Ahriman
Tyrant
Of course it represents a squadron - and always did.
This is true for basically *every* turn based strategy game; the graphic is a representative icon, not trying to represent every individual model.
Air units combat model : return to civ 2 model ?
- Thread starter Lachlan
- Start date
Of course it represents a squadron - and always did.
This is true for basically *every* turn based strategy game; the graphic is a representative icon, not trying to represent every individual model.
It's probably one of my least favourite parts of the game. Each airplane has a set amount of fuel and you need to manually bring them back to an airport each time to refuel or they crash and you lose the unit.
The one unit per tile thing works in Panzer General though, as there's a seperate layer for ground and air units, and you don't have to keep an airplane directly on top of an airport, you can keep it one tile away from it so an airport services 7 tiles at a time (one hex in every direction of the airport and the port itself)
Oh my! And my spearman unit will have to represent more than 3 people with spears?
sputnik323
Magelord
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2008
- Messages
- 394
Yeah thats annoying .. should have an auto return to base when fuel is low, or have a limited range thereby showing they return to base each turn.
CivIIs Air System was hillarious, totally unrealistic but still very funny 
That said, this would really be a big step back. BTS already showed the right direction, a limited number of squadrons in a city. There is just the problem left that you can still have 2000 tanks in the same tile, so it was inconsistent.
With the great 1 unit per tile rule it will make a lot of sense, lets say a normal city can base a squadron with an airfield, 2 with an airport or something.
And the air system currently in BTS (indirect air support) makes also a lot of sense, no general ever moved arround with his planes, he said "bomb those tank division".
That said, this would really be a big step back. BTS already showed the right direction, a limited number of squadrons in a city. There is just the problem left that you can still have 2000 tanks in the same tile, so it was inconsistent.
With the great 1 unit per tile rule it will make a lot of sense, lets say a normal city can base a squadron with an airfield, 2 with an airport or something.
And the air system currently in BTS (indirect air support) makes also a lot of sense, no general ever moved arround with his planes, he said "bomb those tank division".
From the "realism" perspective, you want your aircraft as close to the front (or their targets, whether offensive or defensive (e.g., air defense)), as is secure. IF that were somehow applied, you would have an airbase "unit" that could EITHER base aircraft OR move to another location. Like Civ4 spies, it would not be able to serve as a base in the turn that it moved. Yes, I know the odds of this occurring in Civ5 are VERY slim.
In WWII European theater, Allied bombers & fighters flew from England because they HAD to. After the Normandy breakout and the supply pipelines were in place, many bases were moved to France. In North Africa, similar circumstances applied, even more so.
In WWII European theater, Allied bombers & fighters flew from England because they HAD to. After the Normandy breakout and the supply pipelines were in place, many bases were moved to France. In North Africa, similar circumstances applied, even more so.
.
Ahriman
Tyrant
Civ 2 air combat will not be in the game....
I think Civ2's system could be salvaged. The situation you described was more of an AI problem than anything else.
Also, doesn't anyone else think it is ridiculous that infantry carrying man-portable shoulder-launched missiles can shoot down aircraft at 50 thousand feet? The FIM-92 Stinger missile has a maximum target ceiling of around 12-13 thousand feet. It should take a much larger missile to carry out this mission, such as those from a fixed SAM site or vehicle (MIM-72 Chaparral or pretty much any warship).
Yeah, but an aircraft carrier should be able to carry multiple fighters, though only one of them should be able to fly directly overhead, the rest would have to move to other hexes.
Minor Annoyance
Deity
I don't know why people are worried about a return to a civ2 model. Considering how much units are changing it's going to be a civ5 model and probably isn't all that much like any of the previous.
Greizer85
Emperor
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2009
- Messages
- 1,210
I'm kinda hoping Carriers will be two-hex units so they can carry two planes. Imagine the riots that that would cause among the "This-is-not-Unreal-this-is-ARCHERY!!!1111eleven" crowd...
Since some people brought it up. You want Airfields back? They're already in the game. Just build a fortress and station your airplanes in them. Want a port? Just station your ships in them. It's all there already and hopefully will also be in Civ V.
And yeah Civ II air combat was awful!
And yeah Civ II air combat was awful!
Ahriman
Tyrant
True, but why would you bother? What possible design advantage is there to the Civ2 model over the Civ4 model? Aircraft IRL are used as support, not assault units, and they can't be damaged by anything except aircraft intercepting or ground units with AA weapons (an intercept chance).
No.
Who says they're shoulder-launched? That's just an icon. The unit could easily have some Patriot-type batteries or something that they cart around with them.
Besides, how many aircraft are actually able to tactically engage moving ground targets from 50,000 feet? Particularly before the last few years of laser-guided weaponry?
If the ground unit was able to shoot down at high altitude, then they'd be able to protect more than just their tile, they'd be able to protect anything behind their tile.
Should an aircraft carrier be able to carry multiple fighter squadrons?
Do you really, really think that a single fighter in civ V will represent a single fighter?
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
I'm of the opinion that aircraft should be exempt from the one tile-one unit rule. They're not really stacks of doom and, in the case of a city or airfield, would be vulnerable if stacked anyway because they can only be defended with one unit. I'd also argue that, for practical purposes, ships should be able to carry more than one unit.
Minor Annoyance
Deity
A recent interview (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/civilization-v-interview?page=1) they said there are three layers, so civilians, ground units, and air units can be in the same tile. I assume it that applies to water but slightly modified. Like water, air and either civilian or ground unit.
Ahriman
Tyrant
Its certainly imaginable that multiple air units could be based in the same tile. The stacking functions differently if they can only be based in airfields or cities or carriers.
LegionSteve
Motörhead
From reading that, if land tiles can contain 1 military unit, 1 civilian unit (e.g. worker) and 1 air unit, I expect water tiles can contain 1 military vessel, 1 civilian unit (workboat) and 1 air unit.
For air units, 1 air unit per tile could mean:
1) They only occupy an air slot when they leave the base/carrier. This would mean you could have more than one per base/carrier. It also suggests you move them around from tile to tile like in SMAC (or CIV2 which I gather was the same though I never played it). If they do this hopefully they will find a better way to represent aircraft range than having them run out of fuel and crash if you forget to send them back to base every other turn...
2) Aircraft always start and end in a base/carrier, and missions happen immediately like in CIV4. In that case the 1 air slot per tile must mean only 1 per base/carrier, which seems quite a low limit on the number of air units you can have. However, since the overall number of units is going to be limited, maybe that will be balanced.
3) something else which I haven't thought of (this is probably the most likely option)
Uhh, yes. Aircraft carriers are HUGE! Quote from Wikipedia:
From the article Carrier Air Wing.
Irrelevant.
Ahriman
Tyrant
Are they bigger than a land-based airforce base? Nope....
