8 spaces for WWII era planes and much further once your technology develops. 18 hours anywhere in the world certainly does not happen with the old transports they used in WWII. Once you develop jet technology, the range of the paratroopers should double (or something to that effect).

As for what they can do when they hit the ground... :mischief: Here is my experience with that. With all of my jumps in the 82nd, it usually took quite a while to assemble the units to push out. I think one pillage would be sufficient or one attack if you were to drop it right onto the enemy unit (that would be great if you could do that). City jumps... not really. Into jungles... not really. Onto enemy bases? Certainly- which is both realistic and fun.

On a small tangent/ stroll down memory lane, I'll pass along one of my more memorable experiences from the Army. After several years in the 82nd I changed jobs and eventually was involved in some airfield take-down exercises that involved the Rangers. Honestly, I was amazed by what the Rangers do because by the time we would normally just be fully assembled in the 82nd, the Rangers would have pretty much killed everything not wearing a US patch on their sleeve. The were amazingly fast and good at what they do. However, jumping usually 1 battalion at a time (at the most), their ability to sustain the fight and dig in against a determined counter-attack was limited compared to the 82nd dropping more units. Hence the analogy that I will never forget- "The Rangers are the scalpel in US military operations; the 82nd is the chainsaw". ;)

Sorry for drifting away from game chat- just thought I would add a little real-world perspective. Enjoy the chat and happy gaming!

Interesting post, 18D.

Maybe limit vanilla paratroops to pillage only, no drop on a unit. Then, when they get commando, they can drop on a unit and attack that round?

I think air units should be able to use captured forts in enemy territory becuase then you could throw lots of para's to take the fort and hold it till you can rush a modern armour or tank to it and then use it as a airbase in hostile territory, it would be a good stratagy, of course it would be a big risk becuase if they fort was lost then you would lose the aircraft with it, there could also be a bonus for AA in the area intercepting a aircraft, just to balance it and not make it too easy for the human player too take all the forts and completly destroy the entire civ with the aircraft.

Any thoughts??

I think air units should be able to use captured forts in enemy territory becuase then you could throw lots of para's to take the fort and hold it till you can rush a modern armour or tank to it and then use it as a airbase in hostile territory, it would be a good stratagy, of course it would be a big risk becuase if they fort was lost then you would lose the aircraft with it, there could also be a bonus for AA in the area intercepting a aircraft, just to balance it and not make it too easy for the human player too take all the forts and completly destroy the entire civ with the aircraft.

Any thoughts??

Sounds nice, however, it depends on the availability of such forts and the AI will not always build these. It could be interesting if this were possible however, even if it would mainly be used in multiplayer.

Imagine a huge air war between two nations where both of them build extra forts to win this air war (to station extra airplanes). Then one of them captures a few enemy airports with paratroopers. Sounds like a nice strategic option to force a breakthrough.

But however nice it sounds, it is not fully clear if this will be possible in BTS. It's not clear if you can use forts in enemy territory and if you can attack with paratroopers in the turn that you land. And both of these elements are needed to make the above described tactic feasible.

I hope(They better!) they are able to paradrop into empty enemy cities and take them over and I hope they(they better) are able to paradrop/attack. Attack while paradroping. And can they go on to carriers? that would be cool, to launch a para attack from the seas!

Ill make my own version of Red Dawn...heh heh....I love that movie

is negitive city atack historicly correct??
we need to add bridges into the game, as something workers build.

off topic, any way to mod gliders into the game? such as a cheap, one time use transport plane that can be used to drop of troops, or light arterly into combat?

going to make it neccesary to put several decent defenders on oil wells, arent they?

Paratroopers are gonna be awesome being able to drop them anywhere u want. And you should probably be putting several defenders on oil wells anyway, its an important resource u should defend heavily.

I do, but usually pretty lightly if I know I can rush units there if an invasion starts. Not anymore

if you can attack with paratroopers in the turn that you land.

You can attack on the same time you land, if you look at one of the videos, can't remember which one, the para still has movement points after it drops, unless it stops it from attacking but allows it to move becuase i can't remember wether it attacked after the drop. so one of those i think could make it feasable, the other i doubt will be allowed in BTS.

