New Paratrooper Rules Are a Big Mistake

[Patrick Ward]

Btw so many are talking about realism and it is more realistic now for using paratroopers - well I have a surprice for you, its not. No transport aeroplanes ever circled DZ to let paratroopers jump (it is that the new 1.02 patch simulates) and risk for getting hit by flak.
So the old rule worked better, simulated the actual drop. Perhaps after landing at DZ the unit only could move one hex and attack with reduced strength, simulating assemblingtime at DZ.

Btw my own flak didnt even have a single shot at enemy fighters while trying to protect my transport - why ?

Its not about simulating circling the DZ. Its about suggesting their fragility, the risk inherrent in their deployment and reducing their game breaking use as a super weapon.

.....

The current version, while still imperfect and in need of refinement, at least provides a higher degree of risk by making them a little more vulnerable over the target. Whats really needed is for the scenarios to be edited to account for the new rules .. which they are being.

Pat

Oh Screw off, The least you can do is not lie to us, just admit its all about the mutliplayer and you are going to focus more here because some Higher UP in magement got one of his "really good ideas." You "fixed" something that was not broken.

I understand where you're all coming from and my post above was entirely about the opinion that the original rules set was more 'realistic' than the new. In my personal opinion that is wrong and my opinion is as valid, if not as relevant or correct, as the myriad of other differing opinions present on this and other threads. My mistake was in voicing it, which I shouldn't of done, and for which I appologise.

But to be called a liar and accused of some kind of conspiracy ..... well, I've learned my lesson and I don't think I'll express my opinion on that.

We've acknowledged that a design error was corrected without accounting for it comprehensively across every relevant scenario, and we've said we are in the process of addressing that along with the changes to the 1942 DLC. At the time of writing we haven't got an internal ETA so won't be providing a public one. I understand how frustrating that can be, especially when so many of you are clearly passionate about the game, but from bitter experience over many decades we've learned that that is the way it has to be.

Pat

[Chalaceador]

And a fix for the campaign has still (after over 2 weeks) not arrived.

Would you prefer that AO'42 was not yet released? Because that's the trade-off. Before it came out, people complained about how long it was taking to release AO '42. Now that it's out, you are complaining that they didn't take long enough. The two camps are directly opposed to one another and seem not to be aware of it. There is a slider with "fast releases" on one end and "bug-free releases" on the other. Will you be posting here the next time somebody complains about how long PC2: Pacific is taking, advocating for careful and deliberate testing and a prolonged development process? I wonder.

The question isn’t about the AO42 release. It is about how long it takes to release the patch. In my opinion they should stop everything (including the Pacific) to compensate their clients who bought a deficient product

[SSLConf_pewp3w]

And a fix for the campaign has still (after over 2 weeks) not arrived.

Would you prefer that AO'42 was not yet released? Because that's the trade-off. Before it came out, people complained about how long it was taking to release AO '42. Now that it's out, you are complaining that they didn't take long enough. The two camps are directly opposed to one another and seem not to be aware of it. There is a slider with "fast releases" on one end and "bug-free releases" on the other. Will you be posting here the next time somebody complains about how long PC2: Pacific is taking, advocating for careful and deliberate testing and a prolonged development process? I wonder.

I would have preferred that since I am not that far into the game, I am still waiting for a fix for eben-emael before I can proceed.

And you are making up a slider that doesn't just have two ends. It doesn't exist to be honest. They would have also had the option to not change the paratrooper rules or turn them off for eben-emael or whatever. There are plenty of options and you are presenting it as a false dilemma.

And please refrain from making assumptions about me and stick to the matter at hand.

But to be called a liar and accused of some kind of conspiracy ..... well, I've learned my lesson and I don't think I'll express my opinion on that.

We've acknowledged that a design error was corrected without accounting for it comprehensively across every relevant scenario, and we've said we are in the process of addressing that along with the changes to the 1942 DLC. At the time of writing we haven't got an internal ETA so won't be providing a public one. I understand how frustrating that can be, especially when so many of you are clearly passionate about the game, but from bitter experience over many decades we've learned that that is the way it has to be.

