Suggestion: Recon Tank / Airborne Inf combo unit

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Suggestion: Recon Tank / Airborne Inf combo unit

      Was playing a game where I have invested in lots of recon tanks early and while I have the units I've having trouble spending the resources to upgrade them further. The Air Assault feature seems cool but without the ability to take territory that feature seems wasted. The unit to pair them with is the airborne inf but then you have to micro them all the time since they move at a snails pace with normal move orders.

      What if you could combine a single recon and a single airborne together to get a unit that moved at the normal recon speed? This perk would only apply if the stack was 1 airborne inf and 1 recon. Mixing other units or more than one would make the perk go away. I think it'd be a lot of fun to be able to use these two units together to get a unit that could air assault and then take territory with standard move orders effeciently.

      Plus it would give people a reason to use recon as something other than an early rush unit. Imo that's really all you need it for. I'd rather have AFV's in mass because they can handle armor if you run into that, they have a bit more HP's and they have good air defense.


      A simpler solution could be to let the recon tank conquer territory but I think the combo idea would be more fun and might make 2 units more useful in the game versus 1.
    • Dude, having a unit that could move at other unit speed AND take territory would completely unbalance and change the game. For example, there would be no reason to build any other type of infantry unit.
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD
    • Dealer of Death wrote:

      Dude, having a unit that could move at other unit speed AND take territory would completely unbalance and change the game. For example, there would be no reason to build any other type of infantry unit.
      I do certainly not think so. This unit would be very strong against infanty, but rather weak against armor. Furthermore, it would require lots of infrastructure to build. It would only work in groups of two, making it bad for attacking strongly defended cities. I think the biggest issue with this would be code issues for dorado and bytro, as well as keeping the game simple
    • GeneralLangmoen wrote:

      Dealer of Death wrote:

      Dude, having a unit that could move at other unit speed AND take territory would completely unbalance and change the game. For example, there would be no reason to build any other type of infantry unit.
      I do certainly not think so. This unit would be very strong against infanty, but rather weak against armor. Furthermore, it would require lots of infrastructure to build. It would only work in groups of two, making it bad for attacking strongly defended cities. I think the biggest issue with this would be code issues for dorado and bytro, as well as keeping the game simple
      Well then you'd be wrong as everyone would use these to sweep across the map taking territory and wiping anything else with artillery and air power. It wouldn't be used primarily on cities, but on provinces.
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD
    • Dealer of Death wrote:

      GeneralLangmoen wrote:

      Dealer of Death wrote:

      Dude, having a unit that could move at other unit speed AND take territory would completely unbalance and change the game. For example, there would be no reason to build any other type of infantry unit.
      I do certainly not think so. This unit would be very strong against infanty, but rather weak against armor. Furthermore, it would require lots of infrastructure to build. It would only work in groups of two, making it bad for attacking strongly defended cities. I think the biggest issue with this would be code issues for dorado and bytro, as well as keeping the game simple
      Well then you'd be wrong as everyone would use these to sweep across the map taking territory and wiping anything else with artillery and air power. It wouldn't be used primarily on cities, but on provinces.
      I know, but you said that it made all other infantry units useless, which I disagree with. I do however agree that it would be a little overpowered
    • Some of these comments are like satire...combing inf with tanks is like making a tank that can conquer without inf...

      Lol.

      A unit that can move at normal speed and take territory would unbalance the game? Like infantry and recon right now?

