Airship: the moost ridiculous unit in the game?

[PotatoOverdose]

The airship as a unit is fine. The civ games have been in dire need of a decent air to sea unit for a long time (Bombers are air to ground and get penalties for attacking sea units, Fighters aren't terribly impressive when attacking sea units either...). While I can see why some people say they are overpowered, consider that they are designed to be anti-naval units which is, as someone posted earlier, related to their original purpose which was naval scouting. While it may be true that the concept of an air-to-sea unit could have been implemented better, their are alot of things that make less sense in civ. Navy Seals for example: SEALS operate in very small groups, thats their whole point. They are an elite tiny squad meant to go behind enemy lines. Theres no way a few SEALS could take out an entire unit or division of infantry or standard marines in regular combat, and if you put SEALS in a large army, they loose their tactical advantage since you would be using them for an overt frontal assault. Going back to the original topic, airships are counterintuitive and historically inaccurate (as are so many other things in civ), but they fill a niche in terms of being the only decent air to sea unit.

 

[lumpthing]

DOes anyone know what I have to do to make the Airship only do recon missions? the xml does have the fields clearly labeled as perform airstrike, airbombard, interdiction, or recon.

thx

I think changing <bOnlyDefensive>0</bOnlyDefensive> to <bOnlyDefensive>1</bOnlyDefensive> would work. I'm not sure whether the AI would understand not to build many of them though.

 

[PimpyMicPimp]

I think Airships are pretty ridiculous.

Offtopic: I find it funny how "ridiculous" is spelled correctly, as it often misspelled is online, but "most" has an extra 'o' I'm not being a grammar Nazi, I just found it funny

 

[obsolete]

Thank God airships are in this latest expansion.

Because if they weren't, I'd have to wade through a 5 thread deep discussion on how rediculously [sic] over-powered Stealth-Bombers are, and how they make Civ IV into a broken game, and don't even make any sense.

So please... please... please Firaxis, keep the AirShips in. The fate of the Stealth-Bombers depends on it!

 

[Spaced out]

I like how you can launch a spaceship to Alpha Centauri without advanced flight.

Rockets and turbine engines are completely different technologies and you really don't need to know anything about planes to build a rocket or vise versa.

The U.S. had a man on the moon before we had stealth bombers. The only thing stoping us from flying to another planet is the powerplant. That and the fact that there is no real way to make a profit from landing on Mars.

On topic,

I don't mind airships. When the A.I. has them I just sail my privateers back home. Transports full of workers can quickly add a massive and semi mobile air fleet to any invasion.

However an Anti-aircraft gun building in cities makes the most sense if one wanted to add a counter-unit to the game.

 

[bardolph]

Thank God airships are in this latest expansion.

Because if they weren't, I'd have to wade through a 5 thread deep discussion on how rediculously [sic] over-powered Stealth-Bombers are...

I love how you annotate your own spelling mistake!

 

[Napalm102]

Rockets and turbine engines are completely different technologies and you really don't need to know anything about planes to build a rocket or vise versa.

Not really true, the engines themselves maybe different, but aerodynamics and control issues are still very much related, with plenty of cross overs, like a rocket plane or a rocket powered by a turbojet.

And I very much agree with the earlier post that advocate a balance in the game. There should be a counter available and a tri or bi-plane sounds like a good choice.

 

[obsolete]

There should be a counter available and a tri or bi-plane sounds like a good choice.

Yes, yes. And once everyone here gets what they wan't, we'll be down to how OVER-POWERED the mighty Ballista-Elephant is. And how this rediculous UU needs some sort of mega-counters to stop it too....

 

[seasnake]

I tried to balance this by making some changes. I upped the range of the airship and gave it a minor air bomb so now it can recon better but do mild damage. I also added a Biplane using the Road to War unit that needs physics and combustion, but not flight. The Biplane has intercept and air strike (double against naval units).

The problem is the Airships can now wipe-out improvements, which gets real lopsided real fast (one turn can deprive a neighbor of iron, horses, coal or oil). So, for all that I didn't much care for the original version, I think I'll be putting it back the way it was. Maybe I'll add an anti aircraft gun with some other tech.

 

[cryogenics]

~hey guys

I love airships - they've saved me a number of times - especially when playing on Island map.

player_13

 

[Wolfshanze]

Some things to note here...

Airships SHOULD come before aircraft... lighter then air travel did exist long before heavier then air flight. Combustion should be tied to Zeppelins however.

As for range, yes, the Zeppelin should have range similar to the bomber... trans-oceanic flight was ONLY available with Zeppelins for the most part until the 1940s. The Graf Zeppelin routinely flew from Europe to South America... how many biplanes and other aircraft did that in the 1920s or 30s?

I did add biplane (and triplane) fighters and bombers in my Wolfshanze mod... so you can have Fokker Triplanes and Sopwith Camels chasing down Zeppelins in my mod.

 

[Stuck in Pi]

I enjoy airships, they can help units live if attacking cities. The only thing is that since there isn't a counter, all units are vulnerable. But the AI will sometimes make enough airships that it turns into a promotion fest when you get your first few fighters. I like the idea of a tri or bi plane counter.

