Spearman Vs Tanks part 2: Longbowman vs Helicopter gunship

Kenric af Grashen

Kenric af Grashen

King
Joined
Apr 23, 2002
Messages
855
Location
Christchurch, UK
Ok I thought civ IV was supposed to stop this from happening but twice while i was at war with the english 2 different longbowmen both with no promotions killed 2 of my helicopter gunship :cry: anyway i thought you might get a laugh out of it!
 
You do realize if you hold the right mouse button over the enemy it'll show the combat odds, right?
 
20 to 10 isn't a huge spread. A few good die rolls (which you can see) with a few rounds of first strike (which longbows have) and it isn't hard to believe.
 
What's hard to believe is that an arrow can take down helicopter. But if you guys watched rambo movie, you would see he uses "special explosive" arrows ;).
 
iammanh said:
What's hard to believe is that an arrow can take down helicopter. But if you guys watched rambo movie, you would see he uses "special explosive" arrows ;).
Click to expand...
Try a rank of 300 Longbows.... that will utterly destroy a helicopter.


So, everyone, PLEASE stop crying :cry: :cry: :cry:
 
Sa~Craig said:
they were bloody good odds,about 20 - 10 in my favour!
Click to expand...
panzooka said:
it happens to me too.... frigate > caravel and my frigate died
8 vs 3.3
...........
Click to expand...
20 v 10 is 2 to 1 odds, not good for an attack. 8 v 3.3 is slightly better than 2:1 but less than 3:1 odds, again not good. The combat is not unit v unit, but combat powers of each unit, regardless of what era the units come from.

While the units themselves may be utterly different, its the stats that really count. The fact that the heli gunship is treated as a landunit is, IMO the real reason those kinda things happen
 
It's a simple fact that modern units just shouldn't lose to ancient units. I hope we could mod this thing away somehow. I admit that civ4 is not supposed to be an exact simulation, but it's just ridiculous that a spearman can defeat a combat helicopter.
 
But it's not a spearman, and it's not a helicopter. It's a graphic representation of some combat stats...

Aside from that, If you make to big a difference it will just turn into who ever gets X unit firsts wins the game.

Although I find the difference to be pretty good. Have had armour roll over less advanced units, even if they were fortified in cities.
 
They really should have made it so that units from lower 'ages' loose a certain % of their combat power when fighting units from more advanced 'ages'.

Like an ancient unit vs a industrial age unit being 50% it's combat value.

Makes sense to me. 300 Longbowmen vs a Cobra Helo or not.
 
I've yet to have a seriously strange defeat, but I always make sure I bombard before attacking fortified postitions, even against out-of-date units.
 
I've played about 10 solid hours in this my first real game, am in the year 1992 and believe it or not have not fought 1 time. Not 1 time have I raised my troops in anger.

But I'm getting restless with future tech and I think my "friend" Persia to the north is chaffing me. :ninja:
 
Prometheus_666 said:
They really should have made it so that units from lower 'ages' loose a certain % of their combat power when fighting units from more advanced 'ages'.
Click to expand...
They've already done something like this in cIV. In cIV, not only does the power ratio determine the chance of winning each "round" of combat, but it also determines the damage done each round.


LauriL said:
I admit that civ4 is not supposed to be an exact simulation, but it's just ridiculous that a spearman can defeat a combat helicopter.
Click to expand...
I seriously think you're a bunch of whiners. What else is realistic in CIV? NOTHING! And that's why it's an excellent game. It is certainly not realistic with 1000+ year old Longbowmen fighing a Helicopter in the first place. Since the Longbowmen has discovered how to live for a thousand years, why couldn't they also discover how to take down a helicopter?

Seriously though. If you want realistic combat, then you need to find yourself a game where you never see one of the major 5 powers of the world field Longbowmen in its modern-world army. That's so horrendously unrealistic in the first place that complaining about the results make no sense.

This is a game, and an excellent one, that has always priorized gameplay over realism. It's not good gameplay to automatically win every battle without any thought of tactic, just because you have a tech lead - that's just boring "realism".
 
Gorbad Ironclaw said:
But it's not a spearman, and it's not a helicopter. It's a graphic representation of some combat stats...

Aside from that, If you make to big a difference it will just turn into who ever gets X unit firsts wins the game.

Although I find the difference to be pretty good. Have had armour roll over less advanced units, even if they were fortified in cities.
Click to expand...
I know. It's many helicopters versus many spearmen. So what? If you have enough ammo for the choppers you can destroy thousands of spearmen easily and they can do practically nothing - unless their spears are rocket powered. :lol:
 
Correct me if i am wrong, but according to the article on combat mechanics, after all bonuses have been accounted for, if your units has a strength of 20 and theirs is 10, don't you have a 99+% chance of winning? It says that at a 1.8 ratio you win 99% of the time...and its is a 2.0 ratio. So statistically, it should almost never happen. If i'm correct, i have to say i think the combat guide is...a bit off.
 
Mujadaddy said:
Try a rank of 300 Longbows.... that will utterly destroy a helicopter.


So, everyone, PLEASE stop crying :cry: :cry: :cry:
Click to expand...


I would take a modern helicopter against 300 or 3000 arrows any day. But in Civ4 it's not a helicopter against all those Longbows, but a squadron of advanced gunships. :)

I think there should be an extra modifier to give the gunship a heavy advantage against more primitive land units, so the chance would be much more remote for a gunship to fall to a longbow, and even more remote against units that don't shoot projectiles.

I don't see why it can't be added to the game while maintaining overall unit balance.
 
TheNiceOne said:
I seriously think you're a bunch of whiners. What else is realistic in CIV? NOTHING! And that's why it's an excellent game. It is certainly not realistic with 1000+ year old Longbowmen fighing a Helicopter in the first place. Since the Longbowmen has discovered how to live for a thousand years, why couldn't they also discover how to take down a helicopter?
Click to expand...
What are you talking about? Many things in civ are realistic. And if your unit has survived a thousand years, it doesn't mean that it's the same old guys living for thousand years, but it's the army with those weapons and armors that are being supported that long. Only the people join that army (or division, whatever) and in the end, die. Get it?
 
This is why I do promotions vs archers and melee units with my gunpowder and later units if I'm in a war and noticing I'm running across those kinds of units. Scoff all you like, it helps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
The perfect army
Replies
5
Views
2K
Fins
F
F
The Eternal Peace
2 3
Replies
52
Views
5K
Fins
F
A
  • Locked
  • Poll Poll
[Vote] (4-01) Helicopter Gunship Tweaks
2
Replies
20
Views
3K
Recursive
Recursive
Aurelesk
Unit comparison between Civilization V and VI
Replies
17
Views
4K
Boris Gudenuf
Boris Gudenuf
T
review after winning twice on deity marathon
Replies
0
Views
942
tsuneomai
T
Back
Top Bottom