[USF] Thompson paratroopers
Posts: 1660
It also gave the airborne a lot of versatility, which was the main idea behind usf, and i can't really see why it needed to be cut off for fancy boosted zook, in a faction that gets 2 long range upgrades for mainline and a recon/long range unit with long range upgrades...
What do you think ? Do you miss old thompson para ? Should recon para have thompsons as possible cqb upgrade ?
Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Posts: 1660
paras have the smg. support paras do not.
And that's the issue...
They had it.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
And that's the issue...
They had it.
You are not very clear on what company you are referring. Recon support company that no longer has smg paras does not have Pathfinders. They have I&R pathfinders.
Both Pathfinders and Paras has been revised.
Posts: 3260
And that's the issue...
They had it.
Didn't they drop in with random gear before?
Posts: 1660
You are not very clear on what company you are referring. Recon support company that no longer has smg paras does not have Pathfinders. They have I&R pathfinders.
Both Pathfinders and Paras has been revised.
Well now you know..
Posts: 747 | Subs: 2
Somebody knows why smg paratrooper has been removed ? It could have been the best complementary unit for new pathfinders.
It also gave the airborne a lot of versatility, which was the main idea behind usf, and i can't really see why it needed to be cut off for fancy boosted zook, in a faction that gets 2 long range upgrades for mainline and a recon/long range unit with long range upgrades...
What do you think ? Do you miss old thompson para ? Should recon para have thompsons as possible cqb upgrade ?
Paras from airborne are still the same.
Posts: 550 | Subs: 1
And that's the issue...
They had it.
The current implementation by far superior to what it used to be. It used to be that you got 2 paras with a random chance (you didn't have a choice of weapon). The chance to get a thompson squad was 25%, a lmg squad 25% and a zook squad 50%.
The two anti infantry weapon equipments were inferior versions of the normal paras. You only got 1 lmg instead of 2 or 3 thompsons instead of 4.
I don't see a problem with losing the ability to get thompsons as a trade-off to be able to actually have a choice instead of praying to RNGuses that he does not grant me 2 zook squads. The zook squads are also better than they used to be.
Posts: 766 | Subs: 2
Paras from airborne are still the same. Recon paras never had access to Thompsons. Of course you'd know... if you had played USF.
Old recon paras did have a chance for Thompsons however, it was not the fact that their equipment was randomized it was the fact that the ability was so damn expensive.
Posts: 1660
Old recon paras did have a chance for Thompsons however, it was not the fact that their equipment was randomized it was the fact that the ability was so damn expensive.
And that's a whole mess, a doctrine with a long range fighting unit get a specialized long range upgrade for para and no chance to specialize any elite on cqb.
Posts: 747 | Subs: 2
Old recon paras did have a chance for Thompsons however, it was not the fact that their equipment was randomized it was the fact that the ability was so damn expensive.
That's funny cause I never got any with Thompsons. However I used that ability only about 2-5 times and made sure not to use it ever again.
Posts: 1660
The current implementation by far superior to what it used to be. It used to be that you got 2 paras with a random chance (you didn't have a choice of weapon). The chance to get a thompson squad was 25%, a lmg squad 25% and a zook squad 50%.
I do not doubt it indeed my friend, it's not about being better as implementation regarding upgrades, but more about being unable to specialize (for no apparent reason) your elite in cqb role.
The two anti infantry weapon equipments were inferior versions of the normal paras. You only got 1 lmg instead of 2 or 3 thompsons instead of 4.
I also remember upgrading such 3 smg para with 2 bar
But yes, like i said, it's about denying options.
The only reason i can see now is...Airborne company needing to keep something more to not be useless.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
.
The two anti infantry weapon equipments were inferior versions of the normal paras. You only got 1 lmg instead of 2 or 3 thompsons instead of 4.
.
I will have to disagree. The weapons where the exactly the same and come for no MU. They had less of them but I consider that an advantage since they could pick up a bazooka or bar or buy the missing lmg.
They where extremely expensive thou and come too late making the ability meh.
Posts: 550 | Subs: 1
I do not doubt it indeed my friend, it's not about being better as implementation regarding upgrades, but more about being unable to specialize (for no apparent reason) your elite in cqb role.
I also remember upgrading such 3 smg para with 2 bar
But yes, like i said, it's about denying options.
The only reason i can see now is...Airborne company needing to keep something more to not be useless.
I see where you're coming from. I can't think of a good reason to not have them as an upgrade other than making them different from normal paras, which in itself could be enough of a reason.
I will have to disagree. The weapons where the exactly the same and come for no MU. They had less of them but I consider that an advantage since they could pick up a bazooka or bar or buy the missing lmg.
They where extremely expensive thou and come too late making the ability meh.
I know. I probably spent more time with Recon than anyone else when it was still a terrible commander, but it doesn't change the fact that the weapons they had (stock) were inferior. Yes, the thompson squad was able to invest another 120 ammo (2 bars) to make them probably the most devastating close range unit (if you used Tactical Movement)
The lmg squad was not able to buy another lmg, only to pick up one bar (only one weapon slot).
Posts: 1660
I see where you're coming from. I can't think of a good reason to not have them as an upgrade other than making them different from normal paras, which in itself could be enough of a reason.
It would achieve nothing at all unfortunately, we all know airborne quickly fell off the meta and is the next usf doctrine to need a rework anyway to be of any use.
(As a player that used a lot airborne, the only thing that will make those viable is a replacement for team weapons paradrop).
Like i said, para with thompson would perfectly fit a doctrine providing a sniper rifle combat squad.
Posts: 1954
That's funny cause I never got any with Thompsons. However I used that ability only about 2-5 times and made sure not to use it ever again.
Sorry but you're wrong on this one. I used the ability a bunch of times. It could drop with Thompsons, 1919's or bazookas, great for troll games.
Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1
Posts: 732
The real question here is... do Airborne Paratroopers get "Elite" Bazookas if they get them from the weapon racks?
Indeed it is. Someone pls test this :-)
And: If you want Thompsons go use rangers or Airborne. New Recon commander is op as it is with 660 manpower swapping for 350 and 80 muni or something
Livestreams
14 | |||||
6 | |||||
281 | |||||
99 | |||||
5 | |||||
2 | |||||
2 | |||||
1 | |||||
1 | |||||
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1099614.642-1
- 5.280162.633+8
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.271108.715+22
- 9.721440.621+3
- 10.1041674.607-2
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Mclatc16
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM