Air units odds

[Chorda]

Some promotions to air units act weird in some situations.

1. Air supremacy.
This one should include helicopter gunships to counter to.

Spoiler :

On practice there are no bonuses against copters at all. IF it was balanced out, then right, precise, description needed.

2. Air sweep.
Air sweep doesn't "sweep out" enemy units on friendly and neutral tiles.

Spoiler :

Which is super weird and not obvious.

3. Bombers&fighters vs Cities.
Not a promotion tho just odd calculations.

Spoiler :

Turns out fighter unit is more effective in bombing cities than B17 - bomber takes heavier damage (without any obvious calculations and against a formula of damage logic) thus fighter with a repair promotion becomes preferable weapon of choice which is ridiculuos. I know there is an airport and probably shelter-defence which inflicts damage on any air units who raid a city. IF fighter is more maneuverable and bomber is clutchy/clunky which realisticly could make a difference, Then a right description needed. Taking into account fighters can heal each turn and have strong "dogfighter" promotion this leads to disbalance between these two units. More over, wasting a social policy to get a crappy unit (which main function destroying cities) is just bs

 

[Delvemor]

For 1. I took a look and found this. Probably not intended.

Spoiler Air Supremacy I and II :

For 2. Air Sweep is supposed to have an effect on enemy aircraft only, not land or naval units.

Spoiler Air Sweep :

For 3. I think the damage received from the interception is lower because the fighter has Air Supremacy, which increases its combat strength during the interception, but not during the bombing of the city. So that's why the fighter would deal less damage to the city than the bomber but also receive less damage from the interception. However it would make sense only if the interception is made by an enemy fighter.

More over, wasting a social policy to get a crappy unit (which main function destroying cities) is just bs

Just because the B17 starts with Siege I doesn't mean you have to use it against cities primarily. It also starts with Evasion without the need of going Siege in the first place, so I just go Air Targeting instead.

 

[bryanw1995]

I've noticed that my 3.1.1 game is rock solid, until I get air units, then any time I mess with air units I get a game disconnect/logout. Once I realized this, I just quick making air units and game is fine.

edit: apparently, it's just big wars late game. Game doesn't like that haha.

 

[N.Core]

1. Helicopter (as a unit combat type) is not used, so it's probably an unintended bug that Helicopter Gunship (unit class type) has a 0% modifier (screenshot above).
2. Bug (as explained above)? Please report it on Github.
3. Evasion bug. Someone already reported it on Github. Should be fixed in the next version.

 

[phantomaxl1207]

Does the Jet Fighter bonus vs Helicopters work?

 

[alchx]

For 2. Air Sweep is supposed to have an effect on enemy aircraft only, not land or naval units.

It's funny, according to the tooltip it damages any interceptors and that's how it works. Which leads to a very absurd sequence of actions: first we fly bombers and fighter-interceptors in order to provoke a group of interceptors (both ground and naval). Then we clean up the area, inflicting 30 damage to each, because this is more efficient.

 

[Delvemor]

It's funny, according to the tooltip it damages any interceptors and that's how it works.

You're right. There is a discrepancy between the tooltip when selecting a fighter and the one in the Civilopedia.

 

[azum4roll]

It's explicitly set to 0% in PromotionChanges.sql

 

[azum4roll]

Does the Jet Fighter bonus vs Helicopters work?

That one works. It's a bonus against the Helicopter unit class.
This explicit anti-Helicopter promotion is probably why Air Supremacy's anti-Helicopter bonus was taken out.

 

[N.Core]

It's explicitly set to 0% in PromotionChanges.sql

View attachment 651616

Why not just delete it if it's set to 0?

 

[CppMaster]

Why not just delete it if it's set to 0?

So it's explicitly set to 0. Otherwise, someone could think that it was missed.

 

[N.Core]

So it's explicitly set to 0. Otherwise, someone could think that it was missed.

Looking at the commit history, Gazebo made this change 2 years ago.

 

[CppMaster]

Helicopter in Civ5 is not really an air unit. It's more like floating skirmisher. Like a zeppelin.