 

[Dutch Canuck]

Here's a simple solution to *fix* airships: award machine guns the ability to fire one free 1st strike at airships that are attacking a city or fort - the math could allow, say, a 50% survival rate for the airships - and change the upgrade of airships to bombers. Then give bombers, but not fighters, the ability to detect and sink submarines (more easily than attack subs though). Upgrading airships into bombers shouldn't be cheap, but it is a better fit IMHO. The machine gun is stretching things a little - well many things are stretched in the civ series anyways - though it is a timely counter since Railroad (for machine gun) and Physics (for airship) are contemporary techs. An alternative to the machine gun could be a free 1st strike vs airships by artillery based in cities and forts, but artillery units take longer to acquire than machine gun units (the Artillery tech actually requires Physics!). I think the anti-airship tweak of the machine gun is the most practical counter without making bigger changes to the game.

There, all fixed!

and

 

[Wolfshanze]

Here's a simple solution to *fix* airships: award machine guns the ability to fire one free 1st strike at airships that are attacking a city or fort - the math could allow, say, a 50% survival rate for the airships - and change the upgrade of airships to bombers. Then give bombers, but not fighters, the ability to detect and sink submarines (more easily than attack subs though). Upgrading airships into bombers shouldn't be cheap, but it is a better fit IMHO. The machine gun is stretching things a little - well many things are stretched in the civ series anyways - though it is a timely counter since Railroad (for machine gun) and Physics (for airship) are contemporary techs. An alternative to the machine gun could be a free 1st strike vs airships by artillery based in cities and forts, but artillery units take longer to acquire than machine gun units (the Artillery tech actually requires Physics!). I think the anti-airship tweak of the machine gun is the most practical counter without making bigger changes to the game.

There, all fixed!

and

I personally don't think Airships are broke at all... the most annoying thing about airships is they are too effective against ships (perhaps)... I've never heard of a single ground-based MG taking-out an airship in history, so that doesn't sound like an answer.

Still, I think the best counter to an airship is early fighters (biplanes/triplanes).

Make Physics+Combustion the requirement for airships... and Flight (which immediately trails Physics) the requirement for early fighters... that only gives airships (at best) a one-tech grace period (if that)... and frankly, airships can't kill anything, so what's the big deal anyways? Oh, and WWII-era fighters can come with Flight+Radio...

There... problem solved.

 

[arstal]

Is that how you're going to do it in your mod?

Sounds like a good solution.

The biggest problem is I usually rush to Radio, so I never get the WWI-period stuff in that case.

 

[Wolfshanze]

Is that how you're going to do it in your mod?

Sounds like a good solution.

Yep... exactly how it's handled.

I have distinct WWI/WWII eras in my mod... Assembly Line, Physics, Combustion, Flight & Artillery are your basis for most WWI units (Infantry, Early Tanks, Early Fighters, Early Bombers, Artillery, Dreadnoughts) and Industrialism, Radio & Rocketry (plus the WWI techs) are what makes the WWII units (AT Infantry, Tanks, Heavy Tanks, Fighters, Bombers, Battleships).

 

[The_Reckoning]

On the other hand, once you get Flight they upgrade to fighters for only 100 gold each, which I reckon is a pretty damn good deal (even if it kinda makes no sense).

lol
I think it makes more sense that Cavalry --> Gunships. Maybe the flight crews of the Zeppelins are more easily taught to pilot regular planes ?

Airship --> Fighter plane

vs.

Horse --> Helicopter

IMO the airship should upgrade to helicopters, and helis should be able to see subs. That way the seeing submarines wouldn't become obsolete.

 

[The_Reckoning]

They probably should unlock with Chemistry, not Physics. The table of elements and atomic weights and refining of gasses is all about Chemistry.

Flight is heavier-than-air flight and is definitely not the right tech for airships.

I think there should be a baloon-type unit which comes with Chemistry or something similar.

The montgolfière, or a hot air baloon of some sort. Upgrades to Airship. Range 4, recon mission?

 

[Wolfshanze]

I think there should be a baloon-type unit which comes with Chemistry or something similar.

The montgolfière, or a hot air baloon of some sort. Upgrades to Airship. Range 4, recon mission?

Useless in Civ4 terms... what are you going to do with a powerless gas bag? Range-4? Hardly... there's no propulsion system on a hot air baloon.

The only use balloons had prior to the advent of the powered zeppelin was static observation... ie: tethered to the ground right where they were put-up... range-0 (range-1 if you're lucky).

Frankly, there's really no place for a powerless gas bag in Civ4... pass on this idea.

 

[Galadrion]

20,000 Leagues Under the Sea was written long before anyone could build a submarine.

Not true: submersible vehicles saw active duty (even if not spectacularly successful duty) during the American Civil War. Though you are correct about the idea not being original to Verne: I've seen both Greek and Danish (Viking, actually) historical documents putting forward the idea, and da Vinci's Codices have some fairly detailed and forward-thinking plans - some of which were used as the basis for those Civil War subs.