You can attack on the same time you land, if you look at one of the videos, can't remember which one, the para still has movement points after it drops, unless it stops it from attacking but allows it to move becuase i can't remember wether it attacked after the drop. so one of those i think could make it feasable, the other i doubt will be allowed in BTS.

If you can find this video again, I would be very interested. You're the first person in this thread to confirm this. The videos that I've seen were of such low quality that I couldn't really see what was happening. But maybe if I look a bit harder, I might see the attack-after-drop that you describe.

If you can find this video again, I would be very interested. You're the first person in this thread to confirm this. The videos that I've seen were of such low quality that I couldn't really see what was happening. But maybe if I look a bit harder, I might see the attack-after-drop that you describe.

well i didn't really say it was an attack after drop, it was that the unit still had movement points after the drop, i have a feeling it was one of the Gamespot videos, it could be that para's are able to move after drop but not attack, in the video i'm talkin about the para went into fortify mode after landing.

well i didn't really say it was an attack after drop, it was that the unit still had movement points after the drop, i have a feeling it was one of the Gamespot videos, it could be that para's are able to move after drop but not attack, in the video i'm talkin about the para went into fortify mode after landing.

Okay. Now, if you happen to find it or see someone else describe it, then please mention the video here. I would be interested to see it.

I remember this from the video too; a paratrooper fortifies after it drops (just after halfway through the video). It seems to have 1 movement point after the drop, so I guess it can either attack, move or fortify at this point.

The video can be seen here: http://uk.gamespot.com/video/938800/6173011/civilization-iv-beyond-the-sword-gameplay-movie-2

It also shows gunpowder units receiving the drill promotion.

I remember this from the video too; a paratrooper fortifies after it drops (just after halfway through the video). It seems to have 1 movement point after the drop, so I guess it can either attack, move or fortify at this point.

The video can be seen here: http://uk.gamespot.com/video/938800/6173011/civilization-iv-beyond-the-sword-gameplay-movie-2

It also shows gunpowder units receiving the drill promotion.

Thank you. The paratrooper fortified after paradropping and it looked as if it could pillage the tile it dropped on. It had a single movement point before and after paradropping.

By the way, that was the most useless paradrop ever. He paradropped inside his own territory next to an enemy city that he conquered during the same turn with other units and he didn't use the paratrooper at all.

Does that mean you can't para-attack?

Im gonna use only 2 units from now on....cruise missile and paratrooper

Does that mean you can't para-attack?It looks like you can definently attack, move, or pillage after the drop on the same turn. But you may not be able to drop right onto a unit you wish to attack.

Thanks for the link, Ghostofkuji.

im not totally convinced, he did drop into his own lands onto roads. but who cares..

Edit:, the player razes that city and it looks like a Random Event occurs and enemy macemen spawn around the ruins. could possibly be an event or entire feature that the populace armed and appear around the city.

Edit:, the player razes that city and it looks like a Random Event occurs and enemy macemen spawn around the ruins. could possibly be an event or entire feature that the populace armed and appear around the city.

This is entire feature according to the podcast on apolyton, it happens if you burn cities down.

It ALWAYS happens if you raze a city?

i cant get onto the polycast site so i couldnt listen. makes a good feature. I Did see that exclamation marker over the city ruins, similar to all the random events.

finally a way to stop genghis kahn AND PLAYERS ONLINE from mass razing my cities.

It ALWAYS happens if you raze a city?

Thats what they said, they were sayin that it was a way of making it harder to just go and raze every city you come across and instead have to keep stuff unless you are able to bring a couple extra units to kill the partisans

Can paratroopers be dropped from a Carrier or some naval ship?

How about if you could drop the paratrooper on the targeted unit in the same square and attack a unit on that square but not capable of moving

That's a RailGun. I'm talking about a Railway Gun used in World war 2.

I always thought that a Rail Gun, was the same thing as a Guass Rifle/Gun - ie a magnetically propelled slug of dense metal that could reach incredible speeds and the damage was caused by the extreme velocity of the round impacting into the target.

