Poll: Marine and Paratrooper which is better and why?

[ChrTh]

Ah, but I tried nuking it...but I still couldn't take it! Even if the city is undefended, you can't directly land troops into it.

 

[Greadius]

Definately Marines! OOH-RAH!


<--------------

I agree with the person above who stated that the uselessness of paratroopers is really the fault of the game designers. By the time you have an airport in a city you pretty much are in control of everything within paratrooper range ANYWAY. I think if that requirement were removed (the airport) they could be very useful. Also if they could be launched from carriers (as also suggested) they could be very useful.

 

[Vampir226]

You know, I hadn't thought about it 'til now, but I want to try to combine the Paratrooper with the strategy where you cut off the enemy capital. Basically, if you destroy all the roads around a capital, you cut off the resources to ALL the enemies cities. Bombers suck for this 'cause you have to use like 20 bombers for the 8 spaces around the capital. If you used paratroopers, you could cut off the capital much more efficiently.

 

[Grashnak]

Originally posted by Vampir226
You know, I hadn't thought about it 'til now, but I want to try to combine the Paratrooper with the strategy where you cut off the enemy capital. Basically, if you destroy all the roads around a capital, you cut off the resources to ALL the enemies cities. Bombers suck for this 'cause you have to use like 20 bombers for the 8 spaces around the capital. If you used paratroopers, you could cut off the capital much more efficiently.

True, though if you are close enough to drop paratroops on his capital, you should probably just capture it .

 

[Cavalry]

Argh, I was under the impression that nukes destoryed the city (the civilopedia's wording) so, they still work like civ 2 that is good. You would indeed have to use marines then.

 

[Cavalry]

During my current game I dropped a paratrooper on Egypt's source of iron and am going to pillage it next turn if he survives.

 

[Magnus]

Originally posted by Grashnak


True, though if you are close enough to drop paratroops on his capital, you should probably just capture it .

Don't forget Paratroopers have a range of 6, so they may be the only land units that can get there.

 

[Dirk Aurel]

The paratroooper strategies posted here sound good, but still think that the limited range,and the fact one can´t move ones troopers to lets say another continent sucks,I mean paratroopers attacking a neighbour is okay but I´d prefer to see them as airborne troops being able to launch from invasion fleets,the same goes for cruise missles btw,I couldn´t even transoprt the things before I edited it,the AEGIS cruiser can´t carry them as in C2,right?

 

[Schnarrd]

There are some cases where marines are necessary (ie one square islands), however when making war across continents in the late industrial era, I'd much prefer simply landing a large group of infantry and tanks and taking the city next turn, even with the risk of counter-attack. Then again, in my games I'm always the first to tanks and usually end up blitzing my opponents, so if my opponents had tanks to counter-attack with, I might find marines more useful to prevent effective counter-attacks.

IMHO paratroopers suck in civ3, as bombers do the job of destroying terrain improvements much more effectively at no risk to the unit. It's sort of a shame, as a bomber/paratrooper combo in civ2 was extremely deadly. Also, I'd like to see more of a variety of useful units in late industrial era instead of just tanks, artillery, and infantry.

 

[Mapache]

Both units suckz major ...

Well, on a more serious note: They are heinous and horrendous.

 

[WUM]

I hardly ever use marines, since i rather use tanks + infantry.
I only used paratroopers (in civ2) to occupy a city i just nuked. In civ3 i never even nuked a city because i never needed to. Hence i never used para´s.

 

[Sparrowhawk]

I have used both units in the past, with success.

Paratroopers are excellent for helping defend a fortified border as they can air drop into trouble spots. Also, they are fun to pillage with. It would be nice to be able to launch them from carriers.

Marines are the only option when attacking some coasts, however, my main use for marines has nothing to do with combat.

I use marines to capture enemy workers. I sit off their coast with a battleship, two transports, and four marines. Bombard a square, wait for the workers, land the marines and capture them. Then you can load them into the transport, or simply disband them! It's a great tactic to use when the computer's being distracted by an attack somewhere else, or as a quick raid.

 

[WUM]

The idea is to isolate the capitol, so ALL cities are deprived of resources (needed to build the most modern units).

If you just conquer it, the capitol will move. You gain one city which will be unhappy and unproductive forever and you still have to cope with an enemy building state of the art-offencive units...

Just conquer the capitol as one of the latest cities. By then it will be far easier to do so too.


But i never use para´s to isolate capitols. I usually use bombers + ships, even if it takes a copple of turns. I can use para´s however to destroy roads on certain essential resources. For instance if the capitol is to far away, or in the middle of their territory. That way i gain the same profits, but way faster..!

Originally posted by Grashnak

True, though if you are close enough to drop paratroops on his capital, you should probably just capture it .