Paratrooper Function suggestion

[Romdanzer]

Hi All,

I would like to seem some form of Paratroopers implemented in this game, since it is a really iconic feature of WW2 which is missing at the moment and it just doesnt feel "complete" without them.

Since it is a corps level game (a WHOLE unit being a little large for usually only paratroop divsions being implemented except Greece with Germans and Overlord and Market Garden with Allies being operations anywhere near Corps level) and implementation with a whole unit is also prone to exploitation and difficulties with AI use, here an alternative suggestion:

Have paratroopers only be something you can buy with PP similar to sea-transportation of units but what it does is either:

a) Make an enemy hex become yours (i.e. make movement easier around ZOC zones or other such things as the now paratrooper conquered hex is friendly, negating ZOC) and the hex is indicated with a small parachute to indicate conquest only by parachute units and will be either eliminated when any type of enemy unit reconquers it or it is "relieved" by a friendly unit. This would be like paratroopers "paving" the way for friendly units - like was the original intent of Market Garden.

or

b) Be a combat modifier for attacks on a unit in a turn - also indicated by a small parachute on the enemy unit during your turn. Either an extra-strength factor - increased efficieny for all attacking units or other such things...i.e. an effect somewhat similar to a leader, lasting only that 1 turn for that 1 hex.

a) and b) being choices the player can make in game. So for each hex with a parachute-attack-symbol you pay x-amount of PP's. Say 50 PP's just for arguments sake, but whatever seems appropriate. The range this can be employed (and the place where the Function is accessed) is determined by friendly infantry-corps units. i.e. like within 5 hexes of any friendly infantry corps unit. Range (and/or combat modifier?) being able to be increased with Research? Maybe even having to have at least "level 1" research to be able to use it at all?

The amount of PP's should not be too low - is has to be too extraordinarily expensive to try and cap several hexes at once and "exploit" the cap-empty-hex functionality.

Maybe initially only Players would be able to use this function but in this way you can conquer empty hexes in enemy territory or help you with key-hex-attacks such as forts or cities or such. Something similar to what the Germans did with Eben-Emael in 1940.

What do you think?

Romdanzer

[Redpossum]

Paratroopers have been suggested several times, both during beta and since retail launch, but this is the best idea so far for their implementation, in my not-so-humble opinion.

Congratulations on some very clever thinking!

[syagrius]

Since the game is at the corps level, if paratroopers were implemented they should be at the size and with stats comparable to garrissons to be realistic.

[Romdanzer]

they should be at the size and with stats comparable to garrissons to be realistic

THAT is very correct and also the way I see it. So then the question automatically comes up: From a game-design viewpoint how much good does that do you? To have a fly-movable garrision strength unit? In combat terms...not very much. All it really does is open up all kinds of potential exploits with this type of game-engine.

So when you think about it - maybe it would be better to "simulate" the effects these paratroopers have i.e. with some kind of "paratrooper function" as I stated above.

The end-result with a "paratrooper-function" is actually maybe not so unrealistic when you analyse what actual strategic military results did paratroopers achieve in WW2 with airborne invasion? Not too much, from a strategic viewpoint. At best only tactical successes which, at the right place at the right time, resulted in other units achieving strategic success with their help, but alone strategically?....It's a quite dismal and disilusionary result when you list it...

Overload:
Not too much - the britisch paratroopers/gliders capped 1 bridge; the US paratroopers where strewn all over the place and also only achieved local tactical success of securing cross-roads/bridges for the upcoming sea-borne invasion troops

Market Garden:
Strategically total failure with respect to the orignial strategic goal of completely crossing the Rhine

Invasion and conquest of Crete by Germans:
The first and mostprobably only significant Strategic success in the entire military history of paratroopers achieving someting on this level alone. At the price of huge losses which resulted in the Germans never really using them again in this way.

All other paratrooper employments where also really only tactical/brigade level in nature; capture of a bridge or an airfield, knocking out a old-fashioned fortress etc..., although sometimes quite successfull, it was mainly by being at the right key place at the right time with tactical surprise...

