Ninakoru
A deity on Emperor
Air stacking is a problem. Three of each class of city-based unit (bomber/fighter/missile) should do the trick someway. The only limit is the oil, when the AI has a lot of oil at higher levels tend to spam air.
The Industrial and Modern Tech Trees are Utterly Broken
- Thread starter Peng Qi
- Start date
apotheoser
Prince
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2006
- Messages
- 336
Maybe radio before "RAdio Detection And Ranging", a/k/a radar, as well?
Well, air stacking will be solved in the fall patch, which is great! XP for interceptions will add to the usefulness of fighters and AA. (I requested this change for a long time and I am very grateful for seeing it covered!)
Anyway, this doesn't solve the problem of early counters.
I think, the solution is easy: make gattling gun (and MG) capable to intercept early airplains in adjacent tiles (= range 1) with ~50% strength.
Due to the larger range and higher dammage, fighters and AA-guns will still be preferable. But there will be at least some protection from earlier units.
(And, by the way, keep the progression in range by making SAM a range-3-unit. That's what I've changed in my XML files and it feels way more reasonable.)
Anyway, this doesn't solve the problem of early counters.
I think, the solution is easy: make gattling gun (and MG) capable to intercept early airplains in adjacent tiles (= range 1) with ~50% strength.
Due to the larger range and higher dammage, fighters and AA-guns will still be preferable. But there will be at least some protection from earlier units.
(And, by the way, keep the progression in range by making SAM a range-3-unit. That's what I've changed in my XML files and it feels way more reasonable.)
terrycrist3
Chieftain
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2009
- Messages
- 40
Instead of a chance to explode each turn, perhaps GWB should just take a random amount of damage after each successful operation (sort of like civ 2 helicopters). You could also make them require 2 oil to make them more expensive.
I don't mind them coming slightly ahead of their counter (though they should require combustion), because there should be rewards for military research. But the trade-off for the first unit of a new type should be that they are more expensive (in resources) and unreliable (random damage). It might be interesting to do this with other early-adopter units like musketmen, gattlings, and ironclads (not extra damage perhaps, but other nerfs that are removed with the next upgrade)
I don't mind them coming slightly ahead of their counter (though they should require combustion), because there should be rewards for military research. But the trade-off for the first unit of a new type should be that they are more expensive (in resources) and unreliable (random damage). It might be interesting to do this with other early-adopter units like musketmen, gattlings, and ironclads (not extra damage perhaps, but other nerfs that are removed with the next upgrade)
Peng Qi
Emperor
I thought Civ 2 helicopters always took 20% of their health in damage?
kaspergm
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2012
- Messages
- 5,576
That is actually a really elegant solution. That would also be sort of a carrot to do the expensive Crosbowman -> Gattling Gun upgrade which I often find myself unwilling to do because the limited range of Gattlings makes them much less useful than earlier ranged units.
worst idea EVER, in a 1UPT game where building a unit like ghost bomber takes longer than discovering a new tech, to have it just mystriously blow up?
I think limiting the massing of air units should solve most issues, and it is being adressed in fall patch.
And onto another point that got mentioned that a frigate based navy was blown out of the water by GWB That's as it should be, and don't expect to launch intercontinental invasions against civs with flight without air cover.
Peng Qi
Emperor
Apparently that argument went WAY over your head. The point was that there IS NO AIR COVER available for navies until about two tech tiers AFTER GWBs, which beyond just being stupid from a gameplay perspective is also absurdly unrealistic.
whyidie
Emperor
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2003
- Messages
- 1,187
Unless I'm playing King or got a good Emperor roll, I can't afford to not upgrade them. AI's running around with Musketmen/Rifleman/Cavalry, I need the gatlings.
Yes, that was exactly my point, thanks.
To be clear, I'm not advocating for earlier carriers. If anything, I think carriers should be further delayed until Radar, to go with real fighters/bombers. But in that case, since there is no naval counter to great war bombers, which historically had no effect whatsoever on naval warfare, I think the ONLY solution is to get rid of GWBs altogether.
