Reform: paratroopers

TntAttack
Posts: 335
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:49 am

Reform: paratroopers

Post by TntAttack »

DreJaDe wrote: Mon May 02, 2022 11:19 pm
I really wanted to start with the fundamentals like changing the way infantry works and for each nation to have somewhat different use to them but yeah... No one engaged on that that much.

Like some of my grenade suggestion which would definitely change the way the rifleman works but you settled with just +%200 bonus against all infantry.
Brainstorming ideas that can make infantry combat much better.

I have a few and borrowed.
1. Nerf smg anti tank attack (May compliment a tank combat reform, and stops making smgs the priority anti tank unit)
2. Grenades deal damages to units inside the structure. Credit: Drejade
3. Bluffing America Rangers (Their 4 speed is meaningless if they combat ability is like a glorified scout. I believe Dahee mentioned that they should also be able to enter airports and paradrop as well)

Note the special infantry abilities from AOM.
4. Paratroopers can enter airports and return to transport plane state. (Credit: IDK)
5. Altough not infantry, I recall reading somewhere about anti and towed arty getting a speed bonus on roads. If that's true, awesome.

What about a seizing ability, infantry have a chance to take possession of an adjacent aa/anti tank. Much like the heal's conversion ability from AOS, if they still have it.
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by DreJaDe »

Im actually OK with SMG being anti tank unit.

This puts tank on a precarious position where they have to choose to be a cavalry or be supported by infantry like IRL.

Grenades dealing damage to units inside structure? I don't think that's mine but my idea is for flamethrower to damage the units inside.

I'm also an advocate of buffing rangers making them cost 2.

They can't build, they have lesser HP and lesser attack. It has the same worth as normal rifleman.

Number 4 is from Banzai and I do agree to it.
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by Stratego (dev) »

2. Grenades deal damages to units inside the structure. Credit: Drejade
remark here: we can not set such think on a "weapon" we can set it on a building.
so a building havea flag: "isUnitsInsideReceivesThgeDamage" and that can be true or false meaning you shoot the building or the unit inside.

so i can set the building and ALL attacks agaisnt the builsind will work like that
What about a seizing ability, infantry have a chance to take possession of an adjacent aa/anti tank. Much like the heal's conversion ability from AOS, if they still have it.
this is not possible by engine currently.
4. Paratroopers can enter airports and return to transport plane state. (Credit: IDK)
this is also not possible i think, but maybe there is a way, any ideas ? (i ask skilled json modifiers)
it can be done with a new ability but that will be usable everywhere (not only in airports) i think that is not what is requested.
5. Altough not infantry, I recall reading somewhere about anti and towed arty getting a speed bonus on roads. If that's true, awesome.
this can be i think.
but i have better idea: i planned already: make them able to transform to "Van" form woth high speed and transform back to artillery form.
i wanted it earlier but was no time to make.
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by DreJaDe »

Stratego (dev) wrote: Tue May 03, 2022 5:15 am so i can set the building and ALL attacks agaisnt the builsind will work like that
An ability of assassin in AOS can kill unit inside a building without setting the building with a command like that.

This means that there's no need to make it so that every attack will shoot the unit inside.
Stratego (dev) wrote: Tue May 03, 2022 5:15 am this is also not possible i think, but maybe there is a way, any ideas ? (i ask skilled json modifiers)
it can be done with a new ability but that will be usable everywhere (not only in airports) i think that is not what is requested.
One way I see is an ability of transformation that can only be used inside airport.
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by Stratego (dev) »

An ability of assassin in AOS can kill unit inside a building without setting the building with a command like that.
there is no such ability i think, or you mean in a TC butz that is already set that way that unis get damage inside.
This means that there's no need to make it so that every attack will shoot the unit inside.
there is need i think, see my answer above.
One way I see is an ability of transformation that can only be used inside airport.
yes, but as i wrote that is not possible to set currently - unless someone can tell me how.
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by DreJaDe »

Stratego (dev) wrote: Tue May 03, 2022 6:04 am there is no such ability i think, or you mean in a TC butz that is already set that way that unis get damage inside
Pls view the "Assination sweep inside" skill of assassin in AOS. It definitely kills the unit the building (ex. Fort) without the cost of the building itself nor the need for the units to damage the unit inside instead.

This is what I mean.

