Paratroopers and their Boxes

Paratroopers and Their Boxes

This suggestion is split into two parts:
Part 1 covers changes needed for Paratroopers themselves, and
Part 2 will cover changes to the Paratrooper Equipment Boxes.

Let’s dive right in.


Part 1: The Paratroopers

Paratroopers currently suffer from four major problems:
.

1. They’re not in the tech tree, and therefore not available to everyone

All soldier classes in the game should be accessible through progression in the tech-tree, not locked behind paid bundles or time-limited events. This should be a basic principle, and I hope it’s one everyone can agree with.

Ideas for where in the tech tree they could be unlocked:

Soviets:

  • PPSh-41 (box), then make the weapon upgrades be shared with the assaulters (like how many tech tree vehicle squads share upgrades for vehicles)

USA:

  • M1A1 Carbine, foldered with the M1 Carbine (read issue 4 for context) as a US squad, and
  • Sten Mk V (hopefully added in the future) as a UK squad.

Germany:

  • MP 38 as a German squad, then make the weapon upgrades be shared with the assaulters, and
  • Beretta M1 as a Italian squad, then make the weapon upgrades be shared with the assaulter.

Japan:

  • Type 100 Rifle (foldered with Type 99 Early rifle) or Type 100 SMG (foldable version of regular, also hopefull future weapon).

2. Only the USSR has fully customizable Paratrooper squads

Need I say more? The Soviets currently have two customizable Paratrooper squads, whilst everyone else has none. This should be the standard across all factions, along with subfaction alternative Paratroopers. This is a basic parity issue that needs fixing.

3. Paratroopers should not be dropping with heavy weapons

Short explanation: It’s silly.

Long explanation:

What’s the biggest logistical concern for a WWII paratrooper? Weight.
Paratroopers had to carefully balance their gear—every gram counted. Even full-length rifles were a concern during airborne operations, which is why historically equipment was often dropped separately in supply containers. These supply drops didn’t need to cushion a human landing, just the gear, so they could be packed more heavily.

So why are we seeing entire squads parachuting in with machine guns strapped to their backs? That’s lunacy. All heavy weaponry should be in the Paratrooper Supply Boxes, not in the hands of troops during the drop. For customizable squads, this would mean restricting airborne loadouts to SMGs, rifles, and assault rifles.

There’s one exception: the Japanese Type Hei squad, which currently carries an LMG. Changing this squad’s weapon outright wouldn’t be fair to those who purchased it, neither would be reclasifying the squad from Paratroopers to MG. The best compromise is to reclassify the Type Hei LMG to a semi-auto rifle, like the tech tree version, to preserve its use in airborne squads under these new limitations (important in part 2 of the suggestion).

4. Some event Paratrooper weapons should be added to the tech tree

Let me explain:

Several of the Paratrooper weapons currently locked behind events or paid squads deserve to be part of the standard progression system:

  • FG 42 with grenade launcher (Schießbecher)
    It’s just the regular FG 42 with a mounted grenade launcher—the exact same launcher issued widely to German infantry. If the FG 42 is in the tech tree, so too should this version be. If alternatives for other factions can’t be found (though I can already think of M2 Carbine with nades for the US), well that’s alright, it’s okay for factions to be unique. And if you’re worried about it being a straight upgrade, just give the regular FGs their long-requested bayonets that it already should have, but nades aren’t that good anymore lets be honest especially less useful when your weapon fires in fully automatic.
  • Vickers No.2 Mk.1
    (Name’s wrong in-game, but I’ll save that for another thread.)
    This British LMG should absolutely be a tech-tree counterpart to the BR 5 M1919A6, much like how the MG 42 100 complements the German tree. The Vickers K fills a missing role for the UK/Commonwealth factions and doesn’t overpower anything—it’s needed.
  • M1A1 Carbine
    With over 150,000 produced, this was one of the most common airborne weapons in the U.S. arsenal. It’s functionally identical to the M1 Carbine, just with a folding stock. This is a no-brainer tech-tree addition—simply fold it in (no pun intended) under the M1 as an alternate unlock.
  • Type 100 Rifle
    Despite low production numbers, Japan is filled with rare and low-volume prototypes already. The Type 100 Rifle is essentially just a converted Type 99 with worse stats—there’s no reason not to include it. This would allow players to roleplay airborne-themed squads outside of the dedicated Paratrooper class, which adds depth and flavor.

If these weapons are moved to the tech tree, the event squads they currently belong to could either:

  • be added to the tree themselves, or
  • simply remain unique collector’s squads (and in the silver chests) without exclusive equipment.

