I'm waiting for it to reach me in Korea, I actually haven't played Civ4 in almost a year. I've seen on some sites that siege weapons and aircraft have changed, but other than the new promotions they don't say how. I wish they'd change back to Civ3 style artillery, but obviously that's not it. :sad:

Siege weapons now have a maximum damage they can inflict before retreating. They can't kill enemy units.

Airships were added at Physics, making naval combat even more of a headache than it had to be.

Siege weapons now have a maximum damage they can inflict before retreating. They can't kill enemy units.

Well that's something. So now you need a few other units in your army besides the artillery. :lol:

Airships were added at Physics, making naval combat even more of a headache than it had to be.

For coastal defense? How do they work? That sounds bizarre.

For coastal defense? How do they work? That sounds bizarre.

They have a max damage limit like siege units, but get a 100% bonus when attacking naval units and can't be shot down until you get destroyers or fighters. If you get an AI like Joao or Williem who beeline physics you can pretty much forget invading anywhere by sea.

They also make building privateers useless as they can generally be sunk by the AI's Carvels (never mind Frigates) after being hit with an airship.

Airships can damage ( but not kill )ships pretty efficiently ( better than to land units ) and until destroyers , no ship has anti-air capabilities.... so you can see the carnage that a frigate time naval stack can suffer from a airship assault + some frigates ( even galleons will do ) to mop up....

Airships ( and cruise missiles... but as much people does not play that era, there are less complaints ) are 2 BtS introduced untis that don't have a immediate counter of any kind.... they can be used in very unbalancing ways.

They have a max damage limit like siege units, but get a 100% bonus when attacking naval units and can't be shot down until you get destroyers or fighters. If you get an AI like Joao or Williem who beeline physics you can pretty much forget invading anywhere by sea.

They also make building privateers useless as they can generally be sunk by the AI's Carvels (never mind Frigates) after being hit with an airship.

Weird. So do they base in a city and conduct missions like a (strategic) bomber? Is there any historical basis for them at all? People didn't think aircraft could sink ships until Pearl Harbor and the slaughter of the HMS Prince of Wales and HMS Repulse in WWII

So do they base in a city and conduct missions like a (strategic) bomber? Is there any historical basis for them at all?

Yes and no. ;)

Yes and no. ;)

About a 5%/95% break?

Update: Maybe about 3%/97%.

First World War

The prospect of airships as bombers had been recognised in Europe well before the airships were up to the task. H. G. Wells The War in the Air (1908) described the obliteration of entire fleets and cities by airship attack. On 5 March 1912, Italian forces became the first to use dirigibles for a military purpose during reconnaissance west of Tripoli behind Turkish lines. It was World War I, however, that marked the airship’s real debut as a weapon.

Albert Caquot designed an Observation Balloon for the French army in 1914. The Type R Observation balloon was used by all the allied forces, including the British and United States Armies, at the end of the World War. In 1919, Japan equipped the Imperial Army with several “Caquot dirigeables”.

The Germans, French and Italians all operated airships in scouting and tactical bombing roles early in the war, and all learned that the airship was too vulnerable for operations over the front. The decision to end operations in direct support of armies was made by all in 1917.[12][13] Count Zeppelin and others in the German military believed they had found the ideal weapon with which to counteract British Naval superiority and strike at Britain itself. More realistic airship advocates believed the Zeppelin was a valuable long range scout/attack craft for naval operations. Raids began by the end of 1914, reached a first peak in 1915, and then were discontinued in August 1918.[14] Zeppelins proved to be terrifying but inaccurate weapons. Navigation, target selection and bomb-aiming proved to be difficult under the best of conditions. The darkness, high altitudes and clouds that were frequently encountered by zeppelin missions reduced accuracy even further. The physical damage done by the zeppelins over the course of the war was trivial, and the deaths that they caused (though visible) amounted to a few hundred at most. The zeppelins were initially immune to attack by aircraft and antiaircraft guns: as the pressure in in their envelopes was only just higher than ambient, holes had little effect. But once incendiary bullets were developed and used against them, their flammable hydrogen lifting gas made them vulnerable at lower altitudes. Several were shot down in flames by British defenders, and others crashed 'en route'. They then started flying higher and higher above the range of other aircraft, but this made their bombing accuracy and success even worse. In retrospect, advocates of the naval scouting role of the airship proved to be correct, and the land bombing campaign proved to be disastrous in terms of morale, men and material. Many pioneers of the German airship service died in what was the first strategic bombing campaign in history. Countermeasures by the British were sound detection, equipment, search lights and anti-aircraft artillery, followed by night fighters in 1915. One method used early in the war when short range meant the airships had to fly from forward bases, and when only Zeppelin production facilities were in Friedrichshafen, was bombing of airship sheds by the British Royal Naval Air Service. Late in the war, the development of the aircraft carrier led to the first successful carrier air strike in history. The morning of 19 July 1918, seven Sopwith 2F.1 Camels were launched from HMS Furious and struck the airship base at Tondern, destroying the Zeppelins L 54 and L 60.[15]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airship#First_World_War

People didn't think aircraft could sink ships until Pearl Harbor and the slaughter of the HMS Prince of Wales and HMS Repulse in WWII

Only a relatively small number of foolish individuals considered battleships to be impervious to fighters.