About the transformation. Isn't there a pirate in AOS that could only transform as a ship on docks?

Definitely what im talking about.
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by Stratego (dev) »

both are instersting if they are truely like that - i will check them! thanks!
(lol maybe too many features we have i do not even remember implemnting :))
TntAttack
Posts: 335
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:49 am

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by TntAttack »

Stratego (dev) wrote: Tue May 03, 2022 5:15 am
this can be i think.
but i have better idea: i planned already: make them able to transform to "Van" form woth high speed and transform back to artillery form.
i wanted it earlier but was no time to make.
1. What van exactly?
- How fast?
- Can it hold anything else? If no, it's just a random truck that appeared out of nowhere.
- Will this break the current barebone micromanagement we currently have with transport vehicles? (Imagine 2 transport vehicle types, but one costs 3, and the other comes as a free deal)

Or imagine throwing a AA into your truck, only to deploy it and watch it drive away.

Even if you restrict AA/arty's so they cant enter transports vehicles, it doesnt seem right.

......

Okay, in the matter regarding transportation balancing, I can't help but look over to AOM, as if it's a refined version of AOWW. I mean just from that fact that transports are cheap, and that infantry can enter Jeeps makes soo much sense.

Give infantry bonuses against arty, aa and anti tank guns.
Enough to 1 or 2 taps.
Capture able if possible.

How about an entrenchment ability for all arty, aa and anti tank types. Gives them first strike and better protection against infantry.
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by DreJaDe »

Yep, I myself doesn't agree to the idea.

They are towed artillery. I'm already ok with training trucks towing them. No need for free version.

Also, TNT. It would help if you also say your disagreements and agreements in other ideas.

@Stratego (dev)
I was wrong on the pirate part. It was the terrain that allow him to transform, not the building.
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by Stratego (dev) »

" myself doesn't agree to the idea."
which idea?
"I was wrong on the pirate part. It was the terrain that allow him to transform, not the building."
? which terrain? it van nbe a problem as not all maps have that terrain - which terrain?
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by DreJaDe »

Stratego (dev) wrote: Tue May 03, 2022 11:47 am which idea?
Written on next paragraph.
Stratego (dev) wrote: Tue May 03, 2022 11:47 am ? which terrain? it van nbe a problem as not all maps have that terrain - which terrain?
Pirates or corsair in AOS can only transform on water which can only be built in water. If the pirate is on water, they can transform as ships.

So the transformation is limited by terrain, not by building.
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by Stratego (dev) »

Stratego (dev) wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 11:47 am
which idea?
Written on next paragraph.
ok i still dont know, please be more specific
you mean you dont like the "transform to wheeled form" idea i worte?
if so why? you just said they are towed - imagine a wheeled form image that is towing of a artillery image.
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by DreJaDe »

Yep, that's it.

Why I don't agree is simple.

I already like the logic of it being towed by the truck on game.

Making trucks appear from nowhere kinda breaks the immersion for me.

We also already have some self propelled artillery which fits this idea more.

Other game such as AOS don't really have that SPA so it makes more sense.
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by Stratego (dev) »

currently they are not towed - there is no towing car or sometihng.



however i like the idea (it would be ready already - only time was short to make it for harchie - but now it is on me)
appearing from nowhere ? lol i dont think that is a problem at all (why should we show not used tow cars beside the gun - just would be disturbing)

others like the idea?

wait is just see we are off topic here...
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by DreJaDe »

Them entering trucks or transport is for me, acts like towing for me and some players.

And like I said
Self Propelled Artillery kinds acts like that already.

Ok, yeah
Out of topic.
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by Stratego (dev) »

oh, that is not "towing" but carrying or something. but ok i see what u mean.
(i dont really like relying only on carrier as that makes the game slower to play and more like a logistic nightmare - also AI can not handle that at all, the other maybe)
TntAttack
Posts: 335
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:49 am

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by TntAttack »

DreJaDe post_id=137103 time=1651583443 user_id=9763]
wrote: Them entering trucks or transport is for me, acts like towing for me and some players.

And like I said
Self Propelled Artillery kinds acts like that already.

Ok, yeah
Out of topic.

I agree. I don't like it because unlike other ideas we have, it doesn't cater towards competitive gameplay which favours balance between unit types.


