Hi bluewarrior 6,
glad to see you engaged, I'll try to answer your suggestions here.

bluewarrior 6 wrote:

The airborne infantry is relay air assault, which is fine. but i feel you should also have true airborne. They have much longer range, but once they are landed they can only walk and cant fly again until they are at a city with an airbase.

That mechanics was something we were considering in early stages of development, but as it was really inconvenient to use, we decided to drop it in favour of air assault.

bluewarrior 6 wrote:

the sea born assault mechanic i feel also needs a bit of tweaking. Realistically a beach assault tends to be fast and is a shock tactic. the landfall of marines should be much faster then 4 hours. Also if you look at modern beach assault tactics US Marines tend to use air assault. Marine expeditionary units will use their amphibious assault ship as platforms for osprey or CH-53 to air assault onto the beach or beyond it. So maybe have an amphibious assault ship that can carry something like 3 airborne (air assault) units.

That would call for new unit - it seems like a good idea and we will consider it. Thank you for your input.

Bluewarrior 6,

I like the airborne idea and the Marines. We talked about the amphibious assault ship in the Destroyer Air Wing thread, check it out.

I think air assault actually works better for modern combat. If you compare airborne WWII where they dropped in and that was it, to vietnam air cav. they used helo's to infil and exfil from combat zones. I think the air cav works much better in this game than having paratroops dropping into zones. If you look at the other air assault units, they would be brought in by STOL/VTOL air craft.

bluewarrior 6 wrote:

The airborne infantry is relay air assault, which is fine. but i feel you should also have true airborne. They have much longer range, but once they are landed they can only walk and cant fly again until they are at a city with an airbase.

the sea born assault mechanic i feel also needs a bit of tweaking. Realistically a beach assault tends to be fast and is a shock tactic. the landfall of marines should be much faster then 4 hours. Also if you look at modern beach assault tactics US Marines tend to use air assault. Marine expeditionary units will use their amphibious assault ship as platforms for osprey or CH-53 to air assault onto the beach or beyond it. So maybe have an amphibious assault ship that can carry something like 3 airborne (air assault) units.

I think that the air assault amphibious assault ship idea would be so cool if it were to be implemented!

agree completely!!!

Take St.Johns Island, Canada... no harbor, out of airborne infantry air assault range, and amphibious vehicles cant capture a province. So you have to land airborne & SLOWLY walk them to capture it?? LAME

bluewarrior 6 wrote:

the sea born assault mechanic i feel also needs a bit of tweaking. Realistically a beach assault tends to be fast and is a shock tactic. the landfall of marines should be much faster then 4 hours. Also if you look at modern beach assault tactics US Marines tend to use air assault. Marine expeditionary units will use their amphibious assault ship as platforms for osprey or CH-53 to air assault onto the beach or beyond it. So maybe have an amphibious assault ship that can carry something like 3 airborne (air assault) units.

I agree that disembarking taking 4.5 hours is quite ridiculous, as well as the amphibious assault ship, but having marines use air assault on a beach seems to OP for the rest of the game If marines act like heavy airborne infantry, that would render airmobile infantry completely useless.

Just my thoughts

True true. Perhaps the balancing would be that you'd be trading the more powerful marines for the quicker airborne infantry? And then you could land marines to reinforce your position once your airborne had secured a beachhead. However, airborne infantry would have the same regular amount of HP that they normally do, so you'd be trading HP for speed. The airborne are faster, but weaker. Marines are slower, but stronger.

I think that Marines should air assault as their landing only. So where a normal unit takes 4 hours to disembark at a dock, marines use the air assault timer for beach assault. This way a marine unit can assault a coastal province in 15 minutes. They don't get air assault except when going from sea transport mode to landing. And it is only for the province they are at. I don't think that would be unbalancing. As it is marines are next to useless. Sure you can attack a non dock province, but after that they are just infantry, they are never really shock troops that attack quickly. air cav are always fast if they have an airfield, but they are much weaker in general.

I think, imho, that motorized should have the advantage of cheap to build and supply, but be below average combat wise.
Mech should be the most expensive but the toughest combat wise
marines second toughest with very fast sea assault, but longer training time
air weakest overall but very fast, and longer training time.

Does anyone else think a more basic infantry unit is needed? a conscript or militia unit that trains really quickly but is not super effective. They would be good for homeland defence, and taking empty provinces, but motorized speed and cheap on mobilization and maintenance? I am thinking basically reserves or national guard units model.

bluewarrior 6 wrote:

good ideas. but i would also allow the range of the Marine airassult to be simular to that or normal air assult units. but can only move based on where their ships are located.

while i agree to a cretin extent with your more basic infantry, i disagree with you comparing the reserves/ national guard with a militia or conscript. (at least in the USA) having seen national guard and reserves from both sides of the fence in iraq, afghanistan and in war games at places like jrtc, ntc, jmtc they are just as good as active if not better in some cases. They have to meet all the same standards and training requirements as active army.

I didnt intend to disparage the guard or reserves, i was meaning that more to the effect of lower deployment costs and speed of mobilization. The militia/conscript is the lower combat rating idea. I would generally expect the marines to be a more discipline combat unit than a guard unit, nothing against the guard, but more in praise of the marines. And game play wise, they would have to be lower stats than motor or who would build motor?

But why would we need these units? Motorized infantry already fit this role of quick, simple, weak units.

I guess for me, and feel free to rip the idea apart, ADD, i have 4 million ideas before breakfast... I kind of wanted a unit that could rapidly be mobilized (hence the militia/guard comparison) so you can have something to put in the way of an invader. Maybe a unit with a higher defense stat but really weak on offense to reflect that they would be used for homeland defense? I get frustrated at times by the 24 wait to get a motor inf, it feels like when you have to wait for a little caesars hot n ready, and you feel so dirty and ashamed, because you were only eating it because it was supposed to be fast...