Sorry, I just don't buy the argument that the historically impossible use of paratroopers in this game should be allowed to continue simply because there are counters to it. It is like saying "It is OK that the paratroopers have plamsa rifles because you can counter them with your laser tanks." You should not have to garrison every city within 8 hexes of every paratrooper with a division for the simple reason that paratroopers could not drop into a major urban area, not could they drop into mountains, nor could they drop in anything less than 2 months (4 game turns) from a previous drop. As well in every large scale paradrop that was made in WWII (even into clear terrain) the dropping units were very disorganized. But in this game they drop with the same effectiveness (at least 100%) that they started with. I don't mind the use of paratroopers in a game in a non-historical manner, so long as it was historically possible. If the Axis want to build them in massive numbers and use them in Barbarossa that is fine with me. But I do object to the historically impossible use of them. I note as well that restricting paratroopers to there realistic abilities does not favour either the Allies or the Axis. So I repeat my opinion that paratroopers should be limited to dropping in historically realistic terrain and should suffer some loss of effectiveness in doing so. Now if someone wants to debate with me that the game does in fact realistically model the abilities and performance of paratroopers in WWII than please do so. But please do not respond by simply telling me that it doesn't matter if the game does this or not because there is a counter to it. To me it does matter.
As an aside, I will say that I think by and large this game does a much better job than most that I have played in simulating WWII on a strategic level. Well done Alvaro.
Firstly, the urban hexes is in my perspective not all urban, but urban area is a part of the hex. There for paradrops should be possible in them. We should also remember that there where para-commanders that rather wished to be dropped right over Arnhem rather then being dropped so far outside the city. They where ready to take the losses when being dropped, rather then being grinded down to bare bones trying to reach Arnhem. So why should drops over urban areas not be allowed?
But, I do see problems with paratroopers having to much organization when they have landed (the organization loss could be different by randomization and taking enemy air and AA capabilities in the vicinity into account - as IRL some landings went way better then others) and they should only be able to move the turn after being dropped. I have no problems if they have more OP/MP than regular infantry when being behind enemy lines, because they where meant to operate behind enemy lines. But I do not like that they can be moved after being dropped.
So why should they not be able to move after being dropped? It is very simple for me, this is a turn based game. In such games the passive player has no chance to react to surprising maneuvers as paradrops are. If a paradrop is performed they really should not be able to advance in the same turn, to give the opponent a chance of reacting. That would give som realism to it. In Operation Market Garden the resolut reaction from Student and other german commanders where a big factor that the allied operation failed. In this game you can paradrop 8 hexes away and then wreck havoc beyond that. That is just to much.
The paradrops can still be a pain in the ass and mess up the opponents defensive lines even if they can not be moved after being dropped.