It will be interesting to see how the fall patch affects this. Hopefully the limit of 6 air units per city without an airport will be sufficient. In my current immortal game, the runaway Shoshone keep piling 20 bombers into a city and decimating my units. Luckily I'm ahead of him in tech or I'd be toast.
Maybe GWB should move like the bombers in Civ I: Having max 8 range and having to land at least every second turn in a city to refuel. with 1 Upt there could be max 6 airstrikes against a city per turn, and as GWB would have to move to the city the city could be protected by units surrounding it, as GWB had no free way up to the city.
Being able to buy and base a lot of airunits within one turn/city is not balanced.
Being able to buy and base a lot of airunits within one turn/city is not balanced.
Wodan
Deity
Nothing else in CiV works that way, it'd be nice to not do a fix which requires custom coding. I'd rather they spend their coding time improving the ai.
All in all, seems to me that reducing the # of air units per city, decreasing the GWB range, decreasing its damage, and/or increasing its cost will be more than sufficient to resolve the balance issues.
Peng Qi
Emperor
...except for with city states and naval assaults, which it won't address at all.
Wodan
Deity
And why, again, are those a problem that they won't address? (Yes, I've read the whole thread. I just don't see a huge problem with, for example, GWBs pwning frigates, especially with my suggested changes which would mean you'd only have 1 or 2 of them, and they'd be more expensive and less damage. Frigates running around against ca. 1920 units should be pwned.)
But anyway, I wouldn't have a huge problem with the Combustion suggestion, or giving some ground units a slight interception %, or adding a unit or two such as the Dreadnought.
kaspergm
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2012
- Messages
- 5,576
I tend to find Rifles sufficient - and in fact better suited - for defence than Gattlings, given they have a higher combat strength, but then again, I used to play Emperor at top and have been playing mostly King since BnW, so maybe that will explain that.
Arty always seemed worse to me. Once you discover the power of arty you pretty much have to turn up the difficulty until the AI will beat you to, or match your time to, arty, or games are trivial, and it has to be every AI that matches your time or you just snack on a free lunch at the arty spike and consolidate your new empire.
For example, last night I played on emperor. I had a horrible start being pinched between three empires. Really should have been a lost game, but the koreans on one side were being slow to arty as they were even a little bit worse off than me. My neighbor on the other side were way ahead of all of us and had taken most of the continent. I had a war with Koreans. Hit an arty spike. Stomped their entire side quickly, and then turned to my other neighbor who got arty just a tad after me (he had gone flight), but the point is I now had a decent sized empire because of the arty spike and I could deal with them by targeting down their arty. Strategically lost game--won by arty.
In an Arty versus non-arty war, neighboring AIs pretty much just have to give you their entire empire. It is by far the biggest bump in in city taking power in the game and the hardest for the AI to deal with. Also, if for some reason you had the sense to make horse units that got the promotion to see 3 squares this applies double because you no longer have the "I can't see the city problem."
Now, if the AI has arty and you have arty it is bad but not as bad for the AI, so it is a bit of a design flaw and an AI flaw.
For example, last night I played on emperor. I had a horrible start being pinched between three empires. Really should have been a lost game, but the koreans on one side were being slow to arty as they were even a little bit worse off than me. My neighbor on the other side were way ahead of all of us and had taken most of the continent. I had a war with Koreans. Hit an arty spike. Stomped their entire side quickly, and then turned to my other neighbor who got arty just a tad after me (he had gone flight), but the point is I now had a decent sized empire because of the arty spike and I could deal with them by targeting down their arty. Strategically lost game--won by arty.
In an Arty versus non-arty war, neighboring AIs pretty much just have to give you their entire empire. It is by far the biggest bump in in city taking power in the game and the hardest for the AI to deal with. Also, if for some reason you had the sense to make horse units that got the promotion to see 3 squares this applies double because you no longer have the "I can't see the city problem."
Now, if the AI has arty and you have arty it is bad but not as bad for the AI, so it is a bit of a design flaw and an AI flaw.
Similar threads
