Paratroopers are way better than Rangers.

Rangers suck for 350mp. Paras are fine.
Give them camo/ambush or some added utility. Maybe include an option to turn them into a better sort of pathfinder unit, very good at long range combat/camo ability (USF legit sniper counter scoped garands?).
Rangers really add nothing over Riflemen play style, its extremely similar...just "better", Paras can be quite dissimilar to rifles and elite units should not just be about having a "better" unit but one that opens up different play styles and tactics.

How can people complain that adding versatility to Rangers would be too much when you look at the 8 million things you can do with falls, obers, jaegers, pgrens, etc.

Rangers suck for 350mp. Paras are fine.
Give them camo/ambush or some added utility. Maybe include an option to turn them into a better sort of pathfinder unit, very good at long range combat/camo ability (USF legit sniper counter scoped garands?).
Rangers really add nothing over Riflemen play style, its extremely similar...just "better", Paras can be quite dissimilar to rifles and elite units should not just be about having a "better" unit but one that opens up different play styles and tactics.

How can people complain that adding versatility to Rangers would be too much when you look at the 8 million things you can do with falls, obers, jaegers, pgrens, etc.

"Look at all the things those 4 man, no weapon rack access squads can do! Why can't my 5 man, 3 slot, cooked frag, tiny target size squad do those things!?!!? "

"Look at all the things those 4 man, no weapon rack access squads can do! Why can't my 5 man, 3 slot, cooked frag, tiny target size squad do those things!?!!? "

falls: camo, airdrop, bundlenade, smoke, faust, field upgradeable weapon slot with no need for tech, etc,
Obers: ability to upgrade for either long range or short range combat, bundle nade, smoke, booby trap, etc.
Pgrens: viable vanilla, can be upgraded with G34s, be used as powerful AT unit, camo, bundle nade, satchel, reps, etc.
Jaegers: camo, long range combat/ crit sniping, infiltration nades, long sight, etc.
Fusis: G43, flares, long sight, nade, snare, etc.


Rangers are basically: you put Thompsons on them, you run them into CC, that's it. It's quite similar to how Rifles are used most of the time. 3xBAR is pointless, Zook Rangers are pretty pointless. The Ranger nade is quite anemic. All those German elite units get useful utility or ability to change/enhance tactics.

Don't the paratroopers have worst received accuracy compare to rangers?

Zook Rangers are pretty pointless

They most definitely are not.

Yeah give a 5man squad with smgs sprint with their awesome grenade. Amazing idea.

Or even better give them smoke so MGs are useless and they close the distance easily.

Have you heard about Assault Grenadiers?

Have you heard about Assault Grenadiers?

Imagine unironically comparing Rangers and Assgrens.

Imagine using your brain and use them as flanking unit.
But no USF gotta blob.

Imagine unironically comparing Rangers and Assgrens.

I know right, one unit sees play and the other has a 90 ammo thompson upgrade.

I know right, one unit sees play and the other has a 90 ammo thompson upgrade.

This is CODGUY levels of delusional.

falls: camo, airdrop, bundlenade, smoke, faust, field upgradeable weapon slot with no need for tech, etc,
Obers: ability to upgrade for either long range or short range combat, bundle nade, smoke, booby trap, etc.
Pgrens: viable vanilla, can be upgraded with G34s, be used as powerful AT unit, camo, bundle nade, satchel, reps, etc.
Jaegers: camo, long range combat/ crit sniping, infiltration nades, long sight, etc.
Fusis: G43, flares, long sight, nade, snare, etc.


Rangers are basically: you put Thompsons on them, you run them into CC, that's it. It's quite similar to how Rifles are used most of the time. 3xBAR is pointless, Zook Rangers are pretty pointless. The Ranger nade is quite anemic. All those German elite units get useful utility or ability to change/enhance tactics.