In summary:

  • Fix issues 1–3 to make Paratroopers fair, consistent, and more historically grounded.
  • Move the weapons listed under issue 4 into the tech tree, where they belong.

Let’s finally give the Paratroopers the love they deserve.


Part 2: The Paratrooper Boxes

The recent changes to how Paratrooper Boxes work are a fantastic quality-of-life improvement, shifting from broad the old low/high-BR only boxes to more BR-specific boxes was a step in the right direction.

However, the ideal system would be fully customizable boxes. I hope this is already on the radar and will be implemented in the near future. Until then, I’d like to offer two suggestions to further improve the current system, one tied directly to the paratrooper changes I outlined above, and the other more general in nature:

  • Replace all SMGs in the boxes with Machine Guns (Suggestion-specific)

As mentioned in Part 1, no heavy weapons should be dropped directly with the paratroopers. If paratroopers are equipped with rifles and SMGs, there’s no reason for the boxes to contain more of the same. Instead, assault loadout should only carry MGs (and possibly be renamed to something more appropriate, I wouldn’t call a MG loadout “assault”). This both to the historical authenticity of the game and creates more tactical depth in what box loadout you pick up or if you decide that it’s not nessesary.

  • Improve gear authenticity — less subfaction borrowing and no captured weapons (General Suggestion)

Being forced to take ahistorical or faction-inappropriate weapons is a frustrating experience. It’s fine to offer the option of mixed or captured gear (rather the beauty of the current squad system), but that’s not the case currently for the boxes. Players who want to build historically accurate squads should be able to do so, and paratrooper boxes should not disrupt that right out of the window. The boxes should reflect faction identity, gear from your nation/subfaction, not someone else’s prototypes or captured gear.

Bonus if this is implemented: The more people get annoyed by “unbalanced weapons” in their boxes, the more they’ll advocate for fully customizable drops, which only helps push the bigger idea forward!

Specific Box Adjustments
  • Pre-war Kar98k to replace Gewehr 98 for Germany BR I–II (same BR, lighter weapon, more appropriate in boxes and more accurate for Paratroopers).
  • Sniper FG 42 II to replace Sniper STG 44 for Germany BR IV–V (FGs were historically airborne weapons, they deserve to be in their boxes; I understand the Sniper variant will clash with the normal FGs ammo pools but that can be fixed, such as by boost paratroopers ammo pools for their primary weapons, Sniper loadout is the least used and least useful option anyway so even a partial fix such as this will be more than enough).
  • Panzerfaust 60 to replace Ofenrohr for Germany and Italy at BR III–IV (lighter and more appropriate for paratrooper drops, a BR lower than the Ofenrohr but still in the BR III range).
  • Breda Mod. 30 to replace ZB-26 for Italy BR I–II (standard Italian LMG is more appropriate than the ZB-26, same BR).
  • Sniper M1 Garand to replace No. 4 Mk I (T) for US BR II–III (No. 4 should be UK-only; M1 fits better for the US).
  • M1C Garand to replace Sniper M1 Garand for US BR III–IV (smooth progression after the above change; slightly stronger and a justifiable buff).
  • M9 Bazooka to replace Ofenrohr for US and UK at BR III–IV and IV–V (the Ofenrohr is captured gear, M9 was widely used and is more thematic because “home made”).
  • No. 4 Mk I (T) to replace M1/M1C Garands for UK BR III–IV and IV–V (bolt-actions snipers are a sidegrade to automatic snipers so I don’t see this as a nerf, and also more historically appropriate).
  • PIAT to replace M9 Bazooka for UK BR II–III (a BR lower, but in the BR II range and is historically accurate, even if they also widely used M9s).
  • Te-4 to replace Type 100 MG for Japan BR IV–V (lighter and more suited to box deployment; BR IV but still fits the BR IV-V matches).

Naturally, as more weapons are added to the game these box selections should evolve to reflect better fits, e.g. a sniper rifle for BR I or MGs for BR III and up for the UK.


That’s all from me for now. What do you think of these proposed adjustments? Did I miss any obvious candidates for consideration?

Would you accept these box improvements as-is, or are there parts you’d tweak?

I’m also happy to announce that I’ll be releasing a series of British weapon and vehicle suggestions soon(ish), including posts on rifles, SMGs, MGs, mortars & AT weapons, tanks, and aircraft.

Until then, Commanders — thanks for reading, and I’ll see you on the battlefield!

