2 attacks per turn = 2 damagecrossmr:
I have to agree here with Lunchmoney. At this point, it seems that you are simple dead set against any reasoning or logic against your assertion, so there's no further point discussing it.
None of my proposed solutions were specific or special. Even your Bomber damage estimate is completely off. Bombers take a minimum 1 damage, not two, and yes, I just checked by bombing a non-barb Musketman. Good luck in your quest. I don't mind either way, but clearly it must mean something to you to be bested by barbs.
Battleships are specialist in that they only clear the coast, and won't take you inland if you need to get there, and it all comes down to you having to wage war almost to a greater degree than you would against another AI with more advanced units. Simply because the AI wouldn't field those kinds of units in that kind of way. An advanced civ shouldn't have to spend those kinds of resources on clearing an area of people with bows and arrows and clubs.
Where did I ever say 5 or more damage per turn?Just to clarify, I get the way you've done the bomber damage math, now, and that is correct; but I still don't get where you said they'd take upwards of 4 damage per turn. No way they're taking 5 or more damage per turn.
I'm referring to another Civ on the same map as I with a similar tech level. The barbarians come out stronger than the other civs on the map in this situation. They require a far greater investment to clear out than some other random neighbour.Not at all. To make an effective landing and prosecute war against a powerful Civ,
Where did I ever say 5 or more damage per turn?
I said 2 damage per turn minimum over 4 turns = 8 damage. You were claiming 5 bombers could take out 40 units in 4 turns, I pointed out that only under the best conditions. Any luck on the part of the barbarians could put them out of commission. They could take upwards of 4 damage per turn if they were attacking higher level barbarians like mustketmen (there were some mixed in with the horde) and if they get unlucky. As they get more damaged it seems there is a greater chance they're going to take more damage
But it's interesting, I've never seen any bombers I've produced have free logistics and get 2 attacks a turn.
I'm referring to another Civ on the same map as I with a similar tech level. The barbarians come out stronger than the other civs on the map in this situation. They require a far greater investment to clear out than some other random neighbour.
You've got a strange idea of "included"To get Bombers with Logistics, build it in the city with Barracks, Armory, Military Tradition, and Brandenburg Gate. You will get three promotions. Use it for Unit, Unit 2, and Logistics. Done and done.
With 3 or 4 modern units I was able to take out cities of neighbours around me. They were at a higher tech level than the barbarians.Define "far greater."
It seems like the solution is to scale up damage and HP by 10 times.
that way you can keep the 1 min damage rule!
+ it is not very hard to program.
I'm not dead set against any reasoning or logic, I'm dead set against apologist excuses which is pretty much all that's been offered in this thread.
Yes, because they are. For all the talk about how archers are secret spec op troops, why is only them getting to be more then they are? Why aren't my mech infantry actually highly trained elite troops who take no damage?I gave what I thought were some pretty good reasons why IRL military units suffer losses from even simple operations against hopelessly outclassed units. You dismissed them all as "special circumstances".
No, actually I didn't ask for explanations. I asked should this be happening in the game, then people lined up to try and give these movie of the week explanations as to why it was happening.You asked for explanations,
Yes, because they are. For all the talk about how archers are secret spec op troops, why is only them getting to be more then they are? Why aren't my mech infantry actually highly trained elite troops who take no damage?
No, actually I didn't ask for explanations. I asked should this be happening in the game, then people lined up to try and give these movie of the week explanations as to why it was happening.
Because they couldn't provide a genuine argument for it happening, they've instead had to come up with all manners of stories to justify it.
Here is a story:
The guy in the giant tank turn the guy with the stick into a road stain and carried on like nothing happened.
That's far more believable than concoctions in this thread.
Supply plays no part in the game. Otherwise there would be actual ways to take it out and we'd beIs it a fair representation of real world situations? Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. Don't dimiss my explanations as "stories to justify it". They are real world issues that affect military campaigns. You think the enemy 'archers' are going to just line up and let that tank roll over them? Hell no. They will be hiding, ambushing the supply lines: asymetric warfare tactics. And they will no doubt lose, but they will reduce the enemys operational capacity. And you send that same tank regiment against another group of enemy 'archers' without waiting to refuel, restock and rest your tank regiment will be reduced again - another suicide bomb in the mess, another soldier killed whilst smoking a cigarette on duty, another tank needing repairs.
Supply plays no part in the game. Otherwise there would be actual ways to take it out and we'd be
Again, simply stories. In this story you assume the tanks do nothing to adapt. Again you're back to movie of the week stories. You assume the attackers do nothing to compensate for the apparent ingenuity and super powers of the defenders.
Why is it always the inferior units that get all these great tactics?
Invalid argument."Simply stories" - for goodness sake. Look at Afghanistan - very good example of asymetrical warfare. You adapt, they adapt, but the important point is you don't fight the superior enemy in a conventional way. The coalition forces there are not losing regiments or units, but they are always losing men and supplies.
It's an unnecessary waste of time. As I said, during the clear out, I ended up wasting 25-50% of the time healing. In a game where time is so important it's a huge drain.Might need to stop to heal, so what?
Except:1 unit minimum damage is there for balance reasons, it helps keep obsoleted units from being 100% worthless over time which is something firaxis wanted.
This is far too much of an investment to take out guys with sticks.Next time you want to beat the oh so hard barbarians, land a couple arty covered by battleships, and a few units to protect them/tank. Game over for barbs. You'll kill multiple barbs every turn w/o losses and out-heal the damage you take.
crossmr:
Chariot Archers can't get Blitz. They can only access Logistics, and since they don't upgrade from anything, they can't get Blitz as a legacy upgrade.