That is the aim of the idea of the "paratrooper function" to be a localized tactical tool which, when used at the right key place at the right time can make a difference, but used strategically alone it becomes extremely costly.... i.e. cost/benefit becomes questionable.

Rdanzer

[Redpossum]

Since the game is at the corps level, if paratroopers were implemented they should be at the size and with stats comparable to garrissons to be realistic.

Can you justify this statement logically? Because I'm not following your reasoning at all.

[Romdanzer]

Well simply only due to the fact that there really only where 1-2 paratrooper divisions vs. what a corps represents in game. The Allies altogether had 3 paratrooper divisions - put them all together and you would call that a corps? Debatable at best. Only 2 instances where they all 3 where imployed at once - Overlord and Market Garden. If you divide them up amoungst the nationalities you only have 1-2 Divisions per Country (2 Americans and 1 British)

1-2 Divisions does not really equal that which is supposed to be a whole infantry corps in game of 50.000 men. Therefore just from a shear size point of view 1-2 parachute divisions would be approximatly what a small corps/garrison unit is in game.

that is the whole problem with the paratroopers - on the one hand they where simply too small in number to justify a whole corps unit - on the other hand the individual divisions where quite strong once on ground...so it would just somehow not "feel" right for them to be so weak - in the end this is all of course too fraught with debate - that's another reason why to avoid a "parachute unit" - better the parachute function imho.

Rdanzer

[syagrius]

Since the game is at the corps level, if paratroopers were implemented they should be at the size and with stats comparable to garrissons to be realistic.

Can you justify this statement logically? Because I'm not following your reasoning at all.

If you didnt understand my statement in the first place, YOU are the one lacking in logic, pal

[IainMcNeil]

Ok lets all play nice

[Redpossum]

My apologies. I didn't intend to be snippy.

First, let's say Airborne troops rather than paratroopers, since many airmobile operations used gliders.

Romdanzer pointed out that corps-level airborne ops were very rare, and even division-level ops were not exactly the rule. Then he suggested a system whereby smaller airborne ops could be simulated, representing regimental or brigade-sized units.

Syagrius came back with a blanket statement that "Since the game is at the corps level, if paratroopers were implemented they should be at the size and with stats comparable to garrissons (sic) to be realistic."

I honestly don't see how that logically follows, since Romdanzer had just suggested/explained how smaller aireborne formations could be represented.

[James Taylor]

Just to add a little historical clarity to the discussion, the Allies employed the UK 1st and 6th Airborne, 101st, 82nd, and 17th US divisions and the 1st Polish brigade.

I would say that constitutes an airborne army......called the 1st Allied Airborne.

Remember there were numerous smaller battalion size detachments also. I'll also refresh everyone as to the TO&E of airborne divisions included an extra air landing(glider) regiment which pushed their manpower limits to the 18000 threshold, way above normal infantry, mobile and armored divisions.

I think there are plenty of historical references to support their inclusion into a game of this scale.

[mrdozer2379]

another thing to think about is this game is semi historic. There is no limit to tanks or corps so having more powerfull airborn then historically was i dont see as out of the question.

[Redpossum]

Just to add a little historical clarity to the discussion, the Allies employed the UK 1st and 6th Airborne, 101st, 82nd, and 17th US divisions and the 1st Polish brigade.

I would say that constitutes an airborne army......called the 1st Allied Airborne.

Yes, but with the exception of Market-Garden, (which was a ****ing disaster due to Montgomery's ineptitude and general lack of balls), those units were never used en masse, as an army.

[James Taylor]

Yes, but Possum, I'd hope you'd be a better commander than Monty, especially since you have the benefit of hindsight.

[Happycat]

Overload:
Not too much - the britisch paratroopers/gliders capped 1 bridge; the US paratroopers where strewn all over the place and also only achieved local tactical success of securing cross-roads/bridges for the upcoming sea-borne invasion troops

Market Garden:
Strategically total failure with respect to the orignial strategic goal of completely crossing the Rhine

Invasion and conquest of Crete by Germans:
The first and mostprobably only significant Strategic success in the entire military history of paratroopers achieving someting on this level alone. At the price of huge losses which resulted in the Germans never really using them again in this way.