6 Likes

I disagree on so many points lol

But para in TT is a good idea, but dont mix it with nagging about the dumb bayonet

Pick the important battles

1 Like

Like that was important part of the suggestion. :laughing:

What exactly don’t you agree with? I don’t mind specifics, in fact I preffer them!

A alternative for this specific suggestion above has been delivered to me by kind @Conscript_Joe in private (to avoid a flame war over a minor difference of opinion, thanks for that btw), here is the alternative to messing around with the British and Japanese LMG paras:


While still supporting standardizing tech-tree paras to rifles and SMGs only, there’s merit in a more nuanced approach:

As a special exception, let event and premium squads keep their MGs as is as part of their identity. Many premium/event squads already break the mold with oversized classes (like 5 MG gunners or 4 flamethrowers in one squad), so this wouldn’t be out of place.

This keeps new players from being locked out of the class entirely and ensures fair customization for all, while still honoring the exclusivity and historical flair of older squads.

The Vickers K, for example, should still move to the tech tree, or more specificly a alternate version of it (original keeping spiderweb sights, tech tree version with a different set of sights), similar to how the premium PPSH-41 Parkerized exists alongside standard one, no gameplay advantage, just a cosmetic variation.


This is a fine compromise. Yes, it’s still wholy unrealistic (you couldn’t drop with heavy weaponry in WW2, or even today), but for the sake of pushing everything else through this is a acceptable point of compromise (I’ll just have to live with my disgust whilst looking at them in game).

2 Likes

It’s true, but:
giphy (20)

Who doesn’t like to dive with overpowered equipment to administer freedom upon the unsuspecting masses?

(If only paras didn’t fall soooo slooooooowly nowadays)

Ohohoh

If it were Post Scriptum or HLL or something a bit more realistic, yes I’d be against it 100% too.
But ppl just want their fun I believe :slight_smile:

1 Like

Part 1:

1: Sure


2: Absolutely. But there are several unique weapons that would have to be available to make them unequippable. I know you mentioned some for the tech tree. But the rest would have to be converted into Gold order items (not available in veterans boxs…this is just to make them unequippable)

  • Beretta M38 with Bayonet (honeslty this could just replace TT one)
  • OG-43
  • M1A1 Carbine
  • Welgun
  • Krieghoff
  • FG-42 grenade launcher
  • Vickers
  • Thompson 100
  • Type Hei LMG
  • Type 100 Rifle

On top of that, USSR would need to be given 2x Slightly different unique weapons (6 of each) as compensation since their paratroopers dont have one.

NOTE: Personally I think ALL premium squads should have interchangable weapons…I bought the squad/weapons…where I use them should be up to me


3: While I do agree on the principle, ignoring weight fits the arcade theme atm…with the speed paras drop atm…I find boxes rather useless and tend to spawn my paras on the ground, Or get away from my box as fast as possible lol…


4: Sure


Part 2:

Ill just say I have wanted fully customizable boxes from the get go. I wont worry about commenting on the rest because it would be moot if we get custom boxes. And thats all I want :slight_smile:

2 Likes

I always envy the time and effort put into your posts. Makes me feel like a toddler making my requests. Sadly, I think these essays are too far above the devs paygrade. Anyway.

I mostly agree with this suggestion, however there are a few things that I wouldn’t change:

  • ZB 26 for Italians: they used them (more so the ZB vz. 33, but it’s still a 26 essentially), and because it would fit the role better for what paratroopers are, which are close range strike troopers. The Breda is a great MG, just not a good attack weapon.

  • M9 Bazooka (UK): Everyone used bazookas, and it would fit the role better. While it is bulkier than the PIAT, it shoots on a much flatter trajectory, which is better for closer range engagements.

Just to rant, I don’t understand why FG 42s were strictly paratrooper weapons in the game. The Allies had their M2 Carbine, and the Germans had their STGs. It would’ve been so much better and realistic had it been done that way.

1 Like

Small suggestion: don’t write such giant posts with dozens of changes.
You will be sure to trigger everyone with at least one of your suggestions, which leads to a potentially good post being ignored.

For example -

This is not an issue. The Soviets got their paratroopers years after everyone else, and without unique weapons either. You suggest adding TT paras, and if you want to give them customizable loadouts thats fine. But changing existing squads (especially premium and event gear) is both hard and frowned upon. I, for one, am against changing existing and rare squads.

Honestly seems like an unnecessary waste of time. It’s weight will stay the same. Just why lol

Literally asking for germany to be better than everyone else

No. Event weapons should stay out of the TT. That’s the whole point. Adding event squads to the TT is even more absurd.

