| General | Hosted Sites | Civ5 | CivRev | Civ4Col | Civ4 | Civ3 | Civ2 | Civ1 | Misc | Marketplace |
![]() |
|
|
Welcome to Civilization Fanatics' Center. You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to our site features. By joining our free community, you will be able to participate in the discussions, search the forum, send private messages, vote in polls, upload your own screenshots to the gallery, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so sign up today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact support. |
|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#121 |
|
Chieftain
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 31
|
Make them available with combustion as a pure recon unit. That differentiates them from planes. Extend their life span a bit so they don't obsolete so quickly. That makes more sense than having them show up before their time. And get rid of the silly attack rating.
My two cents, anyway.
__________________
If you don't know where you're going. . .any road will get you there. Louis Carroll |
|
|
|
|
|
#122 |
|
King
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: NJ, USA
Posts: 935
|
Agreed. Given their sub spotting ability, and cheap recon alternative, why should they ever go obsolete?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#123 |
|
Nintendo Fan
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Hello, Sir!
Posts: 1,931
|
Airships don't even come at a historically correct time on the tech tree. Has Firaxis confused them with hot-air balloons?! And I was happy that gunships that gunships were pushed back for historical accuracy (having helicopters come with a 1st-tier modern tech made absolutely zero sense).
|
|
|
|
|
|
#124 | |
|
Prince
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Civ4
Posts: 565
|
Quote:
Quechas come in 4000 BC and the Inca civilization didn't even exist until around 1100 AD, so put that in your pipe and smoke it.
__________________
CivGear - Civilization T-Shirts, Mugs, Posters, Etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#125 | |
|
Deity
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: London
Posts: 2,213
|
Quote:
there are more historical mistakes and anomalies than correct unit relationships. So complaining about airships, as many in this thread are doing, just doesn't make sense to me.I think you have to view the units and their abilities in Civ 4 as a bit of fun not an accurate historical simulation. Therefore airships are fine and they fit into the basic pattern as well as just about any other unit. As far as gameplay is concerned; they add another level of strategy and literally add another dimension to the game in that period and have interesting effects on tactics and research priorities. Airships have been a very worthwhile addition to BtS in my opinion.
__________________
It's the economy, stupid 1992 Clinton campaign |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#126 |
|
Emperor
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Irrelevant.
Posts: 1,151
|
Except airships aren't fun.
__________________
2007: Economic Left/Right: 5.75 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 6.26 2010: Economic Left/Right: 8.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 3.23 2012: Economic Left/Right: 8.62 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 1.23 |
|
|
|
|
|
#127 |
|
Prince
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Civ4
Posts: 565
|
Wow, what a spectcular arguement! You win! Airships are "stupid" and "not fun."
Please, indulge us with some reasons that they are "stupid" and "not fun." I know you said that they are not historicaly accurate (but they are plausible)and i agree with you on that. But why aren't they fun? Because they happen to nerf a beeline you used to be able to take advantage of? In my opinion, they are quite fun. Uncle JJ said it better than I will.
__________________
CivGear - Civilization T-Shirts, Mugs, Posters, Etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
#128 | ||
|
Emperor
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Irrelevant.
Posts: 1,151
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
2007: Economic Left/Right: 5.75 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 6.26 2010: Economic Left/Right: 8.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 3.23 2012: Economic Left/Right: 8.62 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 1.23 |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#129 |
|
Deity
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cheeseland
Posts: 2,609
|
Sattelites?
__________________
Civ IV BTS /Huge/Marathon/Single Player/Mods History in the Making ,Civ IV Road to War , Legends of Revolution , History of the Three Kingdoms , and Grand Inquisitions 255c . Maybe one day I'll load V on this new computer, but I have no desire to play it anymore. |
|
|
|
|
|
#130 |
|
Prince
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Civ4
Posts: 565
|
I think you need to use your imagination more, there are many ways to counter airships. What about airships of your own? Doesn't that effectively counter enemy airships by damaging the enemy stack as much as yours? If you dont have as many airships in range as the enemy, that's bad strategy on your part. Another counter for airships is not attacking until you get SAM infantry, beeline it if you must. Another counter for airships is using a GG on a Woody III axeman early-game barbslayer to give him the Medic III promotion. Put him in your stack, and your troops will be able to heal the airship damage. Another counter for airships is beelining to flight. I'm sure there are many ways to beeline to flight that nobody ever thought about before BtS... that's what makes airships good, its an added element to the game in that era. Airships are basicaly a rifleman/cavalry rush nerf, and it's not badly implemented because it allows the civ that went the "scientific" route (Scientific Method, Physics, etc.) to have a chance to survive the rush of the civ that went the "military" route (Military Tradition, Rifling, etc.). It slows the rifle or cav rush down because if you want a level playing field and don't have a tech lead then you've got to research physics too.
__________________
CivGear - Civilization T-Shirts, Mugs, Posters, Etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
#131 | |||||||
|
Emperor
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Irrelevant.
Posts: 1,151
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
2007: Economic Left/Right: 5.75 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 6.26 2010: Economic Left/Right: 8.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 3.23 2012: Economic Left/Right: 8.62 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 1.23 |
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
#132 |
|
Prince
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Civ4
Posts: 565
|
^^ uber-unit?
give me a break. airships can't even kill something. they are merely a support unit.
