Aircraft must be able to sink Ships

GoldenEagle777

Chieftain
Joined
Dec 6, 2006
Messages
13
I can't put it any more succinctly. Aircraft must be able to sink ships in the expansion. I have heard the "game balence issues" argument, but its just so unrealistic to not allow a/c to sink ships and it really annoys me. Especailly if its a fleet of wooden boats, such a frigates etc.
 
What if the damage you are able to inflict is proportional to (exponential instead of linear) the health of the target?

(I don't what the damage range is off hand. Say it is 1 - 10)
To a ship w/health > 75%, a bomber can inflict 1-10 points of damage.
To a ship w/health 51 - 75%, a bomber can inflict 0 - 5 points of damage.
To a ship w/health 26 - 50%, a bomber can inflict 0 - 2 points of damage.
To a ship w/health < 26%, a bomber can inflict 0 - 1 points of damage.
 
What are the game balance issues with this feature anyway?
 
It was more fun when we could control the planes ourselves. I used to love taking a carrier of stealth fighters and bombers in Civ 2 and rainind down fire on my enemies. :(
 
It is absolutely ridiculous that planes cannot sink ships, and I cannot see any kind of balance issue as the reason; that's what AEGIS cruisers are for! They have anti-air counters! You just stack anti-air missile cruisers with your naval units and it acts like a SAM. If they were worried about earlier sea units post-Flight, they could just up the carrier anti-air stats.

Sadly, I guess Firaxis won't listen to us on this, because I read in the chat log that planes won't be able to sink ships in BtS. :sad:
 
I can't put it any more succinctly. Aircraft must be able to sink ships in the expansion. I have heard the "game balence issues" argument, but its just so unrealistic to not allow a/c to sink ships and it really annoys me. Especailly if its a fleet of wooden boats, such a frigates etc.

Oh, did it ever happen in real life? :-) Kidding guys, kidding!!

Breunor
 
It's also ridiculous that Aircraft are unable to destroy ground units. It essentially defeats the purpose of having air units to begin with. It's understandable that Air units cannot take cities(Although Helicopters should be able to take cities since they move and fight like ground units up to and including the fact that they cannot cross impassible terrain). The only Air unit features the helicopters receive are air unit's inability to take cities, and air unit's inability to benefit from roads... all of which are disadvantages. The only reason to have air units now is to siege, and countersiege.
 
Ok guys, lets get real for a minute. I'm sure that the real issue is play balance. I'm not sure how it would be affected, but would air untis be too strong if they could wipe out units completely? You don't want to make the game a race for flight.

Breunor
 
you had 3 levels of aviation...first level would be like ww1, 2nd level would be like ww2 or cold war...third level would be like america is now, dominate! WW1 level a/c would not do much damage at all, and then slowly, more advanced units would do more damage. There should be counters available to, like AAA and SAMs. With the introduction of the new mobile SAM it helps defened against air a lot, although personally, I think the graphics should be that of an SA-6 Gainful, not the Patriot. Actually, if I really had my way, there would be a tactical mobile same with a short range, that you would put on intercept, and it would intercept with low damage anything within say 2-3 squares, then I would have the strategic same, Patriot, SA-10/20, where that would have only 1 movement point, but would have a much larger range and would not be available until much later. I could go on and on on this subject....

AAA - defend that specific square if attacked
mobile tactical same, defends 2-3 squares around the units
strategic SAM - 5-8 square range
SAM land improvment - 5-8 range (if you wanted to have sams that can be built by workers - note - they should look like SA-2 sites)
 
What he said, Irl, any military that has no airforce does not last. They are taken out from above, and driven from the points of high strategic importance. A few aircraft can make a large amount of soldiers disperse.

Besides by having air units engage in combat like regular units, the regular units would also inflict damage upon said air units.
 
What he said, Irl, any military that has no airforce does not last. They are taken out from above, and driven from the points of high strategic importance. A few aircraft can make a large amount of soldiers disperse.

Besides by having air units engage in combat like regular units, the regular units would also inflict damage upon said air units.

But this doesn't matter in the game. This is the reason that earlier tech units are stronger than they 'should' be based on history. The game designers want to balance the game, and make it so getting a tech lead doesn't automatically lead to overwhelming military superiority.