Good idea. Especially since TT paras would be able to take SMGs… but not MGs lol. So you would have 2 SMGs from the boxes making them useless.

Frankly just Axis buffs and Allies nerfs (while PZF 60 can deal with all allied armour, M9 and PIAT are just frankly trash).

So obviously, while you do have a couple of good suggestions, you just blotted them out with dozens of others, and so unfortunately make it hard for anyone to support you :c

1 Like

One I piece of advice recieve a lot. I do understand it, and mostly agree with it, however I got two problems.

I don’t want to flood the forum with seperate suggestions, this is frowned upon by moderators, and I understand their wishes and conform to them.

Secondly, well I would not respect myself if I didn’t say my piece fully, I don’t want to be held back. I’d rather write a post that I’m proud of than write a post that’ll ruffle the least ammount of feathers (which is a impossibility on the internet either way). I want to write the best to my abilities, dropping a imagie, a short couple of sentences and a link as a source… well that style of writing sure is more understandable but it’s not for me…


I mean, yes it is, everyone should have access to customizable paratroopers. That the Soviets get to have this privilege is an issue, one that I would seek to rectify. Do the Soviets have less unique weapons because of this? Yes. Should they recieve some as compensation? Perhaps, it’s not the point of my post though. If you got ideas for weapon ideas as a follow up I’d be happy to promote that post.


Yeah you’re probably right :laughing:. I was at a loss for what to do, making changes to a premium squad is never easy because people paid actual money for them, I don’t want to cheat people of their purchases. So in my desperation to come up with something I didn’t see at the time that the only change I considered was a rebranding on the weapon class, which does nothing to address my original concern of “weapon is to heavy to be dropped with”.

The basic idea (outside of paratrooper realism) is though that since I also want the boxes to only carry machine guns, having one already equiped would be a little superfluous (and silly), and that removing sprind speed debuffs might be nice when you got another MG as a backup.


No, I was not, surely you read the explenation? Other countries should recieve similar items in the future, such as M2 carbine with grenades. Also, the recently nerfed rifle grenades are not that useful in BR 5, when everyone and their momma carries automatic weapons.

Though I grant, can’t find semi-automatic or SF rifles with grenade launching capabilities for the Soviets, and I doubt Japan has that either (except paper guns). But you know, that’s fine, fully-automatic rifles with grenades in the TT can stay a Germany/US exlusive, I don’t want or ever expect Japan to get Assault Rifles, it’s okay for factions to be unique.


You do realize that the concept of a “Event Weapon” is made up, and can be unmade as well? Some weapons are needed in the tech-tree to fully complement factions and subfactions and to fully represent each branch of the military. Why the hell give us access to paratrooper cosmetics on regular squads if we can’t get access to paratrooper weaponry?

The game is hurting itself by arbitrarely making some weapons (and vehicles, but that’s not the point of this post) rarer than others. Prototypes or paper guns get put in the tech tree every update, but real adopted and widely used weaponry gets put as limited-time event stuff or even premiums. Why should the Soviets get the Urgan in the tech tree but the Vickers K is a event drop? The US gets the M1C but the UK has to have their only BR 1 option for a sniper rifle be made into a premium (P14 sniper was a common weapon even in WW2)? It’s arbitrary, dumb, just hurts the game and needs to be called out more.

The squads being moved was just an idea, not the main suggestion, don’t get yourself worked up on that, that’s why I offered an alternative right next to it.

Also, please read a alternative route to acomblish this posted later, at the suggestion of @Conscript_Joe (in full above):

So there is precedence for doing this, I though “just moving them” was simpler, but we could provide slightly different versions for these weapons either in the tech tree or to replace the ones weilded by the paratroopers, such as a tech-tree Vickers K with different sights, or the paratrooper M1A1 a paint job (and tech tree version is just bland normal version).


I’m a Allies main at heart (UK/Commonwealth specificly), and I don’t see this as a nerf. Consider, the M9 is more accurate, easier to aim and has more range, even compared to the Pzf 100, which Axis/Soviets make up for with raw penetration potential. Also consider that if you’re facing a tank head on from the front as a paratrooper you have done something wrong, M9s are more than enough for flanking drops even at great ranges.

