Air "Power"

[fcolmenarez]

If by "a lot of sight range" you mean a tiny fraction of their operational range, rendering long range bombers useless, then yes. That's the problem with the lack of recon; it's not about comparing them to normal unit's, they're a totally different class of unit.

Oh please DROP the Hyperbole. Sight Range is 6, Fighter Range is 8, that's hardly a "tiny fraction", to use those quotes you love. It's NOT a big deal.

Even Bombers still have 6 out of 10. That's not "tiny" either. I think it's perfectly fine to have those limits if your air units are the front line. Destroyers can reveal more of the map so your carriers can stay a bit back and their air units use their full range. Land warfare is similar. I find more merit in debating whether the current model damages air units too much.

 

[Aristos]

There is no recon run because aircraft automatically give 6 range line of sight. They removed recon run because it was boring micromanagement, and with fewer units it wasn't really a sufficiently powerful task for an entire bomber wing.

Nonsense. The BUG mod solved that "micromanagement nightmare" eons ago by adding a button that basically automates recon missions using the same code as the AI, which works pretty well.

There is nothing a smart modder cannot change for the better, unless the core engine of the game is broken... like now.

 

[MikeJep]

First off I want my stacks back!
But lets move on...
My thoughts on Air power.
Could a reasonable solution to this debate be the fighters auto-scout their entire uncontested operational range? How many planes of the whole wing would scouting take? Not a lot I think. If their isn't any resistance scouting would be rather easy.
The following exceptions would be...

• All tiles which are in foreign territory (except if fly over agreements are signed) would be occluded.
• Also any tiles which are protected by enemy AA guns/intercepting fighters. Would also be occluded.
• A new city building AA installations could also "cloak" cities. AA installations would also provide defense against strategic bombings on cities.

Actual scouting missions shouldn't require a move. Having to scout an occluded territory would initiate a quick fight with the defenders.

I would like strategic bombing raids back but redone.
I am a huge fan of Axis and Allies 1940. We should replicate the strategic bombing found in that game. Selecting a group of fighters and bombers which do battle with interceptors. Then select targets for damaging.

 

[MikeJep]

Ever since the Pacific front during WW2, the carrier has played the dominant role in naval combat. Everything centers around the carrier. Battleships then and more modern missile based ships exist to protect the carriers of the fleet. Any historical evaluation of the Japanese fleet during WW2 tracks its gradual loss of carriers, fighters, and experienced pilots as the most important statistics. The reason for this is that airplanes could leave the main fleet, strike another fleet or an island that the main fleet couldn't reach for days, and then return safely to the carrier. We're not talking about 6 tiles here; that's likely to be the size of a large convoy in Civ V. We're talking 12 tiles or more; the full range of fighters.

Word,
We need a mission for fighters aboard carriers that facilitates their interception of attacking ships aswell!

On a side note. There should be a purchaseable promotion for all ground units which gives anit-air craft abilities. Without the promotion they will be unable to damage attacking aircraft.

 

[bryanw1995]

Think about it like this: a stack of 40 units in cIV that was at parity tech wise with you would have a ton of AA with it, your regular bombers would have been partially/mostly damaged or even shot down. however, AA is now often an instant-kill mechanism for bombers. I almost choked the first time it happened to me. and the ai spams a LOT of AA when it gets it. As I mentioned in my earlier post, a total of not more than 5 air units (with 2 artillery for backup and some infantry/AA as melee protection) fought off my overwhelming army of infantry in my most recent game. yes, the terrain was a bit difficult with mountains on 2 sides and water in play off to the side, but with only artillery for the ai I could have wiped russia off the map during my infantry era (I had 6 artillery, 4 of which had logistics, they were so incredible I used 3/4 of my aluminum to get them to rocket artillery asap in fact). and anyway, 10 weakened units from 10 bombers (with no AA to fight them off obviously) would absolutely stop most invasions cold turkey unless the enemy had a true COD with every unit at current tech levels. and remember that after a few bombing runs bombers upgrade to logistics/air repair/cover/etc so can truly become engines of death. and then when you get bored you can now upgrade your logistics/air repair bombers to stealth bombers, leading to game over for anybody who's not nuking you every couple of turns.

Pre-patch all of this was moot b/c for some inexplicable reason the ai didn't build planes. Now? the ai will obliterate you with his air force if he has either a lead of a couple techs OR if you don't have oil for fighters. In fact, oil based units haven't gotten much commentary post-patch since they're so late game, but bombers and especially fighters are now very useful, some times even necessary.

edit: @mikejep that wouldn't have been useful pre-patch since the ai never built air units, and even now air is so strong as it is that if anything it needs a nerf not a buff. the only thing keeping air from ruling the mid/late game is potentially limited oil reserves.