If the game came down to, 'get that tech first and you win', it doesn't matter if it is airpower, or super advanced laser power. It reduces strategic choice.

So, now, you have choices in modern warfare (air-power, tanks, etc.) I wouldn't make any one tech lead to military dominance automatically, regardless of a view of 'real life'.

Furthermore, airpower isn't everything. The US eventually had substantial air superiority in Korea but couldn't break the stalemate with China, and it much less good in low intensity conflict like Vietnam. Having said that, air power has been devastating inthe 20th century.

Breunor
 
The only reason airpower didnt work as you mention in Korea and in the current situation is because of political constraints. If America were unlease her full fury, we could wipe the floor with our air, killing millions of people indiscriminently.

As far as people saying its unbalenced...I want a game that models reality more then a balenced game that says my steath bombers can sink a trireme, or whipe out a warrior, or for that matter, kill workers. Give me a break!

I want 3 levels of airpower tech, the first level aircraft shouldnt be that effective, that way its not a rush to airpower, the 2nd level, ww2 or cold war type units, should be more effective, but they should require you to go through other techs that allow ground/navies to develop. The 3rd level should come at the very end of the game, and it should be absolutely devestating.

That being said, there should be good counters available too at each level, but if you don't have the tech to stop stealth aircraft from carpet bombing your cities, your out of luck, just like in real life. That being said, steath aircraft that have that capability should be extrememly expensive, just like in real life, that way, its is very expensive and takes a long time to aquire such aircraft, again just like in real life.

While on the subject, I should be able to carpet bomb my enemies cities and whipe out the population, or tgt the city improvements, like in real life. If a civ kills too many civilians though, other civs might get unhappy with their gov't if it doesnt stop trading with the bombing civ. There are lots of cool political ins and outs you could have.

Bottem line though is: the third level of airpower should be overwhelming, so much so that countries cant afford to have huge airforces composed of such aircraft. Also, there should be good defenses available, but only at the tech level of the aircraft type. I will be pissed if my stealth aircraft are getting shot down by an inferier enemy. Nothing ticks me off more then stupid crap like that.

Just thought of this while typing, perhaps there could be an anti-aircraft upgrade that could be added onto units. That way you could upgrade units to be effective at damageing attacking a/c. People would then have an incentive to upgade at least 1 of their units in a stack with anti-air capability. The upgrade could be allowed to all rifle bearing units when at least 1 civ in the world has discovered flight. Conversly, the upgrade could become available with physics.

Example, there could be 5 levels of "AAA" upgrade. Each level adds a 10&#37; chance that damage will be done to the attacking aircraft. Note, that I believe when aircraft attack a ground unit, it shouldnt be an attacker wins vs the defender wins scenario. Both should be able to attack and damage each other on the same pass. When 1000s of bombers were being launched on germany in WW2, the bombers all took damage, and so did the target. Back to the "AAA" upgrade though, 10% chance at the first 4 upgrades, and then the 5th one could be 25% chance. Having such upgrades would help negate the power of aircraft.
 
Yea it's annoying they can't finish off ground/sea units. I know you can go mod it, but that does no good if you want to do GOTM/MP etc.

It seems like they decided to take the hacksaw to flight to simplify the game for their 'new audience'. Also probably because the AI was already incompetent and trying to get it to handle 1 more thing would just show it to be that much worse.

If they would just put back in control of aircraft so you could move them yourself, and set up some things to help counter the power... it would work great. some/all of these type of things - this is only a real basic draft and obviously would need much work etc..
  • expand flight techs (start with zepps and move into more advanced planes)
  • Make sure AA items are available before people have planes (easy if flight is spread more and you start with scout zepps etc) - or when someone researches planes, it gives everyone access to AA units
  • each AA unit can only shoot once per each civ's turn (defending civ has 1 AA. civ X could attack with 1 plane and it would have high probability of being downed - civ Y could attack with 5 planes, but only 1 plane has high prob of being downed. rest are fine)
  • dive bombers/attack planes/higher tech bombers could specifically target AA and have some algos that work that out differently
  • Powerful fixed AA that can't move from town it's built in
  • Medium AA that starts as a truck and can be 'unpacked' in any spot to
    produce decent AA power.
  • Weaker mobile AA

Just make it so that air power is powerful, but there is counters if you are behind techwise... I don't see how it would be fun to turn it into a race for air power - but it's also not fun to have it be so sissified.
 