__________________
CivGear - Civilization T-Shirts, Mugs, Posters, Etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
#133 |
|
Prince
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Civ4
Posts: 565
|
^^whats with the "everything must have a hard-well defined counter" anyways? Maybe you should invest your time playing Paper-Scissors-Rock. I thought every strategy game ever has a "counter" to everything? What's the counter to the other guy's Queen in chess -- the "uber-unit" if there ever was one? Your own queen? yes, that must be it. just like building your own airships are the counter to the enemies airships. Airships can be killed. If simply killing the airships is all you want to do, CAPTURE THE CITY THEY ARE BASED IN. What's next? Are you gonna start whining that your swordsmen cant swim out and take over ships that are blockading your ports because you neglected build any naval units? "I didn't research Sailing so there's no counter!"
__________________
CivGear - Civilization T-Shirts, Mugs, Posters, Etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
#134 |
|
The Sins Of A Solar SEAL
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: TEC Space
Posts: 3,809
|
Actually, Bronze is stronger than Iron, so a Bronze Axeman beating an Iron Swordsman is actually quite accurate. Iron was just more common than bronze and didn't require an alloying process. Steel came much later.
Anyway, if you think Airships being available with Physics is bad, I played the Genetic Age Mod for Warlords. Mark V tanks with Assembly Line, Zeppelins available with Physics and guess what else? Biplanes! There was no Flight requirement, it was just Physics and you could build Biplanes and Zeppelins. Biplanes had an advantage against Zeppelins, but still it was a crappy mod idea. So Airships with Physics does seem reasonable. Now, I don't think they're pulled by a steam train if they're bombing enemy territory. I mean, how's the train going to run? On a smooth road!? Give me a break! The Airship uses magical pixie dust and Chuck Norris to propel it to and from the target. Everyone knows that silly. Now, what's this talk about flying submarines!? Everyone knows a submarine goes underwater, hence the name Sub (as in under) and Marine (as in, water) so a flying Submarine contradicts itself unless you mean that the submarine is flying underwater (which technically isn't flying, but swimming, sinking, floating etc) What you're looking for isn't a flying Submarine, it is an Airship, which is a ship that flies in the air, hence the name airship. Of course, the airship would not be the same as the Airship, but it can fire sky torpedoes or something. So the Flying Submarine contradicts itself in name. It should be the Flying Ship armed with Torpedoes and is shaped like a typical Submarine but isn't. Oh yeah and airships rule! |
|
|
|
|
|
#135 | |||||||
|
Emperor
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Irrelevant.
Posts: 1,151
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
2007: Economic Left/Right: 5.75 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 6.26 2010: Economic Left/Right: 8.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 3.23 2012: Economic Left/Right: 8.62 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 1.23 |
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
#136 | |
|
King
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Sweden
Posts: 865
|
Quote:
Info taken from (I don't like to refer to) Wiki.
__________________
"Nemo enim fere saltat sobrius, nisi forte insanit" - Pro Murena 13; Cicero |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#137 |
|
Chieftain
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: London
Posts: 12
|
After a fair few BtS games now my opinion is that the airship is a reasonably sensible unit with the exception of them being able to bomb destroyers and other industrial ships. Mind you, I generally dont make a stack of them to attack things with relying more on their recon ability : this has saved me from being crunched by absolutley massive oversea invasions (which catherine is particulary keen on), an event which surprised me a lot when it first happened, never saw it on warlords and vanilla.
Anyway, the airship is great, and there is a chance of them crashing, in my last game Hannibal must have had a crash every 8 turns or so, but then he did have a huge stash of them. |
|
|
|
|
|
#138 |
|
The Sins Of A Solar SEAL
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: TEC Space
Posts: 3,809
|
But still, it is quite accurate to have a bronze axeman kill an iron swordsman, because iron is weaker than bronze and they're not using steel.
I like airships because I get to bomb the enemy's Longbowmen while I've got Infantry... |
|
|
|
|
|
#139 |
|
King
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: NJ, USA
Posts: 935
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#140 |
|
Deity
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,891
|
^ although by that point, the air interception levels are too high.
They would be a lot better as pure recon units, air units that can Move (and wouldn't have any missions to run) You use them for coastal surveilance, watching the seas. (Destroyers in the area should pick them off though)
__________________
Improvement Ideas City States:http://forums.civfanatics.com/showth...5#post11296685 Miscelaneous Ideas:http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpo...&postcount=403 |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
|
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| airships | dennisg | Civ4 - General Discussions | 36 | May 17, 2009 02:12 AM |
| Airships? | Bigfoot3814 | Civ4 - General Discussions | 26 | May 10, 2008 06:54 AM |
| Airships | Alzara | Civ4 - Fall from Heaven | 30 | Apr 19, 2008 10:36 AM |
| Airships yes! | Dnomal | Civ4 - General Discussions | 71 | Aug 08, 2007 02:09 AM |
| Airships | mice | Civ4 - General Discussions | 8 | Jul 26, 2007 08:38 PM |