Stratego (dev) wrote: Tue May 03, 2022 1:15 pm oh, that is not "towing" but carrying or something. but ok i see what u mean.
(i dont really like relying only on carrier as that makes the game slower to play and more like a logistic nightmare - also AI can not handle that at all, the other maybe)
With this change, I imagine casual singleplayer to be more enjoyable, but in competitive mode it's effects aren't easily understood.

- What if transportable types (aa, anti tank, arty) become priority unit of choice and unbalance other units like tanks e.g. why make a 4-5 turn tank when you can a speedy arty to reinforcements your front lines twice as fast, with more fire-power and range.
- If competitive multiplayer is reduced to spamming such units, how will you respond exactly if players protest?
1. Rebalance aircraft (as they are significantly more vulnerable to aa) and other units
2. Nerf transportable types (aa, anti tank, arty)

Neither looks good

But, the idea has some merit. Quite a few changes like giving infantry bonuses against them would be preferable, and making it so that they can't fire on the turn they transform back into their normal states is probably obvious.

Also balancing stats so that other fractions like Germany and russian have op dual state unit e.g. flak88, which is way worth it's value over other nations.

Bluffing tanks is a must, maybe that rail system idea could be implemented to balanced out their mobility.

Even then, I guess my only problem is that we have shifted from op stationary concrete towers to mobile ones.
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by Stratego (dev) »

yes dont talk here about anything else than concrete towers - i totally lost where were we.
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by Stratego (dev) »

there is no such ability i think, or you mean in a TC butz that is already set that way that unis get damage inside
Pls view the "Assination sweep inside" skill of assassin in AOS. It definitely kills the unit the building (ex. Fort) without the cost of the building itself nor the need for the units to damage the unit inside instead.
i checked and GOSH it is freaking HACK by Endru! :)
he defined an AURA over the target building that kill every unit in 0 range (and targets only non building units!)
MEGA HACK! :)

so yes this way it can be done lol :)
so we can make the flamethrovers having such ability to vipe out all units inside (but all will be wiped out!)
------------
wait it was the greandes!
grenades can not be like that - as they can target normal units too - so an ability can not work 2 ways
a) one is normal damage to an ainfantry
b) if a building targeted than all units inside will die (using the aura hack)

we can not do that! one effect can do one type of thing!
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by DreJaDe »

Stratego (dev) wrote: Tue May 03, 2022 3:06 pm wait it was the greandes!
Assume that its just for flamethrower.

For a new skill to balance nerf the concrete artillery since that was part of my suggestion.

It's not that OP considering that concrete artillery have just 1 unit carry capacity..

The skill can be then set to just be able to target the 2 said OP buildings. And kill nonbuildings inside.

And also as I said. Just increase the cost of flamethrower of the unit is OP now to 3.
TntAttack
Posts: 335
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:49 am

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by TntAttack »

Stratego (dev) wrote: Tue May 03, 2022 3:06 pm [quote
------------
wait it was the greandes!
grenades can not be like that - as they can target normal units too - so an ability can not work 2 ways
a) one is normal damage to an ainfantry
b) if a building targeted than all units inside will die (using the aura hack)

we can not do that! one effect can do one type of thing!
Can't you just make another grenade type specifically for flamethrowers then? Or does this restriction apply to all grenades, that is, if all grenades are attacking infantry, none can aura hack.

Or what about making an new ability altogether, based off grenades, only for flamethrower and other units that might need such attribute in the future.
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by Stratego (dev) »

sure flamethrower will have a "wipe out enemy" (can target only concrete ones - and maybe bunkers and sandbags too - discussed in other thread)
but we can not make the infantry grenades do the same as we would lose their anti-personell ability on open ground.
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by DreJaDe »

TntAttack wrote: Tue May 03, 2022 4:43 pm Can't you just make another grenade type specifically for flamethrowers then? Or does this restriction apply to all grenades, that is, if all grenades are attacking infantry, none can aura hack.
Let's just keep the grenades for normal anti infantry. That would be better.
SS-Jericho
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2021 5:34 am

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by SS-Jericho »

Buff tech spcialized AT (pzschreck, piat, m1 bazookas, japanese ATs)

1. Increase their bonus damage to medium tanks form 16 to 20. I dont know about heavy tanks, but pzschrecks has 230 mm penetration.
Why? They cost 3 turns and are available till tech 2 and specialized only for tanks, but they take mostly (sometimes 2) 3 turns to kill a medium tanks. While SMGs has decent damage to tanks + 2 turns and good for infantry combat. Also the panzergrenadier is 3 turn and can one shot medium tanks, so why not buff them?