Pat

Pat, just to point this out. It was one single person that accused you of being a liar, please don't stop communicating because of that. I don't agree with what he said (and I can't imagine anyone really does). I (and other posters) might be angry, but that is not reason to insult anyone, and we don't.

[lordjani]

I would have preferred that since I am not that far into the game, I am still waiting for a fix for eben-emael before I can proceed.
[/quote]


You can finish the eben-emael scenario without paratroopers. It's just a "little" harder that way.

[SSLConf_pewp3w]

You can finish the eben-emael scenario without paratroopers. It's just a "little" harder that way.

I know, I could also just take the other route.

[SirAllan]

To Nexus: you are, in my opinion, totally wrong - its not an improvement, but perhaps the new patch will be

To Pat: At Arnhem, the Allies took them by surprice at the first day of the battle with allmost perfect drops and landings with small or no casulties at all to the flak - it was only after the whole operationel plan got in germans hands, that paratroopes and transport planes was having greate losses in the air at their respective DZ's.

[SirAllan]

Well if I recall correctly, it was only after a few MP's cry over some players exploits of using paratroopers as a "superweapon" in a MP match, that the devs hastly implemented a new patch fixing the whiners problem and thereby created another problem for the more largely in numbers of SP's Campaign.

[Scrapulous]

And a fix for the campaign has still (after over 2 weeks) not arrived.

Would you prefer that AO'42 was not yet released? Because that's the trade-off. Before it came out, people complained about how long it was taking to release AO '42. Now that it's out, you are complaining that they didn't take long enough. The two camps are directly opposed to one another and seem not to be aware of it. There is a slider with "fast releases" on one end and "bug-free releases" on the other. Will you be posting here the next time somebody complains about how long PC2: Pacific is taking, advocating for careful and deliberate testing and a prolonged development process? I wonder.

I would have preferred that since I am not that far into the game, I am still waiting for a fix for eben-emael before I can proceed.

And you are making up a slider that doesn't just have two ends. It doesn't exist to be honest. They would have also had the option to not change the paratrooper rules or turn them off for eben-emael or whatever. There are plenty of options and you are presenting it as a false dilemma.

And please refrain from making assumptions about me and stick to the matter at hand.

Let's go in reverse order. Which assumption did I make about you? I see in my post no statements about you whatsoever, so I'm scratching my head, here. My question to you was genuine, by the way.

And you are making up a slider that doesn't just have two ends. It doesn't exist to be honest. They would have also had the option to not change the paratrooper rules or turn them off for eben-emael or whatever. There are plenty of options and you are presenting it as a false dilemma.

You're moving the goalposts. You were complaining for a moment about how long the patch is taking to deliver. My response was to that notion. Now you're saying they shouldn't have changed the rule in the first place, which is a different discussion, OR that they should have tested and then modified the previous DLCs using the new code base with the new rules, which would have taken more time. This is exactly my point: the work they're doing now what they would have had to do before the release in order not to release with Eben Emael in its current state; it would have taken the same amount of time to do the work whether they did it before release or after. In one case, we have the product now, albeit with some bugs. In the other, we don't yet have the product, albeit without these bugs. It's a trade-off, and the people who decide to release these products have to weigh these trade-offs, and they don't always listen to the developers who say "the product isn't ready to ship" because there's more that goes into the decision.

Your idea that they could just pull the paratrooper change is convenient as a theory, but often not so simple in practice. Even with elaborate revision control software, it's not always so easy to back a change out of a code base that is otherwise ready for deployment. What's more, the paratrooper thing is not the only bug that was released, and their dilemma was probably more like:

1. We could delay the release by a few weeks so we can test the DLC with the new rules and debug the new game settings we added and generally get a higher confidence in the quality
2. We could spend a couple of weeks backing out the buggy changes and then testing THAT new game state to make sure that reverting the code didn't introduce any more bugs
3. We could release now and spend those weeks doing bugfixes after the fact

Options 1 and 3 are on the fast/bug-free axis. Option 2 is going to look terrible to any product manager or release manager because it represents a big loss of resources. At the end of a few weeks, options 1 and 3 wind up at the same place: the new features are in place and operating as designed. Option 2 ends up with the buggy features nowhere in sight and weeks more of work ahead in order to get those features back into the code base and operating as designed. It's pretty rare that the decision makers will choose that one. So strictly speaking you're correct, there's another option, but it's not an especially likely one as I see it.