All those German units also carry more risk. What happens if one of the MANY high aoe AI units knocks out 4 ranger models? They run home. What if a one knocks out 4 fall/ober models? A massive loss.
Rangers are rifles on steroids. ie the best mainline infantry in the game on steroids. It ain't flashy but you get exactly what you pay for. They are bigger and better. Harder to hit and hit harder.
I agree their vet is pretty underwhelming since it's a copy and paste of Para vet (but with better base stats, granted 1 less man) perhaps a bonus in enemy territory (rangers lead the way!) would be a suitable vet 1 bonus.

The 3 weapon slots is amazing, and still having one after the Thomson upgrade as good as it is even more so. Just because they have 3 slots doesn't mean you need to fill all 3 with BARs,having a squad that can eat infantry and still scavange/deny a weapon to the enemy is an amazing thing.
Also iirc rangers have elite zooks, so 3 zooks on them have near shrek level damage and pen but still zook level reload and... Well you can have 3 of them.... Not wise in every match up but a nice option to have.

To say rangers are uninspired would be one thing but to pretend they are BAD is another entirely that requires PURPOSEFULLY ignoring thier qualities to skew perception. It's difficult to make a unique and viable elite infantry when your core infantry is semi elite to begin with.

Ranger is raw power. which is why they have smoke & combined arm abilities go with them.

Though I prefer Para, I can do alot of things with them.
- Drop 2 behind the line and wait for hard flanking

- Drop them on Vic point when its safe, or scarify denying Vicpoint cap in late game

- Tactic assault, whip so many thing with this ability when enemy retreat

- Demo that Okw HQ, Ost bunkers

There are times that I drop a single Para with Thompson behind an Ost defensive line with 1Snip, 1Gren, 1MG, 1bunker, 1 mortar. And I destroy the whole thing with 1 Para. Tactic on Gren, Cook on MG, Snip had no chance to retreat, demolition on bunker, the only thing that retreat alive is mortar. (I respect this guy using combined arm though, if it was 3Gren and an MG, there would be no chance to win)

Triple Zook rangers are the strongest AT squad in the game imo

I arrived late but thedarkarmadillo worded my thoughs accurately.

I Get it is weird to have a mainline on steroids instead of a suplementary squad, like all the other docrtrinal squads do. But if only rangers do that, it makes them unique in their way.

Even pfusies trade with volks early for late game potential , falls trade utility for fragility, pgren are the analogue of penals, but without snare.
Obers are AI elitist that resemble grens but for OKW but without snare.

Maybe allow rangers to be available earlier can be a worthy buff?

This is CODGUY levels of delusional.

It's the pure truth and nothing else. Heavy Cavalry was the most picked commander in the WCS 2019, now go and check how many Rangers were built. But wait, I'll spare you the trouble and just say it: 2. Out of 22 picks of the Heavy Cavalry doctrine, only 2 Rangers were built.

It's not so different in the ladder either. Heavy Cavalry is certainly meta and sees the most use but despite that fact, it's been a while since I saw the Rangers last time.

It's the pure truth and nothing else. Heavy Cavalry was the most picked commander in the WCS 2019, now go and check how many Rangers were built. But wait, I'll spare you the trouble and just say it: 2. Out of 22 picks of the Heavy Cavalry doctrine, only 2 Rangers were built.

It's not so different in the ladder either. Heavy Cavalry is certainly meta and sees the most use but despite that fact, it's been a while since I saw the Rangers last time.

You think it's because rangers are bad? when they can 1v1 obersoldaten with thompsons? Or because USF is forced into multiple rifles, gets forced to use free officers and then doesn't want a 6th and 7th infantry squad?

Not trying to be rude, but there's more factors in play than just "rangers not strong enough therefore not picked"

It's the pure truth and nothing else. Heavy Cavalry was the most picked commander in the WCS 2019, now go and check how many Rangers were built. But wait, I'll spare you the trouble and just say it: 2. Out of 22 picks of the Heavy Cavalry doctrine, only 2 Rangers were built.

It's not so different in the ladder either. Heavy Cavalry is certainly meta and sees the most use but despite that fact, it's been a while since I saw the Rangers last time.