The only reason airpower didnt work as you mention in Korea and in the current situation is because of political constraints. If America were unlease her full fury, we could wipe the floor with our air, killing millions of people indiscriminently.

Breunor -- Don't agree here, but its not worth debating. Of course, the US could have won using nuclear weapons also.

As far as people saying its unbalenced...I want a game that models reality more then a balenced game that says my steath bombers can sink a trireme, or whipe out a warrior, or for that matter, kill workers. Give me a break!


I have a lot of wargames, I want CIV to be balanced. I don't think it makes sense to create a tech tree and then say, 'Oh, we have all these choices, but you lose if don't beeline for airpower. The only purpose of the other choices on the tech tree is to distinguish the players who are too new or stupid to recognize that getting airpower first always wins.' Obviously, different strokes for different folks. This is why 'obsolete' units can fight. Its a game balance issue.

We have the 'beeline' problem now with cavalry, and apparently Firaxis is 'fixing' it in the next release.

Breunor
 
it would not be a bee line to airpower...think about it, how many multiplayer games actually make it to the modern erra? (multi is all I play by the way).

If I played single player, I would just mod the game, but you can't play tons of modded games online b/c its too much of a hassle and people are always suspicous.

All you need to do to counter it is to have a AAA upgrade that allows ground units to damage a/c.

Also, you make it so that you have to go through other techs that allow for defenses as you upgrade to more powerful air units.

Also, if the super powerful a/c are a result of one of the last techs, then there is no such thing as "Bee Lining" to it, b/c you need all the other techs first, and Unit that comes about from such a late tech should allow for dominate units anyway.

Also, another, and much better way to handicap it, instead of not letting a/c sink ships, is to make a/c cost lots of money to own and operate.


To go sooo far as to say aircraft cant sink ships, give me a break! It really ticked me off when I saw that in civ 3, and I am glad they changed it. I first realized it was that way in civ 4 when, in a multi player game, one guy dropped out. I had been busting out tons of a/c, he had been busting out tons of destroyers. When he dropped, AI declared war and sent tons of destroyers into my territory. I had a massive airforce that would have deicmated any navy of destoryers in real life, but what happend, all I could do was severely damage them. And these severely damaged destroyers just kept going up and down my coast bombarding my cities...how stupid...

I love Civilization, its my favorite game, but I hate this aspect of it. I am glad that most multiplayer games never make it to the modern erra because modern combat currently is so stupid and so ground power based.

While on the subject, I think I think it would be cool to be able to build Multiple Independent Reentry Vehical (MIRV) nuclear weapons. I am glad they added tactical nukes, but I want there to be super powerful ones that will just wipe the city off the map completely, and turn the ground into waste land...doing so should cause the world to hate you too. Imagine the effect of ten 50 megaton H-bombs exploding at precise distances around a city to ensure maximum destruction of all life and buildings...When I nuke a city, I don't want to capture it, I want it wiped off the map...if 1 warrior can raze an undefended city of millions of people, why can't I nuke a city to the point where everyone is dead and it becomes ruins?
 
Another way to balence it out...

All modern ships should have some level of airdefense, or at least be able to upgrade. I personally like the idea of a AAA upgrade.

Also, you could make it so that the air defense of all the ships in a given stack are added together, b/c that would be like real life, and force you to have to have a navy to attack the ships. In real life, there were so many American ships in the pacific fleets, that Japanese a/c usually couldnt even get close b/c there was just so much flack!

That would make it so that in the modern era, stacking ships would be required to prevent ships getting decimated by air power, and it would make it so that you would have to have a ton of a/c get past all that air defense.

Just some more idea...we will see how BTS turns out. I suspect that blimps might be able to sink ships...but I don't know...
 
Golden,

I actually think we agree here. I also think aircraft should be able to sink ships, as long as they keep the game balance.

Breunor
 
Back
Top Bottom