I am all for simulating a ground war, even if in a rudimentary fashion for now. This isn't specifically a ground war simulator, but it must be admitted that the necessity of having paratroops (read: ground troops) storm the map room for base capture is at least a step in that direction. If the sim goes even that far to simulate ground battles, I think it's more than a bit unlikely that the paratroops could take the base without meeting heavy oppostition. It aint a buncha girl scouts keeping the base secure from invasion. Wouldn't a couple platoons of soldiers storm out the barracks and kill anyone who dares step foot in their base? Yes, they would. But since it is not a ground war sim, and realistic ground engagments aren't part of the picture, I think its an equitable compromise to conclude that bases shouldn't be able to be taken unless the barracks are down.
I propose that in order for a base to be captured, the defensive possibilites of the base must be destroyed. This includes AAA and FLAK (as yet to be implemented) for the airborne threat, and the Barracks for the paratrooper/ground threat. If the barracks are up when paratroops are released, they should be mowed down mercilessly. In my opinion, the fact that the airborne base defenders have to launch their own paratroops to counter the enemy is a redundant and unnecessary step. It should be no problem at all for HiTech and crew to code in a fix whereby the barracks must be destroyed before base capture is a persuasive possibility.
------------------
Swoosh of the Skeleton Crew