 

[Tekamthi]

yes there is a relatively unused 'unitcombat_helicopter' under the hood in VP. Helicopter gunships are not unitcombat_helicopter, hence the strangeness we're seeing in this thread

 

[N.Core]

yes there is a relatively unused 'unitcombat_helicopter' under the hood in VP. Helicopter gunships are not unitcombat_helicopter, hence the strangeness we're seeing in this thread

This is why I'm curious if we can use that unit combat type as a Mounted Ranged unit combat, but with renamed text to prevent confusion.

 

[Tekamthi]

This is why I'm curious if we can use that unit combat type as a Mounted Ranged unit combat, but with renamed text to prevent confusion.

Unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean, I think this is more or less what's occurring -- Helicopter gunship is the same unitcombat as whatever it upgrades from, ie light tank or w/e, so unitcombat = mounted ranged. These anti-air-related sql/xml table entries are done to ensure, in a roundabout way, that some kind of text shows up in game to represent what bonuses are applied etc. If you left the helicopter gunship entry blank, instead of expressly setting to its default value of 0, it probably wouldn't display in pedia, leaving only the misleading helicopter = 100 entry. To solve this, we could delete *both* sql entries to achieve consistency in pedia; there would be no modifier info for either unitcombat helicopter nor helictoper gunship, though this then leaves anti-air's treatment of helicopters somewhat ambiguous.

I think to eliminate the helicopter confusion, it would be best to set the anti air modifier value for UnitCombat_Helicopter in UnitPromotions_UnitCombatMods to 0 (it is currently 100, and this doesn't matter one way or the other since there are no true helicopter units in VP, but when you read pedia without ever having looked at sql tables, this implementation seems contradictory.. helicopters get 100 but helicopter gunships get 0? just make them both 0, or both x amount if community decides anti-air promo should affect helicopters)

I think OP makes some good points about functionality of air units. Between various changes to functionality of air and anti-air, my very-intermittent play schedule, confusing pedia entries, etc. over time I've kind of lost track of precisely how these air units work in-game. I just click and hope for the best

 

[N.Core]

Unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean, I think this is more or less what's occurring -- Helicopter gunship is the same unitcombat as whatever it upgrades from, ie light tank or w/e, so unitcombat = mounted ranged. These anti-air-related sql/xml table entries are done to ensure, in a roundabout way, that some kind of text shows up in game to represent what bonuses are applied etc. If you left the helicopter gunship entry blank, instead of expressly setting to its default value of 0, it probably wouldn't display in pedia, leaving only the misleading helicopter = 100 entry. To solve this, we could delete *both* sql entries to achieve consistency in pedia; there would be no modifier info for either unitcombat helicopter nor helictoper gunship, though this then leaves anti-air's treatment of helicopters somewhat ambiguous.

I think to eliminate the helicopter confusion, it would be best to set the anti air modifier value for UnitCombat_Helicopter in UnitPromotions_UnitCombatMods to 0 (it is currently 100, and this doesn't matter one way or the other since there are no true helicopter units in VP, but when you read pedia without ever having looked at sql tables, this implementation seems contradictory.. helicopters get 100 but helicopter gunships get 0? just make them both 0, or both x amount if community decides anti-air promo should affect helicopters)

I think OP makes some good points about functionality of air units. Between various changes to functionality of air and anti-air, my very-intermittent play schedule, confusing pedia entries, etc. over time I've kind of lost track of precisely how these air units work in-game. I just click and hope for the best

There's a problem with Mounted Ranged line borrowing Archer unit combat type, which is that they borrow the same promotion and any stuff (like buildings) that uses unit combat type level. Not really related to this problem, but it's a problem. And one of my suggestions is to use the Helicopter unit combat type for the whole Mounted Ranged unit.

This promotion problem should use unit class for Helicopter Gunship instead of unit combat type. I don't know why people didn't notice that for so long.

 

[Rekk]

This promotion problem should use unit class for Helicopter Gunship instead of unit combat type. I don't know why people didn't notice that for so long.

The bonus to the unit class was there originally and it was specifically removed in the March 2nd 2021 patch. The bonus to the unitcombat is a holdover from BNW.

 

[N.Core]

The bonus to the unit class was there originally and it was specifically removed in the March 2nd 2021 patch. The bonus to the unitcombat is a holdover from BNW.

So then the text is wrong? But why is it set to 0? I don't get it.

 

[Stalker0]

To me this is probably a text issue. I don't think helicopters need to get mowed down by fighters anymore than they do now. They aren't an amazing unit to begin with.