 

[DrPepper836]

You would be very surprised how little effectual power campaigns BY THEMSELVES actually have. If you're interested, I suggest "Bombing to Win" by Robert Pape.

Personally, I like the balance that Civ 5 has with Air: not too strong, not too weak. I like a passive recon ability and I think bombing strategic resources might be a little OP. But that's a great idea to consider. Do I smell a mod?

I agree; bomb-able resources is a minor concern, and with the new rebel patch could be used to totally destroy an enemy empire, so I am willing to let that slide. I do hope, however, that someone gets a mod out to do recon and remove the arbitrary bombing penalty when the c++ comes out. I'll try if I have time.

And I'm talking more about recent technology in my concerns. Historically, you're right; despite all of our bombing efforts, German industrial output actually increased during WW2. Now, however, is different. We have prototype missiles now that could hit your house from halfway across the world, and bombs with so much accuracy as to make collateral damage a thing of the past, comparatively. If you want a good picture of how 21st century warfare is going to look, I would recommended The Next 100 Years by George Friedman.

Oh please DROP the Hyperbole. Sight Range is 6, Fighter Range is 8, that's hardly a "tiny fraction", to use those quotes you love. It's NOT a big deal.

Even Bombers still have 6 out of 10. That's not "tiny" either. I think it's perfectly fine to have those limits if your air units are the front line. Destroyers can reveal more of the map so your carriers can stay a bit back and their air units use their full range. Land warfare is similar. I find more merit in debating whether the current model damages air units too much.

Yes, and stealth bombers have a range of 20. Also, it is overly simplistic to say "6 out of 10." If you compared the total number of tiles, that's reducing the bombers target-able tiles by around 50%, maybe more; and much much more for the stealth bomber, certainly.

 

[Dralix]

Yes, and stealth bombers have a range of 20. Also, it is overly simplistic to say "6 out of 10." If you compared the total number of tiles, that's reducing the bombers target-able tiles by around 50%, maybe more; and much much more for the stealth bomber, certainly.

Maybe an advanced air recon ability for stealth bombers that gave them vision of 12?

 

[Malkaviel]

From my understanding, the USA doesn't use stealth fighters (which are actually bombers but meh) or stealth bombers (like the B2) for "recon" because their fuel efficiency is horrible. Pretty much if you see a stealth plane, someone's about to catch a JDAM or a tac nuke up the wazoo.

There have been long-range stealth recon vehicles since the 60's tho, like the SR71... maybe add them as a unit build-able with a pre-req skunkworks national wonder (at flight) and include vtol (at lasers) who need no home base (airfield) and un-manned drones (at robotics, +2 happiness one-time bonus with civil society policy) and more...

 

[Ferrum Rex]

Just thought I would throw out(especially with a renewed game play vs reality argument with the release of CiV) Squadrons, which the aircraft in the game represent, break down all the time. In a squadron it's extremely rare to ever see it at full strength, there are always at least two down jets, and that's with a small squadron. It's not an over night fix. Constant maintenance goes on to keep the other aircraft up(at the price of many of hours of service, there is a reason the military doesn't get paid overtime). To an earlier point that brought up ships with the same issue. Modern era ships don't often represent fleets, which rather you build(carrier, sub, destroyer, etc). unlike early era ship such as triremes. Now these ships do take wear and tear but will only receive minor repairs in friendly territories and won't receive major repair unless in home territory, bringing to a good addition by the way, forcing ships to heal in friendly territory. The tactical disadvantage of no recon is regrettable, but I agree with the earlier sentiment of this mostly likely being to retain territorial integrity. Good bringing focus to a game play issue, one of the many things to be tweaked. Hopefully they can figure out one day how to make the modern era warfare useful as opposed to messing with it if you want to.

 

[kingpapawawa]

recon mission are vital to any well planned war. give me something.. a spy, a plane that can fly at altitude that the enemy cant spot, a group of marines that can sneak in undetected, a satellite, anything would be nice... somehow in the civ5 world this does not exist.. but if my scout walked thru German territory in 1200BC i can know where you build a city in 1840AD...

bombers have been destroying roads and bridges to slow down enemy invasions for many years now and i definitely miss carpet bombing in civ5

 

[DrPepper836]

The obvious answer to recon missions is to do what I think should've been done in Civ IV: make recon missions interceptable, and make it so that doing a recon mission over someone who you don't have open borders with counts as a DoW.

 

[NukeEm]

I like air. It's helps advancing forces, softens positions for me and are very versatile. I think air is tuned just fine. I wish there were a recon options though. I like scouting before committing to a push.