They are also used well against light to medium armor since they have longer range compared to AT nades and for germany the panzer faust and in some cases used can kill heavy tanks from the side or rear.

(Any better suggestion or thoughts?)

2. Why is PIAT a lost stronger than other AT?
User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 2382
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Infantry Reforms

Post by DreJaDe »

SS-Jericho wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 9:19 am Buff tech spcialized AT (pzschreck, piat, m1 bazookas, japanese ATs)

1. Increase their bonus damage to medium tanks form 16 to 20. I dont know about heavy tanks, but pzschrecks has 230 mm penetration.
Why? They cost 3 turns and are available till tech 2 and specialized only for tanks, but they take mostly (sometimes 2) 3 turns to kill a medium tanks. While SMGs has decent damage to tanks + 2 turns and good for infantry combat. Also the panzergrenadier is 3 turn and can one shot medium tanks, so why not buff them?

They are also used well against light to medium armor since they have longer range compared to AT nades and for germany the panzer faust and in some cases used can kill heavy tanks from the side or rear.

(Any better suggestion or thoughts?)

2. Why is PIAT a lost stronger than other AT?
I read some records from YT, some qoura articles and others more internet articles and most of them say that Panzerfaust and Panzerschreck are although more powerful than PIAT, were both more inaccurate than PIAT.

Like literally out of the millions Panzerfaust fired, they only destroyed like hundreds.

There stats is like 2500/1 tank kill
Or 3% of the tanks kills on the eastern front.

While Piat on Normandy constituted to 7% of all tank kills. And 100k were only produced. It was also well liked by the Canadian users who used they deemed it as the best anti tank second to the bren gun.

And can Peirce almost all tank just hitting them on the side like others.

Grenades on the other hand were balanced based on their Cool down which I think is ok.

So the best thing I could agree is for Panzerschreck to have better anti heavy tank bonus than PIAT.

Honestly, I think Panzerfaust should have lower damage but it's fine since it have a long CD.
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Reform: Infantry Reforms

Post by Stratego (dev) »

this seems stucked
- can we get to a conclusion some way?
- if anyone has yet responed please ask him to.
- if i am wrong and here is a conclusion somewhere please summarize me

thanks!
SS-Jericho
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2021 5:34 am

Re: Reform: Infantry Reforms

Post by SS-Jericho »

I believe all the suggestion from this topic has already a seperate except for the paratrooper.

The suggestion was:
Paratrooper being able to return to transport plane. Once the Airborne infantry go to the Airfield by the next turn it will automatically turn into a paratrooper transport plane.

Additional suggestion fix:
Damage bonus vs infantry/vehicle non-combat
250% ----> 350%
They are elite after all and are very hard to use without aircraft carrier. If you think its too much then atleast 300% bonus.
Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 15734
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Reform: paratroopers

Post by Stratego (dev) »

i have renamed to paratroopers.
Dahdee
Posts: 185
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:49 pm

Re: Reform: paratroopers

Post by Dahdee »

I wanted to point out that I was mistaken about ALL Rangers being airborne qualified. While this is the modern case, it was pointed out to me by Vogel that it was NOT a requirement in WW2. There were Rangers who were also Airborne, but certainly not all at that time. So, as to the Rangers retuning to drop from parachute plane as Tnt suggested at the beginning of the thread, we don't need to include them in that idea. Sorry, my bad.
Dahdee
Posts: 185
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:49 pm

Re: Reform: Infantry Reforms

Post by Dahdee »

SS-Jericho wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 6:03 am I believe all the suggestion from this topic has already a seperate except for the paratrooper.

The suggestion was:
Paratrooper being able to return to transport plane. Once the Airborne infantry go to the Airfield by the next turn it will automatically turn into a paratrooper transport plane.

Additional suggestion fix:
Damage bonus vs infantry/vehicle non-combat
250% ----> 350%
They are elite after all and are very hard to use without aircraft carrier. If you think its too much then atleast 300% bonus.
I like this very much.
Post Reply

Return to “Balancing discussions”