That is a 1v1 tournament with a very small sample size. Which ladder are you talking, are you speaking for all 4 modes?

3 zook rangers are incredibly strong. That's the most damage any AT squad in the game can inflict with their weapons in 1 "burst" and they are one of the more durable squads in the game
____

I dont see them as this "upgunned rifle squad" ppl are talking about, they are strong in their own way. I usually get them just for the zooks, maybe a 2nd squad for thompsons depending on the map

I dont really see them as lacking a unique ability. 3rd weapon slot on a faction with weapon racks is good enough for me. Especially with the elite zook feature tossed in on top

You think it's because rangers are bad? when they can 1v1 obersoldaten with thompsons? Or because USF is forced into multiple rifles, gets forced to use free officers and then doesn't want a 6th and 7th infantry squad?

Not trying to be rude, but there's more factors in play than just "rangers not strong enough therefore not picked"

That's right, USF doesn't need extra infantry squads unless their Rifles/Officers are wiped. But that doesn't mean that we should completely ignore the WCS 2019 stats. For example, Recon Support in WCS 2019 was selected 5 times and out of these 5, Airborne squads were used 4 times. Now, I know that there's a big difference between paras and Rangers but don't you think that there's some issue when an elite squad in a doctrine is used %9 of the time whereas, in the same tournament, for the same faction, another elite squad is used %80 of the time?

There's no point in comparing squads in a 1v1 basis. Obersoldaten squads can stay behind heavy cover, fire from long range and don't need to risk themselves unlike Ranger squads who needs to close in and deal with MGs and Tanks that are waiting for them. In a real match where Rangers and Obersoldaten needs to fight each other, Rangers are already at a disadvantage because they don't know what expects them in FoW. Obersoldaten has no such problem. Therefore it's not a fair comparison.

That is a 1v1 tournament with a very small sample size. Which ladder are you talking, are you speaking for all 4 modes?

3 zook rangers are incredibly strong. That's the most damage any AT squad in the game can inflict with their weapons in 1 "burst" and they are one of the more durable squads in the game
____

I dont see them as this "upgunned rifle squad" ppl are talking about, they are strong in their own way. I usually get them just for the zooks, maybe a 2nd squad for thompsons depending on the map

I dont really see them as lacking a unique ability. 3rd weapon slot on a faction with weapon racks is good enough for me. Especially with the elite zook feature tossed in on top

I was talking about 1v1.

Yes, I think they're strong too. As they are supposed to be, there's no reason for a 350MP, 3CP, 150 munitions investment that requires weapon tech to not be strong. 3 zook rangers aren't my problem, they're fine IMO. My problem is with Thompson rangers, who needs to close in to deal damage and have many problems because of that ever since they lost their damage reduction. Even you said that you get them for zooks and only sometimes for thompsons. They're simply not good enough AI squad, even with a huge investment like 3x BARs. That's why I wish they have something like smoke grenade or sprint to help them to close in distances and become a powerful AI unit when upgraded as such. Sprint/Smoke nade can be locked behind the Thompson upgrade, too.

Thompson weapon profile doesn't NEED to close in. They are good out to mid range. They do better up close for sure but depending on the scenario they can pick. I can't believe people are actually whining about relative positions and once upgrading a unit to SUB MACHINE GUNS that they are better up close that at range... Mwhats next? When I upgrade my squads with AT their AI isn't as good so relic please change the game so none of my choices can be bad in any given scenario"? Jesus fuck.

My problem is with Thompson rangers, who needs to close in to deal damage and have many problems because of that ever since they lost their damage reduction. Even you said that you get them for zooks and only sometimes for thompsons.

Like every CQC squad in the game, they excel moreso on some maps than others. Wide open maps they are less useful, maps with lots of LoS blockers they become much stronger. Ambush/flank, you dont need stealth to do it

But tommy rangers are decent in the midrange too, they are not ONLY good at close range