[Wagner0445]

Hello guys, I'm nearly to finish AO 1940.

Playing on second level difficulty but not using save&load. I go to next mission only if achieve main and bonus objective. The question: is this possible to win Operation Mercury with new paratroopers rules? Or should I wait for patch and play another game ?

Well, I won the mission on General (3rd difficult level) but had to give me extra rounds through cheats to achieve the bonus goals. In my 5 tries, the best the AI did was take and hold Kefalas losing all but 3 units. So if you really want to get the bonus objectives either wait or use the cheat codes to give you 10 rounds more than the mission takes.

[Mateusz300]

So I wait. Than you for the answer, but it's not positive information for me . I'll start AO 1941 after the patch.

[adiekmann]

Hello guys, I'm nearly to finish AO 1940.

Playing on second level difficulty but not using save&load. I go to next mission only if achieve main and bonus objective. The question: is this possible to win Operation Mercury with new paratroopers rules? Or should I wait for patch and play another game ?

Well, I won the mission on General (3rd difficult level) but had to give me extra rounds through cheats to achieve the bonus goals. In my 5 tries, the best the AI did was take and hold Kefalas losing all but 3 units. So if you really want to get the bonus objectives either wait or use the cheat codes to give you 10 rounds more than the mission takes.

I won on hardest with a non-imported core. Furthermore, I never have used more than 6 (but usually only 5) FSJ units. I still had no difficulty with the map. I rely on a lot of air support and usually end up deploying nearly all of my aircraft.

[Wagner0445]

Hello guys, I'm nearly to finish AO 1940.

Playing on second level difficulty but not using save&load. I go to next mission only if achieve main and bonus objective. The question: is this possible to win Operation Mercury with new paratroopers rules? Or should I wait for patch and play another game ?

Well, I won the mission on General (3rd difficult level) but had to give me extra rounds through cheats to achieve the bonus goals. In my 5 tries, the best the AI did was take and hold Kefalas losing all but 3 units. So if you really want to get the bonus objectives either wait or use the cheat codes to give you 10 rounds more than the mission takes.

I won on hardest with a non-imported core. Furthermore, I never have used more than 6 (but usually only 5) FSJ units. I still had no difficulty with the map. I rely on a lot of air support and usually end up deploying nearly all of my aircraft.

When did you do that? Before or After the 1942 DLC dropped? And did you get the bonus objectives? The normal objective is currently doable and before the DLC it was an easy mission. But not currently.

[adiekmann]

Well, I won the mission on General (3rd difficult level) but had to give me extra rounds through cheats to achieve the bonus goals. In my 5 tries, the best the AI did was take and hold Kefalas losing all but 3 units. So if you really want to get the bonus objectives either wait or use the cheat codes to give you 10 rounds more than the mission takes.

I won on hardest with a non-imported core. Furthermore, I never have used more than 6 (but usually only 5) FSJ units. I still had no difficulty with the map. I rely on a lot of air support and usually end up deploying nearly all of my aircraft.

When did you do that? Before or After the 1942 DLC dropped? And did you get the bonus objectives? The normal objective is currently doable and before the DLC it was an easy mission. But not currently.

I did it a few weeks ago. I just checked and I unfortunately do not have a save file any more to send you. But yes, I captured/completed all objectives.