The PIAT is highly underrated though as well, but I only asked for it to be in boxes that fight at BR II, which would still make them fair because BR II already fights BR III, no unreasonable nerf here. M9s the rest of the way for sure (which is what I said)

theoretically I nerfed the Axis too, but you didn’t comment on that, I asked to remove the Ofenrohr from them as well (no idea what to do with Japan until they recieve something else, other than to continue playing only Br I-III games). The Ofenrohr is a amazing paratrooper AT weapon, but they sholdn’t have it, too bulky, panzerfausts just make more sense to be air dropped en-masse.

Also, you perfectly demonstrated what this system was also trying to do!


1 Like

Just save yourself a headache and ignore that guy… he’s commieboo through and through and focus solely on what concerns his favoured faction and it’s opponents while ignoring the main reasons of your thread.

1 Like

Thank you, I know these long post mostly go unappreciated by the community, but it’s people like you who actualy take the time to read them that I hope to hear from! Your words bring warmth to this chilly Scandinavians heart.

You know, I see people mentioning this but I’ve yet to find a source that confirms it, only that the military officially tested the weapon, nothing about the adoption or even a name for the weapon in Italian service. However, they should definetly have the option to in the future in a customizable box, but for now the Breda is just definetly more common in use by the paratroopers as well so deserves the place more.

I was only asking for the PIAT in BR II-III games as well, not a complete replacement, BR III-IV and IV-V would have M9s!

1 Like

Dear lord? Sounds awful! He took the time to read though, even if I think he missed a few spots or minor points, everyone deserves a chance to be taken seriously.

Of course!

But, you were warned! :smile:

1 Like

That’s why we need 3.45 in RCL Mk I recoilless rifle
British soldier with a 3.45 in RCL Mk I recoilless rifle, circa 1940s ww2dbase enlisted

Wow…
While I still can’t say I agree with you on everything, I do appreciate the effort. Nice to see people care about one of my favourite games, work constructively and create a nice environment here on the forum.

Eh, pretty much. It basically all comes down to how CMs decide to foward your suggestion. Of course, it makes sense personally to compile everything for easy access but I have seen some feedback on large suggestions from moderators and the like to concentrate on one suggestion per post. Anyway, matter of preference.

Well, you have to look at this from the point of view of Enlisted… All of these suggestions are logical on paper, but you are dealing with a tiny development team and a community that in many cases hates losing “unique” content. Again, I wouldn’t mind having customizabe paras in the TT (only logical since TT squads have customization) but changing existing and pretty much unobtainable content would seem like a waste of time.

Just think about it - the devs will have to face the problem of making all para squads customizable, implying problems with the “unique” weapons that were only made to be used by one squad. Players that have these squads lose “uniqueness”, and finally if you are adding customizable squads to every TT anyway… why change premium and event squads that not everyone can get ?

Exactly :man_shrugging:

I actually liked the example with changing the sights on the Vickers when I first read your post. It’s a pretty good idea (as long as we are adding gear that will have some real purpose, not just re-skins of existing weapons). I can even give you an example of this off the top of my head - the AS-44 was added first as a premium, then to the TT. Not saying it was the correct thing to do, just saying it is possible.

Another one in the common effort to finally free Italy and the UK?))

The point really was, after the M1 bazooka penetration buff, the only real difference was that the PIAT ended up with worse ballistics. I also use it, but frankly its a bit harder to get used to.

As for the Ofenrohr to M9/Pzf 60- as far as I can see, you suggest Germany only gets a nerf on BR III-IV

But for the M9 to replace the Ofenrohr both BR III–IV and IV–V.

Which seems like a bit biased to me. Allies get a BR3 weapon, Axis get a BR4.

Addittionaly, if you are against paras getting the Ofenrohr but still suggest giving it to the Axis… why not just give them Pzf 100s on IV–V if you want the German AT loudouts to have gear that is one BR higher than the Allies in IV–V games. At least that’s the way I interpreted your suggestion.
:man_shrugging:

Anyway, great suggestion. Paras should be added to TTs, and your way is certainly a valid one.

1 Like

I’m not trying to be biased, I hope you understand. Until we get faction appropriate AT gear, the Ofenrohr was a lazy solution (or at best a placeholder) and I’d accept the at least home-grown (and prototype) M20 Bazooka over captured gear in the tech-tree. I really just detest holding those things in game when I’m not playing as the Germans, I’ve refused to use them outside of Germany for this reason.

If people think Panzerfaust 100s are unfair? Very arguably so, so they become another reason to actually add something appropriate instead. Harsh? Yep… I just want to pull the band-aid off…


See Lord @Conscript_Joe, he can be reasonable.
image
:laughing:

images (45)

1 Like

Hehe they dont hate losing it, they just hate sharing it.

1 Like