Air Units

[SJSerio]

Has anybody heard on how Air units will be handled in Civ 4? Will it be like in Civ 3? I don't know how anybody else around how about the Civ 3 method of handling air units, but I personally liked it. It reduced alot of worry and hassle in dealing with fuel issues. In Civ 2, I probably lost most of my air units from running out of fuel. Anyway, the Civ 3 way was still a little buggy, imo, but it definately was my preferance and I hope that they implement it in this version as well. I don't think too much has been said on this subject... not that I could find anyway.

 

[Superkrest]

i liked not using the fuel...but i thought air combat(along with navy..but thats a whole different thread) was completely horrible....it needed sooo much work to make it effective it was rediculose. im hoping they keep the same style..but im soo very much hoping that they re tool the whole darn system as well. if the airforce is as useless in civ4 as it was in civ3....i might just break down and cry

 

[SJSerio]

I agree. Though I found that the Air Force was good for recon (saving money for sending out spies every turn just to keep an eye on units in a specific area) and for bombing. However, I felt that it was a bit too powerful in this regard. Also, no matter how much I played it, I don't ever recall ever losing any air units, unless I blindly left them alone in an unguarded city or colony, etc, and an enemy ground unit overtook them.

 

[MrMahk]

defenitely agreed 100% with all of you, especially since i still havent figured out how to use fighters in civ3

 

[sweeneygov]

I lost air units, but to air defence fighters in the city i was bombing, thats it. Apart from that i was just blitzing everything in range. air units much too powerful, i didnt actually get shot down that often really.

what would be good is a SAM unit or some infantryman with anti-aircraft weapons to shoot down aircraft attacking my land forces! Running out of fuel was cool though, in an urgent situation i could choose to sacrifice my aircraft for one last attack on a unit if it was a serious threat and needed weakening!

 

[Raggamuffin]

I actually prefer the Civ2 way of handling it here. Somehow it's easier to remember you actually have those air units when you have to move them like regular units. Plus I hated how the screen shifted when targetting far away.

And in Civ3 I always thought they were a bit too powerful. As someone mentioned they are hard to beat.

 

[Superkrest]

jsut to clarify...the bombers where only too powerfull because everything else in the system was totally useless...mobil sams,flak, even defending aircraft did nothing...and rarely did the AI even use any thing air...including bombers. the whole system was junk. you could win a world war with out using anything other then transports and ground units.

 

[-Tomasz-]

Everytime when I bomb an advanced civ, my first bomber is always shot down by an enemy fighter! This must be my luck.

Anyway, I like the Civ3 system a lot and I hope they'll use it in civ 4, although I'd prefer if their range could be bigger. Maybe you could extend it via techs. That would be pretty cool.

Tomasz

 

[sweeneygov]

even in Civ 2 air power was relatively powerful. an AI would create hundreds of stealth bombers and bomb all my units and cities into oblivion, even if they had a SAM unit in the city! at least in Civ3 air units cant actually kill a unit, only weaken it.

 

[V. Soma]

in Conquests the DO kill units

 

[sweeneygov]

Does that not make air power unchallengable?

 

[The End Is Nigh]

The air units in CivIIII were OK. And Bombers should be able to cause heavy damage. After all they are easy to shoot down (I try to build a SAM in each of my city plus two jet fighters which are enough to destroy any Bombers attempting to attack my cities). A city without such protection is like a sitting duck.

What I would like to see in CivIV is the ability to transport mechanised units through large transport aircraft across many squares (rather than just foot units through helicopters which have a limited range).

 

[sweeneygov]

CivIIII ? CivIII right? A SAM and two fighters, is that all? I have to put in at least 3 or 4 fighters in every city to ensure protection!

Should be able to operate choppers off of carriers, i did it in Civ2, that was cool.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Well regardless of their lack of balance, the way in which air units were used to attack, defend, etc. in Civ 3 was an improvement over Civ 1/2.

 

[Superkrest]

the idea was a definite improvement...but the whole thing was kinda useless

 

[frekk]

Airpower is just too devastating in C3C. Once I get bombers, it's pretty much game over every time - I more or less stop building land units, because you only need a few from that point in. Forget SODs of modern armour, all you need is a huge stack of bombers. Don't use them till you've got two dozen or so, then start blasting. If the enemy places lots of fighters in his nearest cities, you lose a few in the first run, but then of course you drive in with ground units and take the city easily - he loses all those fighters, and after that, you're better off with your SOD of bombers than any other kind of SOD because you can hit him all over the place, every round.

I think people who see airpower as ineffective aren't using enough bombers, that's all. It's actually far too powerful, at least against the AI. Just like ground units, they are useless if you don't have enough, but once you get past a certain critical mass, which is usually alot less than a ground SOD, they're ridiculously powerful.

 

[Ghafhi]

Hopefully sams will be worth something and fighters do there job. I agree with Frekk that air superiority is good superior offense. I do combine my bombers with radar artillery. Radar is by far the best form of bombardment and superiority for close range. If you are warring with a civ near you radar will always take of hp from the defending units where as bombers sometimes blow up other stuff. Bombers however have the advantage if you catch your enemy trying to move a bunch of units in your terrain.

 

[FinnMcCool]

I play a lot of mods, and mod myself, so my experience is based on choosing whatever attack values you want. But most games, I find that ALL air power including bombers, is WAY too over-rated, since ....

THE PRECISION-BOMBING FLAG IS BROKEN!!!

Because I have no choice in the matter of where the bombs are dropped, I've come to really hate air power. It's sad. Air power can win or lose a war, and if you want to create any real-world mods, it's absolutely essential to give air power the ability to bomb their targets. Instead, we see population kill, destroyed libraries, markets, colloseums, etc... with no loss to units. I admit, bombardment carries a lot of collateral damage, but jeez, the bombadier should be able to direct the drops a little!!

 

[bkwrm79]

They need to fix the C3C model, but I hope they keep it.

Even in C3C, modding to increase the chance of interception and removing lethal land from bombers really helps to balance things. Even at that a bomber squadron is a bargain for the price.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

My feeling about C3:C air power was the same as it was for espionage. It was perfectly fine conceptually, it just needed tweaking and improvement of all the various elements in order to make it work. That said, I fear that they will go the same way with air units as they did with espionage-throw the baby out with the bath water. i.e. get enough complaints, so we will simply chuck the whole system out-rather than find out where it went wrong, and improve it . Hope I am wrong though.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.