Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: sillyflower

In my game vs Sveint he has done I think 10 para drops in 3 turns. See sveint's AAR. At least I assume it will show all the drops but obviously I can't check. I should also say all credit should go to him for coming up with this plan.

No way of intercepting them unless you have a lot more fighter than the Germans which will mean no ground troops to defend with. IRL paras suffered horribly on landing,even with air supremacy. They had only had very light equipment (in '41 they didn't even drop with their rifles) compared to normal inf but his para units have the same combat strength as my inf xxx and had no way of defending against tanks in the open. Even with air supremacy. IRL drops on bad terrain were impossible but here they can land anywhere at full strength and march 60 miles ( I think 1 hex = 30 miles) and/ before the enemy can react so they can cut off large areas.

I don't want to limit numbers because that doesn't fit with the game so my suggestions are:

1 There always has to be a significant risk of serious loss of cohesion/readiness and also of casualties. That will also stop them being ably to jump every couple of turns

2 No drops into cities, swamp, forest or mountain hexes (too many losses) or beach hexes because most of them would probably drown as drops were rarely accurate. The alternative would be greatly to increase the penalties in 1 for dropping into these terrain types, but that would be more complicated to sort out.

I know that paras aren't much help to a player who is on the defensive, and with some restrictions on where they can jump, there may be a case for reducing the unit cost but that must be the last part of any adjustment.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Richard III

Surely this issue can be fixed with simple House Rules rather then risk breaking other areas of the game by tinkering with the code. Broken WITE being the poster boy for this code tinkering approach to minor gameplay issues.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RoadWarrior

quote:

ORIGINAL: Richard III

Surely this issue can be fixed with simple House Rules rather then risk breaking other areas of the game by tinkering with the code. Broken WITE being the poster boy for this code tinkering approach to minor gameplay issues.

quote:

WP is nothing like WitE very very few games are.

WP is a one man show and the guy knows his code and game play - unlike GG whos probably turning 2.0 into another coding/logistics disaster like 1.0/WitW.

This game is great dispite the fact I have lost most of the games I have played so far.

I disagree with your view on changes to the paradrop play. The proposed loss of some cohesion of a parachute unit (~24% I think Alvaro mentioned) would neither "break other areas" or make gameplay a disaster that renders the game unplayable. It would also change the use of paratroops to a more historic ability for WW2. I welcome changes that allow unit types to perform with some historic abilities, especially when they don't overly complicate overall play.

_____________________________

JRR

(in reply to RoadWarrior)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

Sorry, I just don't buy the argument that the historically impossible use of paratroopers in this game should be allowed to continue simply because there are counters to it. It is like saying "It is OK that the paratroopers have plamsa rifles because you can counter them with your laser tanks." You should not have to garrison every city within 8 hexes of every paratrooper with a division for the simple reason that paratroopers could not drop into a major urban area, not could they drop into mountains, nor could they drop in anything less than 2 months (4 game turns) from a previous drop. As well in every large scale paradrop that was made in WWII (even into clear terrain) the dropping units were very disorganized. But in this game they drop with the same effectiveness (at least 100%) that they started with. I don't mind the use of paratroopers in a game in a non-historical manner, so long as it was historically possible. If the Axis want to build them in massive numbers and use them in Barbarossa that is fine with me. But I do object to the historically impossible use of them. I note as well that restricting paratroopers to there realistic abilities does not favour either the Allies or the Axis. So I repeat my opinion that paratroopers should be limited to dropping in historically realistic terrain and should suffer some loss of effectiveness in doing so. Now if someone wants to debate with me that the game does in fact realistically model the abilities and performance of paratroopers in WWII than please do so. But please do not respond by simply telling me that it doesn't matter if the game does this or not because there is a counter to it. To me it does matter.

As an aside, I will say that I think by and large this game does a much better job than most that I have played in simulating WWII on a strategic level. Well done Alvaro.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa

Keep in mind when they drop they get 50% of their OPs. It is +2 to move in or out of ZoC. So if they drop between corps they can't move.