1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Air-raids and city structures.

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by MajorDisaster84, Aug 24, 2010.

  1. MajorDisaster84

    MajorDisaster84 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Messages:
    59
    Location:
    Pullman, WA/Seattle, WA
    Rather than hijack another thread, I'll start a new one for a fairly straightforward question.

    Cities have hit points now, but they're also home to structures. What I'd like to know is, can bombers damage or destroy individual structures in cities when making air-strikes on cities? When one gets to more advanced aircraft, say, jet fighters or stealth bombers, I wonder if they perhaps can select what structures to target? Perhaps not with a perfect certainty of destroying the target, but a percentage change of destroying the selected structure?
     
  2. Louis XXIV

    Louis XXIV Le Roi Soleil

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2003
    Messages:
    13,579
    Location:
    Norfolk, VA
    They could in Civ3 (don't remember it working all that great half the time, though). I would hope so. Crippling a civ from the air was sometimes more fun than using air to actually win (in Civ3, I bombed every tile improvement and city building and brought them back to the stone age because they didn't have any planes to fight me).
     
  3. stealth_nsk

    stealth_nsk Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,513
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    Very unlikely. I don't see too much use of it to introduce such feature.
     
  4. generalwar

    generalwar Philosopher

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    Messages:
    407
    Location:
    Croatia
    Probably not, but, who knows?
     
  5. Aussie_Lurker

    Aussie_Lurker Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Messages:
    7,782
    Location:
    Adelaide, South Australia
    Why not? What if you want to take out their manufacturing capacity-like they tried to do in WWII?

    Aussie.
     
  6. stealth_nsk

    stealth_nsk Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,513
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    If speaking from the realism point of view funny thing is what primary targets will be happiness buildings - reducing enemy units strength by 1/3 has great impact right now, instead of delayed and local effect of decreased production :crazyeye:

    And from the gameplay perspective it needs some system to know the list of buildings in enemy city - this will be either exploit or will require some form of espionage. Surely, building destruction could be random (as in Civ 3), but not sure if that will benefit gameplay that much.

    Another issue is quite short range of bombers. Only stealth bombers will be able to reach cities next to front line.

    But in general I'm not against the idea, I just worried about proper implementation. In Civ 3 that wasn't fun.
     
  7. Mercade

    Mercade the Counsellor

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2002
    Messages:
    2,636
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Proximity to the border only increases the likelyhood that you have knowledge of the layout of the city and where the interesting buildings might be (whether production or happiness). Having your city bombed might even give a 2 round morale boost. Espionage can easily be implicit. In this context, being able to select a building (and then having a 33% chance of hitting something else) doesn't seem unreasonable at all.
     
  8. stealth_nsk

    stealth_nsk Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,513
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    I assume you're speaking about realism, completely laying off the gameplay, because:

    You suggest this to be a part of espionage system? How it should work?

    You mean happiness increase? So to fight negative consequences of war to your happiness you need to remove your air defenses? :crazyeye:
     
  9. smackthewise

    smackthewise Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2008
    Messages:
    364
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    I imagine it will be added through various mods. Such a Legends of Revolution in Civ4, where you can select to bomb ships in port, factories (production buildings in general), units etc.
     
  10. stealth_nsk

    stealth_nsk Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,513
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    Universal answer for 50% of threads here :)
     
  11. Xetal

    Xetal Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    82
    It would certainly encourage people to take the fight away from their major cities. Losing hundreds of years of buildings in a war would be almost as bad as losing the city itself.
     
  12. Tomice

    Tomice Passionate Smart-Ass

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2009
    Messages:
    2,321
    Location:
    Austria, EU, no kangaroos ;)
    It'd be realistic, at least for modern air units. But sniping certain buildings could be overpowered.

    There should be a way to weaken an enemy civ from air, except for killing their troops. There are enough examples in recent history of air strikes against a foe someone didn't want to invade, but only weaken him.
     
  13. stealth_nsk

    stealth_nsk Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,513
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    One more idea. You don't need buildings to be destroyed in cities you're going to conquer or convert to puppet-states. So this would be beneficial only if you're going to bomb cities far away from the front line, which you're not going to conquer at all.

    Stealth bombers seem to have enough range. So I'd suggest them to have special building-destroying mission. The buildings could be chosen randomly, or they could have a bombing priority like Factory-Armory-Barracks-... and destruction starts from the first building in the list available.
     
  14. Zhahz

    Zhahz PC Gamer

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2005
    Messages:
    1,615
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    If civ was a wargame, then sure. But it's not. It's a game that has war in it. WWII is a tiny slice of history (that you don't have to repeat) There are plenty of wargames out there with highly detailed and indepth combat. Civ doesn't really need it for combat to achieve what it's there for.

    Every single complication you add to warfare is something the AI will probably never do very well (again because it's not a wargame and the AI has a lot more to consider than just fighting), and thus it becomes something for the player to use to abuse the AI. I'd rather see combat kept basic while still enjoyable and have it be something the AI might be decent at. If you wanna ruin an AI's production, take over a production city - that's something the civ AI can understand.

    The AI isn't going to bomb you into the stone age because the AI isn't demented (I've done this to the AI too in Civ III...). Might be kinda interesting if the AI did do something like this to you occasionally when you pissed it off.
     
  15. stealth_nsk

    stealth_nsk Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,513
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    The more I think about it the more it looks clear for me what some kind of infrastructure bombing will be a Stealth bomber ability. I see no other reasons for their range.

    And since bombing improvements implementation would be even more difficult (because road air defense will become too difficult), I believe it will be city infrastructure bombing.
     
  16. Xetal

    Xetal Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    82
    or perhaps "damage" the buildings with bombardment attacks.

    It disables them and requires 10%-25% of their construction cost in hammers to repair. That way you could cause short/medium term damage to the city itself, but it wouldn't be catastrophic.
     
  17. stealth_nsk

    stealth_nsk Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,513
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    From the realism point of view - I think it requires 150-200% of construction cost to repair building after modern bomber strike :lol:

    From gameplay point of view - doubt it's worth introducing the whole new gameplay system just to 1 mission of 1 unit. If there was espionage, the system would be used here.
     
  18. Xetal

    Xetal Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    82
    I would think that it wouldn't take a specific mission to damage buildings.

    Any bombardment attack into a town would risk damaging the buildings. It would be a way to provide economic/infrastructure damage to a civ and it also provides a good reason to try to keep the fighting out of your own cities (which is good for a strategy game and it is also good for realism's sake)

    As for realism -vs- gameplay: I think that you would have to go with gameplay and the 10-25% damage to the building. That way you could repair your buildings and not set the city back 2000 years because of one war.
     
  19. stealth_nsk

    stealth_nsk Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    5,513
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    Exactly why I didn't use bombers against cities in Civ 3. I want to conquer cities, not ruins, even if ruins could be repaired faster. Terrible idea.
     
  20. Xetal

    Xetal Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    82
    It is a terrible idea because it forces you to make a choice?

    Would you prefer a game with no choices? No consequences? Maybe Civ isn't for you...

    You can either choose to sacrifice your troops by assaulting a city that you don't want to damage, or you can bombard it and more easily capture it... but at the cost of having to repair buildings.

    The entire point of the Civ series is strategic decision making. Suggesting that it is a "terrible idea" because there is no clear right answer that lets you roll forward without consequences is asinine.
     

Share This Page