Where is my AEGIS Modern Cruiser???

C

crazy canuck

Chieftain
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
12
Location
Toronto Region
Why not have an AEGIS Cruiser allowed after Fiber Optics are discovered?
It would replace the Battleship and Destroyer (and earlier naval vessels)

I would probably give it the ability to fire tomahawk missiles in a 3 square radius, have decent air defence and the ability to detect sub (50% chance).
I would also give it the ability to attack ground units and improvements.

If it detects the sub, the sub has a harder time to get a first strike chance.
 
That sounds real balanced. ;)

BTW, why fiber optics? Much of the Aegis (not an acronym) technology was done in the '70s.
 
How can a AEGIS be unbalanced??? It can do all thoses things... it can fire tomahawks to distance targets, while a battleship has to get within range....
Realistically, a WWII battleship would not stand a chance against a AEGIS crusier.
AEGIS also have good air defence abilites and will improved tech has a good chance of finding subs...
If you think it is unbalanced, then the cost of making an AEGIS cruiser should be higher.....
I don't think we should penalize a modern ship's capabilities just to make it more balanced...
 
It's a game not reality. Balance is much more important than fidelity. I won't deny that the Aegis is a decent piece of hardware especially when you compare it with something made 30 years before, but game balance has to trump that. It would have to be a very expensive unit.

BTW, it is Aegis (as in shield, not AEGIS an acronym).
 
WWII battleship would whop the ass of Aegis cruiser/destroyer anyday. The last discommissioned battleship does have the ability to fire tomahawk missiles and they also have guns that can hit for up to 2 miles. The only thing battleships can't do effectively is anti-air and anti-sub.
 
joelzhl said:
The last discommissioned battleship does have the ability to fire tomahawk missiles and they also have guns that can hit for up to 2 miles.
Click to expand...
AFAIK the guns on Iowa can hurl a projectile for a good 20 miles.
But yeah, they're noisy as heck, and you don't really want to be a boat in the water that makes noise and doesn't have good anti-sub weapons
 
I used to work at a place that tested battleship guns in the day. We needed a 25 mile range so that the shells didn't hit anything. An 18" shell will pretty much ruin your day.
 
warpstorm said:
We needed a 25 mile range so that the shells didn't hit anything. An 18" shell will pretty much ruin your day.
Click to expand...

Iowas have 16" guns. The Musashi and Yamato had 18.1" guns, if I recall correctly.
 
You are right of course. It's been years since I've seen them.
 
I'm not missing Aegis, but I do think that a coal-fired 'armored cruiser' capable of sailing the oceans is a definite gap in the naval units. There's been times when I've coal but no oil and was stuck relying on frigates and ironclads until appopriate resources were secured. Basically, I'm talking about a weak destroyer (maybe even the same strength as the ironclad,) without the air defense or sub-sighting bonus.....
 
jkp1187 said:
Basically, I'm talking about a weak destroyer (maybe even the same strength as the ironclad,) without the air defense or sub-sighting bonus.....
Click to expand...

Hmmm... Armored cruisers, from the pre-dreadnaught days. Obsolete by WW1 (as indicated by the number of them sunk by the Germans and the British).
 
The Iowa class battleships could not only fire a 16" shell 25 miles, but could also fire a 13" shell 46 miles. An armor piercing cruise missile can only penetrate 3" of steel, while a 16" shell can penetrate 20". If a battleship were built today, it would probably be made to do anything an AEGIS cruiser can do except anti-sub. In the game an AEGIS could serve as less expensive, weaker ship that earns its place in the fleet with its sub hunting ability and as an extra air defense unit. A nice addition to the game would be the distinction between old and new battleships; dreadnoughts and battleships.
 
Be careful with unit overload, though. I think Sid himself mentioned that too many units/combinations thereof was one of the things he wasn't happy with from Alpha Centauri and was striving to avoid in future.
 
jkp1187 said:
Be careful with unit overload, though. I think Sid himself mentioned that too many units/combinations thereof was one of the things he wasn't happy with from Alpha Centauri and was striving to avoid in future.
Click to expand...

Wow now that is interesting. The ability to customized units and governments was one of the BEST aspects of AC IMHO.:blush:
 
jkp1187 said:
Be careful with unit overload, though. I think Sid himself mentioned that too many units/combinations thereof was one of the things he wasn't happy with from Alpha Centauri and was striving to avoid in future.
Click to expand...

I know where the Aegis went... into my Mod :P

Also flooding the game with units is quite easy right now... I should know. I am rewriting the tech tree after Steam Power completely just to make more room and to spread things out ab it more :P
 
Hey, don't forget about the expansion we get with every civ game. that will have a lot of "missing" stuff
 
Half Fast said:
it would probably be made to do anything an AEGIS cruiser can do except anti-sub.
Click to expand...
In real life, if battleships would be made again (perhaps with far better trajectory computers, but still they can't have pinpoint accuracy), they'd probably travel in a group with ASW ships, and maybe even a sub.
The noisy carriers travel in a group with destroyers and submarines.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Lonecat Nekophrodite
Civ7 units that can be fixed.
Replies
4
Views
627
MutilationWave
MutilationWave
K
  • Locked
Nuclear Weapon Defense
Replies
1
Views
725
leif erikson
leif erikson
Lord Lakely
TIMELINE: A Civilization concept by Lord Lakely
6 7 8
Replies
151
Views
6K
Lord Lakely
Lord Lakely
evonannoredars
Austria-Hungary - Modern Era Dual Civ Concept
Replies
0
Views
636
evonannoredars
evonannoredars
S
Guided (Rocket) Missiles: A new paradigm
3 4 5
Replies
86
Views
8K
Tekamthi
Tekamthi
Back
Top Bottom