Guided missile, worst unit in the game?

Vikingr · Jun 6, 2014

andreafin said:
is a guided missile is supposed to be like exocet or cruise missile? i would think those would be very effective against ships with no antimissile missles and point defense gatling guns. i would see those as promotions a ship would need in order to survive a guided missile attack. maybe thats why the current missile is weak; its taking into account its a relatively slow speed missile, representing a number of missiles being launched than just a single missile, and the fact that many if not most of those missiles got destroyed (shot down) by defenses that ships and cities are assumed to have by that stage. personally i think if you are able to fire guided missile against ironclads or frigates or even lower tech ships it should be a instakill. who is really going to put antimissile systems on a galleas? against a carrier or battleship or missile cruiser it should be representing multiple missiles launched. a battleship or carrier might survive a missile or even 2 being hit but i dont think a missile cruiser would necessarily survive one hit, nor destroyers. so for them it should be doing either miss or hit; and if a hit depending on the target type either a kill (missile cruiser or destroyer) or random amount of damage up to and including a kill on carrier and battleship, along with any missiles or aircraft they are carrying.
land units in cities its about right imo. the units will not be grouped in one place for easy destruction by a single missile. the city may even have anti missile batteries.
units out of cities maybe it depends on terrain its in, how much damage is done?

I think guided missiles (if we think of them as cruise missiles and such) would make most sense to use against cities, and vessels. The vessels for the reasons you already talked about, and cities because well ideally in real life you'd probably want to to use them against military bases and such and not straight up cities, but in the game military facilities are theoretically built within the city so yeah. I know that cities could have anti-missile defense but still.

What if you could launch guided missiles at enemy territory; not just cities or units? Like you could target mines, lux resources, and manufactories and such with them, and the effect would be that it's like pillaging them. You wouldn't get money and such from pillaging like with a land unit but it could have it's uses. Maybe if you're going to start a war, you could do it by striking their resource improvements with guided missiles so that they start out at a disadvantage. It wouldn't be necessary for a/some cities you'll move against immediately but perhaps if you have a couple subs or cruisers within range of cities which your land forces wouldn't capture for awhile, the effect would be better. Though this is probably a stupid idea.

CaterpillarKing · Jun 7, 2014

I do not believe I have ever used a guided missile. I always just use nuclear weapons

AIcivs · Jun 7, 2014

Vitruvius said:
I guess it can be useful when you don't have oil for bombers. Also, does it actually trigger an interception even though it has evasion (100)? If it does then it can be used as a replacement for air sweep with the exception that it actually does damage.

No... It cannot be intercepted, like the stealth bomber. But, unlike the bomber which cancels its attack when evading, guided missiles travel fast enough to hit its target before being intercepted.

In other words:
Stealth Bombers evade by cancelling its mission before it gets hit.
Guided missiles evade by traveling too fast before it gets destroyed.

Thats why they are very useful. It can cripple your enemies frontline units.

DrakenKin · Jun 8, 2014

Sounds like after 3 pages we found the answer.

They are similar to fighters then, now we have to compare a normal fighter sweep to sending a missile, even if them taking an air slot in a city is very annoying and brings them back to being useless.

Vikingr · Jun 8, 2014

Any thoughts on the idea of allowing guided missiles to be launched at and pillage/disable enemy hex improvements (farms, mills, mines, etc)?

I'm thinking that you could have a couple subs and/or cruisers off the coast of some enemy cities/future enemy cities (if you're setting up to attack), with guided missiles. Your actual civ and forces would be perhaps on the other side of the continent fighting or about to launch the attack, but wouldn't reach those cities which the vessels are hanging off of till much later/a time later. You'd think of the cities which your ground forces initially move on and fight over as the front line, while the other enemy cities might serve as the home front, producing reinforcements and all. But if you could launch those missiles and take out aluminum mines, uranium mines, or the like, that could be helpful for you. I mean taking out any one of the hex improvements might do something to make things difficult for the enemy in the war.

And say you make peace or something before taking over those cities you struck/their whole empire--it might make it difficult for them to recover for awhile if you've both taken some cities and took out a number of their resources which they'd have to take the time to rebuild.

DrakenKin · Jun 8, 2014

I thought about that idea but imo it would be too much annoying. If we use it, the AI has to be adjusted to use it too. Imagine having a fleet of bombers and the AI insta kills all your oil mines at the start of a war? You can't even post anti air to protect the tile since they can't be intercepted.

As I said annoying. And even if the AI didn't use it that way, it would be cheating and an unfair advantage for the human player. You'd fight every war at 50% troop strength advantage.

Vikingr · Jun 8, 2014

I wonder if it was made less readily available to produce though, if that would balance it. Instead of churning them out it would take some time to make each one.

Unless I'm mistaken, if they were to take out your oil but you already have the bombers, that wouldn't change anything; it's just that you couldn't make new ones until you rebuild the oil refinery.

Mutineer · Jun 8, 2014

I always believe that there is combat penalty for having negative resource.

Vikingr · Jun 8, 2014

Mutineer said:
I always believe that there is combat penalty for having negative resource.

Hmm, maybe. Maybe I just never noticed it, or never had negative resources. I know you get a penalty for negative happiness but not sure about resources.

DrakenKin · Jun 8, 2014

Mutineer said:
I always believe that there is combat penalty for having negative resource.

Yes there is. Make swordman, destroy mine, your swordsmen become much weaker. It goes for all units needing resources.

Xiao Xiong · Jun 9, 2014

A massive bonus against naval units would make them very interesting, even if they were made weaker against cities. It would give them a purpose that rocket artillery couldn't achieve (no rocket artillery out in the middle of the ocean). I am thinking if they were +100% against naval units, and -50% against cities, they would become interesting. One use would be to store them in coastal cities as a defense against a surprise naval attack, and another use would be to protect your fleet from the enemy fleet in a mid-sea encounter, etc.

Guided missile, worst unit in the game?

Vikingr

Chieftain

CaterpillarKing

Conqueror of Cacoons

AIcivs

Chieftain

DrakenKin

Prince

Vikingr

Chieftain

DrakenKin

Prince

Vikingr

Chieftain

Mutineer

Deity

Vikingr

Chieftain

DrakenKin

Prince

Xiao Xiong

Prince

Similar threads