**I am assuming you mean Crete map in the AO41, not the stand-alone scenario.**

Some suggestions or explanations of what I always have done successfully since the very first time I played this map:

I do not worry or depend on what my AI allies are doing. I expect them to get nearly all wiped out.
I only deploy 5-6 ground units, all FSJ, and load them up with heroes stripped from my other ground units.
I OS all of the ground troops and aircraft as much as I can.
I deploy all of my aircraft. In this case with a non-imported core it amounted to 4 fighters, 2 or 3 Strat bombers, 2 Stukas, and 1-2 twin-engine fighter-bombers (tac bombers that are not Stukas) to the best of my recollection.
From experience playing PG, PG2, and PC1, I always try to land my paratroopers where the enemy cannot see them. Then when they do, it is when I am attacking. Not much in this respect changes from before the patch.
2 groups: one lands in and eventually takes the northwestern airfield, while the other group lands in the hills on the western side of the island. They then seize those two western-most flags including an airfield which allows you to immediately rebase all or most of your aircraft to provide support thereafter.
A couple FSJ move against the victory hex in the southwest of the island, while the rest move towards the fortified city/airfield/victory hexes due East. Air power attacking as mobile artillery.
Your tac bombers are critical for dealing with the enemy's vehicles.
Use the airfields to reembark a couple FSJ units to get them to take/assist in capturing the Eastern most victory hexes. You'll never make it if they have to fight/walk all the way over there! Meanwhile, they rest of your forces continue moving East once that first major city/airfield/flag complex is taken.
Key is close air support.
Hope this helps! Sorry I don't have any of the save files any longer to show you.

[Wagner0445]

I won on hardest with a non-imported core. Furthermore, I never have used more than 6 (but usually only 5) FSJ units. I still had no difficulty with the map. I rely on a lot of air support and usually end up deploying nearly all of my aircraft.

When did you do that? Before or After the 1942 DLC dropped? And did you get the bonus objectives? The normal objective is currently doable and before the DLC it was an easy mission. But not currently.

I did it a few weeks ago. I just checked and I unfortunately do not have a save file any more to send you. But yes, I captured/completed all objectives.

**I am assuming you mean Crete map in the AO41, not the stand-alone scenario.**

Some suggestions or explanations of what I always have done successfully since the very first time I played this map:

I do not worry or depend on what my AI allies are doing. I expect them to get nearly all wiped out.
I only deploy 5-6 ground units, all FSJ, and load them up with heroes stripped from my other ground units.
I OS all of the ground troops and aircraft as much as I can.
I deploy all of my aircraft. In this case with a non-imported core it amounted to 4 fighters, 2 or 3 Strat bombers, 2 Stukas, and 1-2 twin-engine fighter-bombers (tac bombers that are not Stukas) to the best of my recollection.
From experience playing PG, PG2, and PC1, I always try to land my paratroopers where the enemy cannot see them. Then when they do, it is when I am attacking. Not much in this respect changes from before the patch.
2 groups: one lands in and eventually takes the northwestern airfield, while the other group lands in the hills on the western side of the island. They then seize those two western-most flags including an airfield which allows you to immediately rebase all or most of your aircraft to provide support thereafter.
A couple FSJ move against the victory hex in the southwest of the island, while the rest move towards the fortified city/airfield/victory hexes due East. Air power attacking as mobile artillery.
Your tac bombers are critical for dealing with the enemy's vehicles.
Use the airfields to reembark a couple FSJ units to get them to take/assist in capturing the Eastern most victory hexes. You'll never make it if they have to fight/walk all the way over there! Meanwhile, they rest of your forces continue moving East once that first major city/airfield/flag complex is taken.
Key is close air support.
Hope this helps! Sorry I don't have any of the save files any longer to show you.

I will try that, thanks. I just started my 1941 field Marschall campaign. It sounds like a pretty interesting and good solution.

[Panzer73]

I have won the Crete scenario with AO'42 and its related paratroop rule change. I used a similar strategy to adiekmann, with a few changes. I used 5 paratroops and 4 infantry (Azul, 2 x Gebirgsjager, 1 Grenadier with Oleh Dir), 5 fighters, 2 fighter-bombers (Beaufighter + Bf109Z), 3 Stukas, 1 Storch and 3 Ju 88As. Most of the units were not OS. I captured the entire island by the 16th turn. Only a couple of his majesty's ships survived.