A Railway Gun was justa really BFG artillery piece that would be used to quickly get around and stop armored advances in WW2.

Macemen appearing from razed cities seems excessive personally... they should add a new unit for each era called Partisan, Armed Peasant, etc. that would spring up and they'd be weaker than other contemporary units, but there'd be a few of them (depending on the size of the city) and if you've just gotten done hammering a city down, you've probably got a lot of weakened units that might fall prey to them... but to suddenly have the peasants spring up with good weaponry and armor seems both unbalanced in terms of gameplay and ridiculous from a realism standpoint.

I always thought that a Rail Gun, was the same thing as a Guass Rifle/Gun - ie a magnetically propelled slug of dense metal that could reach incredible speeds and the damage was caused by the extreme velocity of the round impacting into the target.

A Railway Gun was justa really BFG artillery piece that would be used to quickly get around and stop armored advances in WW2.

Sorry but railway guns were mostly used in that war that everybody seems to be forgetting about, WW1, not WW2. They were used in WW2, but only very limited. The things weren't that movable and could only bombard places that were reachable by rail. So they were somewhat useful in a static war like WW1 where a rail could be build towards a enemy stronghold, but in a quick war of strategic maneuvering like WW2, they weren't that useful.

They were used against tough static targets, not against movable targets like an armored advance.

I stand corrected! My main point though was to try and describe the difference between the two things, as people were using thm interchangably for what you have accurately described.

Can paratroopers be dropped from a Carrier or some naval ship?

I Dont think paratroopers can be paradropped by an Aircraft Carrier. just to mirrow Civ3, Paratroopers will need to not move for an entire turn (varified) and dropped only from cities with airports or forts (which as a side note was no limit to how many you could drop from)

Macemen appearing from razed cities seems excessive personally... they should add a new unit for each era called Partisan, Armed Peasant, etc. that would spring up and they'd be weaker than other contemporary units, but there'd be a few of them (depending on the size of the city) and if you've just gotten done hammering a city down, you've probably got a lot of weakened units that might fall prey to them... but to suddenly have the peasants spring up with good weaponry and armor seems both unbalanced in terms of gameplay and ridiculous from a realism standpoint.
Well, the Maceman probably had 0 experience, and only a few of them appeared, if the entire populace took up arms, you should probably see 15-50 units spawned... That Maceman is probably the result of taking the best the city had and equiping them. (and I assume Maceman is dependent on tech level of the defender... which is better than making a bunch of extra units.)

That Maceman is probably the result of taking the best the city had and equiping them. (and I assume Maceman is dependent on tech level of the defender... which is better than making a bunch of extra units.)I hope so.

If you have Paratroopers, then Macemen are not going to be more than a minor nuisance (though you do lose movement points clearing them out, so it can still be significant sometimes).

If it's always macemen, well... then I will found a number of undefended cities hoping barbs will raze them (and give me macemen in the age of the warrior :goodjob: )

A simple solution to prevent the AI from going crazy with lots of paratroopers would be to limit the number of them per civ, as with spies or missionaries. Might not be agreeable to many, though.This would actually be a great solution.

I fear the addition of Paratroopers will only increase the micromanagement be a significant level - escorting workers, guarding resources and border cities.

In previous games, the best paradrop strategy is dropping large numbers of paratroopers. Numbers that are clearly unrealistic. But para-spamming was easily the best luxury solution to taking cities: remember a solution might not be the most cost-effective as long as it saves you a hundred mouse-clicks or so. Not to speak of the advantage presented by short decisive wars.

Putting a high cost on paras themselves isn't a good solution - that only makes them go unused if you can't afford to lose them.

It is the support systems required that are limited.

Perhaps a new building, the Paratrooper Base, allowing a single paratrooper to be built (and rebuilt, as soon as one is destroyed). This way, you need to make a considerable investment if you wish to use Paratroopers as something more than special-purpose low-frequency units, and only the largest empires would be able to use para-spamming against their enemies. If you have 18 cities, you could field 18 paras (at the most).

As it is, I'm afraid paras will be a big nuisance, adding much more MM than fun. *sigh*