Rdanzer

I like your idea for introducing the paratroop function into the game. An alternative would be a garrison sized unit, expensive as hell, and with very limited range.

But I think some of your commentary regarding real-world successes and failures misses one of the key elements.

The 101st Airborne had some considerable success during D-Day in eliminating Germany artillery that was very effectively shelling Omaha Beach. This was a significant achievement, especially if you were one of the guys pinned down on the beach.

[Talen]

The Russians tried a large paradrop in '43 or '44 and it was a mess. And this at a time when they were kicking the Germans around everywhere and their leaders and staffs were equal to and perhaps superior to the Germans; not to mention their vastly superior intelligence. Shows how hard it is to get a paratroop drop done effectively.

Also, Happycat is right but fails to mention another bonus of 101 Div's being scattered all over the place. They came down in so many places so far from their scheduled drop zones that this helped confuse the German command as what was happening where. An example of a screwed up operation having beneficial effects.

[Romdanzer]

The 101st Airborne had some considerable success during D-Day in eliminating Germany artillery that was very effectively shelling Omaha Beach. This was a significant achievement, especially if you were one of the guys pinned down on the beach

Yes but that is more on the level of a tactical success - as I said before - on a tactical level airborne/airmobile troops did achieve things, just like in your example above.

But not on a strategic level... i.e. for example conquer the entire normandy area alone....? no they did not.

How exactly your example above would be "simulated" by the game engine with a paratrooper function is hard to say - something like a "combat modifier for sea-borne-assulting troops" .. but then again we have no real "seaborne assault" in this game do we? Any corps can just land in any empty hex without opposition being 100% successfull or it cannot when an enemy unit is in the coastel hex :-/

The point with the partrooper being a whole unit ..... this as a thought experiment:

You would have to "create" an airborne/airmobile unit (approximately the strength of a garrision unit to reflect the amount of paratroopers/glider soldiers that existed.. i.e. 18000 vs. 50000 for a full size corps) that would be able to "fly" into the normandy hex and "occupy it" - now that unit would stand alone in the normandy hex and essetially have capped it. Something like that in game would just not feel quite right. It would feel just too exaggerated when one considers what they did actually achieve in Normandy (i.e. tactical successes and not strategic successes).

Better to have a paratrooper function something like....make the empty but still enemy normandy hex yours with a "paratroop attack" and then have the unit that lands in that now-friendly hex from the sea then land in it and then be able to do something further like attack another hex or move 1 additional hex or something like that because it's landing in a friendly hex and not an enemy hex....seem better?

Rdanzer

[mrdozer2379]

airborn should be in the game with not alot of attack power but high defence power. So they can drop behind enemy units and cut them off from supply (disrupt enemy supply) Why is there a constant debate on numbers, this game is not going to follow REALITY at all so who cares. The unit should be in a game like this that has lots of hexes and wont bog the map down.

[Redpossum]

The Russians tried a large paradrop in '43 or '44 and it was a mess. And this at a time when they were kicking the Germans around everywhere and their leaders and staffs were equal to and perhaps superior to the Germans; not to mention their vastly superior intelligence. Shows how hard it is to get a paratroop drop done effectively.

Well, mostly what it shows is the difficulty of coordinating a division-scale paradrop. WWII is full of examples of successful paradrops at the battalion level, and quite a few at the regimental level.

Also, Happycat is right but fails to mention another bonus of 101 Div's being scattered all over the place. They came down in so many places so far from their scheduled drop zones that this helped confuse the German command as what was happening where. An example of a screwed up operation having beneficial effects.

Absolutely true, and an excellent point. The Germans do not appear to have ever considered the possibility that the Americans had simply screwed up and scattered the 101st all to hell and gone. Rather they seem to have assumed that it was all part of some fiendishly subtle plan.

Obviously, the Germans of that time didn't know Americans very well, or they would have realised that the words "American" and "subtle" seldom belong in the same sentence

[Redpossum]

Yes, but Possum, I'd hope you'd be a better commander than Monty, especially since you have the benefit of hindsight.

If you'd like to debate the relative merits of Montgomery and Patton, I'd be utterly delighted to, but let's not hijack this paratroopers thread, OK?