Now I play at General difficulty, but I can say that this run was no different than my other runs - except more of Student's troops died. My recommendations are:

1) A Fast Rebase hero to send a fighter (either Bar or Galland) to the east in a single turn is very helpful in stemming Student's losses.
2) Lightning Strike and/or Double Attack on those Stukas for the CAS duty is very helpful
3) Use the Storch to scout out the RN's initial positions (due south of the starting airfields). It is very helpful if you can start taking out the RN Spitfires before they can even move
4) Equipping a fighter squadron with a D.520 is very helpful in this mission for that purpose (with a First Strike hero and either OS or Rapid Fire 1.5x hero)
5) At least one strategic bomber with a Shock Tactics hero to immobilize one of the RN battleships and sink it.
6) Lethal Attack on a strategic bomber demonstrably works on ships. The same bomber can effectively support the ground troops almost as if it is a long range tactical bomber after the first 6-8 rounds.

[peterw]

I agree to the majority here: The old paratrooper rules was better.

With the “old” rules I had more losses using paratrooper as with normal infantry as other units like tank can support it.
But with the V1.2 rules paratrooper are useless for me.

Therefore my question how to enable the “old” paratrooper rules.
As I play mainly my own mods, this would solve it for me.

[dalfrede]

Therefore my question how to enable the “old” paratrooper rules.
As I play mainly my own mods, this would solve it for me.

Rewrite the source code of the game.
So you will have to wait for the next update.
Or install an older release.

[CaesarCzech]

Therefore my question how to enable the “old” paratrooper rules.
As I play mainly my own mods, this would solve it for me.

Rewrite the source code of the game.
So you will have to wait for the next update.
Or install an older release.

Thats the thing i dont get like WHY they didnt just have option to use older paratrooper rules in singleplayer ?

[CaesarCzech]

Its not about simulating circling the DZ. Its about suggesting their fragility, the risk inherrent in their deployment and reducing their game breaking use as a super weapon.

.....

The current version, while still imperfect and in need of refinement, at least provides a higher degree of risk by making them a little more vulnerable over the target. Whats really needed is for the scenarios to be edited to account for the new rules .. which they are being.

Pat

Oh Screw off, The least you can do is not lie to us, just admit its all about the mutliplayer and you are going to focus more here because some Higher UP in magement got one of his "really good ideas." You "fixed" something that was not broken.

I understand where you're all coming from and my post above was entirely about the opinion that the original rules set was more 'realistic' than the new. In my personal opinion that is wrong and my opinion is as valid, if not as relevant or correct, as the myriad of other differing opinions present on this and other threads. My mistake was in voicing it, which I shouldn't of done, and for which I appologise.

But to be called a liar and accused of some kind of conspiracy ..... well, I've learned my lesson and I don't think I'll express my opinion on that.

We've acknowledged that a design error was corrected without accounting for it comprehensively across every relevant scenario, and we've said we are in the process of addressing that along with the changes to the 1942 DLC. At the time of writing we haven't got an internal ETA so won't be providing a public one. I understand how frustrating that can be, especially when so many of you are clearly passionate about the game, but from bitter experience over many decades we've learned that that is the way it has to be.

Pat

The problem is that this kind of thing is a pattern at this point notice how in PCI you had units with different and Polish and German infantry for example didnt have the same stats same with Russian and Germans, here aside from some unique units tanks broadly have comparable stats, its pretty clear that the balance was MP focused it was something one could handle even if it made the game play differently but now This MP focus is Obviously harming SP. so id like to ask if SP or MP is primary focus off the game. And im being genuine is SP the primary focus or MP ? because in both cases its going to impact how the game will develop.

[Bee1976]

Thats the thing i dont get like WHY they didnt just have option to use older paratrooper rules in singleplayer ?

Maybe they are doing exaclty this with the fix. Or neg trait option for the new rules, or pos trait option to use the old. Who knows. But i would have assumed that it might be possible to mod the old paratrooper rules in.

Considering SP and MP, well i never play Multiplayer. Im simply not interested in Pvp in PZC2 so i wont play tournaments and so on (buuuut if there would be pve tournaments... )
The easiest way would be to serpate multiplayer rules completly from singleplayer rules for the campaigns. So MP-Players can have their fun, and SP Players aswell. But im npot sure if it is that easy to realise.