      Maybe there is like a big secret that putting recon and inf together is secretly op and these ppl are trying to hide it in some wizard of oz misdirect... The heck are you guys talking about?
    • imo its quite silly
      pretty sure that airborne inf being that slow is on purpose
      also: so recon changes from "only an early rush unit" to "its purpose is to buff airborne inf"? lmao not much of a buff to its usefulness

      "a simpler solution would be to let the recon conquer land" hell no

      reads pretty much like "invent new mechanic x to buff unit y in particular"

      edit: i hope you realize how ridiculous that sounds?
      I am The Baseline for opinions
    • It would barely do anything, Recon + airborne would not be that useful.
      It would be only for if you want to scout out the province and then take it.
      And even then still get destroyed by any artillery and Mobile AA Vehicles that detect the air assault, because I assume that is what you are going to do with it.
      It's not like a tank combined with airborne infantry, it's more like "combine it just because it would buff it" when it wouldn't really buff it at all in my opinion and also, the point of airborne is for it to be slow, what do they just get in the recons and lug their helicopters along? In practice, this is what I see: builds specifically centered around this combo relying on other units to do the work or this combo to help destroy lone infantry and SAM and TDS guns, which the Airborne Infantry can already do on it's own and really the only thing that would stop it otherwise that would not stop it with this combination would be Motorized Infantry, which granted is spammed a lot.
      Conclusion: only useful against opponents who spam Motorized Infantry with no other significant defenses at that moment. Can still be easily shot down by AA and fighters and helicopters, still would get destroyed by really any city infantry except maybe marines and just possibly special forces, which would be really the only defense this would help with, and still would get wrecked by pretty much any armor type and even more by tank destroyers.
      This might be for the early game only, in which case it could destroy random infantry stacks encountered. And that's about it.
      And only two can be stacked anyway, basically making the entire setup pointless except for supplies/components balance.
      So the real conclusion is that the only reasons you do this are for:
      1. Early game destroy random infantry stacks
      2. Extra recon ability, but if you have radar that isn't going to do much
      3. Supplies/Components balance
      And no, definitely not recon vehicle by itself can conquer, spam recon vehicle early game and take over all neighbors if that happens, recon vehicle would become overpowered as it would basically be this suggestion but without that extra building cost, mobilisation cost, and upkeep cost of the infantry.
      Now I'm done.
    • Clock wrote:

      It would barely do anything, Recon + airborne would not be that useful.
      Yes well that is what Airborne is doing already so...

      This would make it easier to use airborne to take territory which is a huge part of this game. Currently moving a bunch of infantry around is the easiest most effecient way to take territory, you just stack move orders and then when you come back a few hours later you have a bunch of territory under your control. (assuming you aren't in combat)

      With airborne you have to do this 1 spot at a time. You can hypothetically come back often and keep moving them around but if you could put them together with a recon tank and they'd just move around normally then they'd more useful.

      How many times do people actually attack the enemy with airborne? I end up using them to grab territory a little faster, especially little islands, mountains, etc. Even when I coordinate with a larger force to take zones ahead of advancing forces you end up having to pull them back because their range runs out. So they might take a handful of spots that infantry could have taken with a bit more time.

      It would be really cool to have more options for using airborne forces in general. There are a lot of units that have air assault capabilities but it's so much work to coordinate them and you can't stack orders or change orders once they start.

      What if Airborne and Artillery combine so that there is no setup time once they land? And the artillery could fire immediately? Maybe a tank destoyer / recon tank combo, or something.

      Hell what about bombers being transports with the right unit combo. The recon/airborne option what if you could stack a bomber, recon and airborne inf and you get 2x the air assault range? That would probably need a new unit, not sure how they'd do that.
    • Tumbler wrote:

      With airborne you have to do this 1 spot at a time. You can hypothetically come back often and keep moving them around but if you could put them together with a recon tank and they'd just move around normally then they'd more useful.
      This would kind of defeat the purpose of an airborne infantry, what Buckeyechamp said:

      Buckeyechamp wrote:

      OK pick a point on map...move 1 inf , 1 RCV there... presto chango... its magic
      Motorized Infantry serves the same purpose but cheaper anyway

      Tumbler wrote:

      It would be really cool to have more options for using airborne forces in general. There are a lot of units that have air assault capabilities but it's so much work to coordinate them and you can't stack orders or change orders once they start.
      True, I don't know what to say to this other than it's a little boring now, but it might become overpowered if you could stack: no micromanaging, just sending units throughout the entire middle region of a continent where your enemy has no mobile AA vehicle while they are asleep, then move on... especially in 4x, this would be deadly. That might not be a bad thing, though. It would certainly make MAAV's more popular.

