Also, changes in hit rates due to their vet increase are hard to convince.
The hit rates of few infantry, consisting of 6 men squad sized, according to vet increase are as follows.
unit / cost / reinforcement | 0 vet | 1 vet | 2 vet | 3 vet |
Paratroopers / 380 / 28 | 100.00 % | 71.00 % | ||
Conscripts / 240 / 20 | 108.70 % | 100.00 % | 70.70 % | |
Guard Rifle / 360 / 27 | 97.00 % | 85.36 % | 64.02 % | |
Shock Troops / 390 / 31 | 100.00 %(armor1.5) | 83.00% |
These results are summarized as follows:
1. Considering paratrooper characteristics in 3cp, the paratrooper's hit rates spec is almost equal to the conscript after 1vet. However, considering the hit rates are almost the same, it is overwhelmingly inefficient in terms of reinforcement speed and cost.
2. Hit rates are much higher than Guard Rifle. In this case, it is difficult to say that the reinforcement cost, hit rates and versatility have a clear advantage over the 2 cp unit Guard Rifle.
3. Hit rates are much higher compared to Shock Troops (* armor value is 1.5, so hit rates calculated above must be multiplied by 0.67). This means that you are forced to do more damage by getting closer to your opponent.
With this in mind, the hit rates of Paratroopers are sometimes difficult to understand. That's why high-rankers rarely choose paratroopers instead of m2hb paradrops. (One reason is that an officer is reluctant to increase the squad size anymore).
Paratroopers generally think that they are quite a part of an elite unit, considering the cost (380 manpower) and the time of appearance (3 cp). But I think that these inefficient hit rates are one of the factors that make Paratroopers not worth the price. What do you think about this?