In July 1921, Brigadier General William Mitchel staged a demonstration where 2 Battleships that were to be scrapped because of treaty requirements were attacked and sunk by planes of the US Army. Among the attendees were a number of foreign dignataries, including a young japanese officer passing through Hawaii - Isoroku Yamamoto. The man who, 20 years later, commanded the fleet that attacked Pearl Harbor.

Any who missed that message certainly should have payed attention to the Battle of Taranto (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Taranto)

Only a relatively small number of foolish individuals considered battleships to be impervious to fighters.

In July 1921, Brigadier General William Mitchel staged a demonstration where 2 Battleships that were to be scrapped because of treaty requirements were attacked and sunk by planes of the US Army. Among the attendees were a number of foreign dignataries, including a young japanese officer passing through Hawaii - Isoroku Yamamoto. The man who, 20 years later, commanded the fleet that attacked Pearl Harbor.

Any who missed that message certainly should have payed attention to the Battle of Taranto (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Taranto)

Actually an enormous number of foolish individuals didn't appreciate that aircraft could beat battleships. Alfred Mahan's theories of battleship supremacy and crushing the enemy fleet in a decisive surface battle were the heart of US naval ideology until Pearl Harbor. Billy Mitchell was right, but he was also a heretic and not listened to. The Navy didn't believe a word of it, and Mitchell's own hostile personality helped him be written off. Even after Pearl Harbor and Taranto the British sent the HMS Repulse and HMS Prince of Wales to engage the Japanese without air cover and were shocked that the ships were easily destroyed by Japanese bombers (the Japanese were surprised as well) because they considered the lessons of Pearl and Taranto to only apply to ships in harbor. Likewise Mitchell's sinking of the Ostfriesland occurred under unrealistic and ideal conditions, an immobile, undefended ship with no crew to conduct damage control or operate the pumps. Now obviously Mitchell was right, and should have been listened to, but that's not what happened.

About a 5%/95% break?

Update: Maybe about 3%/97%.

First World War

The prospect of airships as bombers had been recognised in Europe well before the airships were up to the task. H. G. Wells The War in the Air (1908) described the obliteration of entire fleets and cities by airship attack. On 5 March 1912, Italian forces became the first to use dirigibles for a military purpose during reconnaissance west of Tripoli behind Turkish lines. It was World War I, however, that marked the airship’s real debut as a weapon.

Albert Caquot designed an Observation Balloon for the French army in 1914. The Type R Observation balloon was used by all the allied forces, including the British and United States Armies, at the end of the World War. In 1919, Japan equipped the Imperial Army with several “Caquot dirigeables”.

The Germans, French and Italians all operated airships in scouting and tactical bombing roles early in the war, and all learned that the airship was too vulnerable for operations over the front. The decision to end operations in direct support of armies was made by all in 1917.[12][13] Count Zeppelin and others in the German military believed they had found the ideal weapon with which to counteract British Naval superiority and strike at Britain itself. More realistic airship advocates believed the Zeppelin was a valuable long range scout/attack craft for naval operations. Raids began by the end of 1914, reached a first peak in 1915, and then were discontinued in August 1918.[14] Zeppelins proved to be terrifying but inaccurate weapons. Navigation, target selection and bomb-aiming proved to be difficult under the best of conditions. The darkness, high altitudes and clouds that were frequently encountered by zeppelin missions reduced accuracy even further. The physical damage done by the zeppelins over the course of the war was trivial, and the deaths that they caused (though visible) amounted to a few hundred at most. The zeppelins were initially immune to attack by aircraft and antiaircraft guns: as the pressure in in their envelopes was only just higher than ambient, holes had little effect. But once incendiary bullets were developed and used against them, their flammable hydrogen lifting gas made them vulnerable at lower altitudes. Several were shot down in flames by British defenders, and others crashed 'en route'. They then started flying higher and higher above the range of other aircraft, but this made their bombing accuracy and success even worse. In retrospect, advocates of the naval scouting role of the airship proved to be correct, and the land bombing campaign proved to be disastrous in terms of morale, men and material. Many pioneers of the German airship service died in what was the first strategic bombing campaign in history. Countermeasures by the British were sound detection, equipment, search lights and anti-aircraft artillery, followed by night fighters in 1915. One method used early in the war when short range meant the airships had to fly from forward bases, and when only Zeppelin production facilities were in Friedrichshafen, was bombing of airship sheds by the British Royal Naval Air Service. Late in the war, the development of the aircraft carrier led to the first successful carrier air strike in history. The morning of 19 July 1918, seven Sopwith 2F.1 Camels were launched from HMS Furious and struck the airship base at Tondern, destroying the Zeppelins L 54 and L 60.[15]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airship#First_World_War

Thanks for the info...

Well, yes. All this is more or less what one could expect of these dirigibles in the game. I agree with history.. haha!

The obvious solution for airships in the game would be to make them innacurate. As it is now they deliver damage 100% of the times they attack a pre-destroyer/SAM unit, this is ludicrous. If only they would damage 25% of the times, it would make Airships more realistic and naturally eligible for scouting/reconnaissance rather than bombing; but without loosing completely their bombing capabilities.
It would make a nice unit but a truly high investment to have as much of them as a devastating bombing force as it might be now (x4 in number + where do you keep them?). ;););)
I believe this is the simple solution to the frequently mentioned issue with Airships.

What do you think guys?

I haven't played BTS yet but that certainly sounds better to me. Or not let them be upgraded. Dirigible crews => fighter pilots? Making them an evolutionary dead end in the game would make building huge fleets of them less cost effective.