      Tumbler wrote:

      What if Airborne and Artillery combine so that there is no setup time once they land? And the artillery could fire immediately? Maybe a tank destoyer / recon tank combo, or something.
      No

      Tumbler wrote:

      Hell what about bombers being transports with the right unit combo. The recon/airborne option what if you could stack a bomber, recon and airborne inf and you get 2x the air assault range? That would probably need a new unit, not sure how they'd do that.
      No, if also artillery can be added. But if it cannot be added, this would certainly make warfare more interesting. Think about invading a country away without invading your neighbor. Defending cities would become more important and encourage players to actually put units to garrison places, it would slow down and speed up expansion at the same time in an interesting way. Of course, the air superiority and MAAV's would also be needed. Especially MAAV's if passive defense is wanted. Maybe they could just change nothing except for that and also make it so that if stacked with that specific combination of units the bomber transport would not transform so that an airbase would have to be destroyed before you could do anything like this.
    • Clock wrote:

      It would barely do anything, Recon + airborne would not be that useful.
      It would be only for if you want to scout out the province and then take it.
      And even then still get destroyed by any artillery and Mobile AA Vehicles that detect the air assault, because I assume that is what you are going to do with it.
      It's not like a tank combined with airborne infantry, it's more like "combine it just because it would buff it" when it wouldn't really buff it at all in my opinion and also, the point of airborne is for it to be slow, what do they just get in the recons and lug their helicopters along? In practice, this is what I see: builds specifically centered around this combo relying on other units to do the work or this combo to help destroy lone infantry and SAM and TDS guns, which the Airborne Infantry can already do on it's own and really the only thing that would stop it otherwise that would not stop it with this combination would be Motorized Infantry, which granted is spammed a lot.
      Conclusion: only useful against opponents who spam Motorized Infantry with no other significant defenses at that moment. Can still be easily shot down by AA and fighters and helicopters, still would get destroyed by really any city infantry except maybe marines and just possibly special forces, which would be really the only defense this would help with, and still would get wrecked by pretty much any armor type and even more by tank destroyers.
      This might be for the early game only, in which case it could destroy random infantry stacks encountered. And that's about it.
      And only two can be stacked anyway, basically making the entire setup pointless except for supplies/components balance.
      So the real conclusion is that the only reasons you do this are for:
      1. Early game destroy random infantry stacks
      2. Extra recon ability, but if you have radar that isn't going to do much
      3. Supplies/Components balance
      And no, definitely not recon vehicle by itself can conquer, spam recon vehicle early game and take over all neighbors if that happens, recon vehicle would become overpowered as it would basically be this suggestion but without that extra building cost, mobilisation cost, and upkeep cost of the infantry.
      Now I'm done.
      Geez - you could write a book on your new idea.
      "CoN is a game of 80% skill and 20% luck" - Tifo_14

      "I don't get paid enough to do anything" - Germanico

      Nothing stops the Tifo :thumbup:
    • Tifo_14 wrote:

      Clock wrote:

      It would barely do anything, Recon + airborne would not be that useful.
      It would be only for if you want to scout out the province and then take it.
      And even then still get destroyed by any artillery and Mobile AA Vehicles that detect the air assault, because I assume that is what you are going to do with it.
      It's not like a tank combined with airborne infantry, it's more like "combine it just because it would buff it" when it wouldn't really buff it at all in my opinion and also, the point of airborne is for it to be slow, what do they just get in the recons and lug their helicopters along? In practice, this is what I see: builds specifically centered around this combo relying on other units to do the work or this combo to help destroy lone infantry and SAM and TDS guns, which the Airborne Infantry can already do on it's own and really the only thing that would stop it otherwise that would not stop it with this combination would be Motorized Infantry, which granted is spammed a lot.
      Conclusion: only useful against opponents who spam Motorized Infantry with no other significant defenses at that moment. Can still be easily shot down by AA and fighters and helicopters, still would get destroyed by really any city infantry except maybe marines and just possibly special forces, which would be really the only defense this would help with, and still would get wrecked by pretty much any armor type and even more by tank destroyers.
      This might be for the early game only, in which case it could destroy random infantry stacks encountered. And that's about it.
      And only two can be stacked anyway, basically making the entire setup pointless except for supplies/components balance.
      So the real conclusion is that the only reasons you do this are for:
      1. Early game destroy random infantry stacks
      2. Extra recon ability, but if you have radar that isn't going to do much
      3. Supplies/Components balance
      And no, definitely not recon vehicle by itself can conquer, spam recon vehicle early game and take over all neighbors if that happens, recon vehicle would become overpowered as it would basically be this suggestion but without that extra building cost, mobilisation cost, and upkeep cost of the infantry.
      Now I'm done.
      Geez - you could write a book on your new idea.
      Every time I think of something else I put it down, that is why it is so long :)
    • Clock wrote:

      Tumbler wrote:

      With airborne you have to do this 1 spot at a time. You can hypothetically come back often and keep moving them around but if you could put them together with a recon tank and they'd just move around normally then they'd more useful.
      This would kind of defeat the purpose of an airborne infantry, what Buckeyechamp said:

      Based on their stats I think their purpose was intended to be an offensive attack unit that could surprise the enemy.

      Currently I think the game mechanics make it a faster way to take 1 piece of territory. Moving from Ireland to England for example, you could train some airborne to jump over but then you're stuck trying to move these guys around at a crawl or just micro them all day long.

      You'd be better of just building infantry and sending them across the water.


      But if you could jump over 2 recon and 2 airborne then split then into 1/1s you'd be able to keep going instead of just sitting there and waiting for infantry to come over. If you run into trouble and u are close enough to your airfield u could assault out also.

      Keeping these units in the fight is a challenge because they crawl when they don't have an airfield close enough. Making them more mobile with assistance from a tank would hopefully put them closer to the enemy when it counts.

      When you consider their cost I think they should be a more useful asset. We could just give them stacking orders on air assault and allow them to change orders in flight...I'm not sure why it's a reasonable trade off to get air assault but you have to use it in such a limited way and then you lose the ability to easily move your unit around with stacked move orders.

      I think they are similar in cost to aircraft and you can change those orders all the time, You can even "stack" orders by ordering the unit to attack far away and it will automatically fly to the closer air base, then start the attack. The gameplay mechanics treat air assault like it's extremely powerful but it's not. If you're lucky there is one city within 400 of your current airbase. And chances are that isn't a homeland city for the enemy so being able to take that city by surprise doesn't mean much. Homeland cities are likely so far away that by the time you get there the element of surprise is lost. Sneaking into an area and building an airbase before the enemy notices can be worth it but I think the bigger advantage will be having fighters nearby. you'll get some benefit from the airborne as well but the real damage will come from the fighters.

      I don't see why anyone is thinking this would be OP, both units in question barely see any use in games because they get killed easily by too many more popular units. Strike fighters can easily shoot down the air assault helos, so can the free fighter everyone starts with. once they're on the ground both those units can attack them and kill them taking minimal damage. The resources it takes to build one set of these would be enough to build an extra 5 infantry at least. The people saying this would be op and everyone would just sweep across the map are fools. You can already do this cheaper with just plain infantry, go try and it tell me how that goes.

      Like I said before, there would have to be some serious black magic at work if it's been a carefully guarded secret that infantry and recon tanks together are over powered and no on realizes it.

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Tumbler ().