All abord the nonsence train

Jerman

Would you like a Trade Agreement?
Joined
Aug 6, 2012
Messages
423
Why the can't a heli capture a city that has no health! This game it was the last capital. IDK but I want to blow my brains out because of this game. Civ 5 and this nonsense.
 
Because you can't read the part where it says the helicopters can't capture cities. Truly, if you had done that, you wouldn't be foaming out the mouth making yourself look like an idiot. It isn't like the drawback isn't documented, and it isn't something unique to CivV, given helicopters couldn't do it in CivIV either.

Seriously, try building up your reading comprehension and vocabulary. If you're going to blow your brains out because you can't read, that says more about you and less about the game.

Really. I know the could do it in civ 4. I did so. I'd better erase my cussing be for I get an infraction.
 
Plus realistically helicopters can't secure cities they need ground troops to do so. I know your mad and all but maybe watch the language a bit.
 
Really. I know the could do it in civ 4. I did so. I'd better erase my cussing be for I get an infraction.

And I edited down my response as well, since I understand the problem. Apologies.

CAN they in CivIV? Because I am pretty sure there have been times where I had to send paras out of the way simply because gunships didn't work.

Plus realistically helicopters can't secure cities they need ground troops to do so. I know your mad and all but maybe watch the language a bit.

Pretty much. Helicopters ignore terrain completely and being able to take cities would lead to hordes of players complaining about THAT.


Uhh... I would take a while to get one over seas, so I got a heli.

Yeah, but if its the last capital and at near no-health, I'm assuming you have bombers already pounding the remnants to nothing, so time wouldn't really matter much, would it?
 
\


Yeah, but if its the last capital and at near no-health, I'm assuming you have bombers already pounding the remnants to nothing, so time wouldn't really matter much, would it?

I pretty much just went to his border with carriers and nuked it 3 times and it could be a manner of a few turns before Hiawatha moves his forces to his capital. At least I saved before the war. TY for the advice.
 
This is one of those situations in which realism must give way to balance. Okay, so it's a bit jarring that helicopters can't take cities, but the alternative is forces consisting solely of air units and helicopters, taking cities in your interior in the first turn of a war.
 
I think that they should allow siege units and helos to capture cities, but then the city automatically begins to be razed because those troops can't "occupy" a city, it must be destroyed.
 
I think that they should allow siege units and helos to capture cities, but then the city automatically begins to be razed because those troops can't "occupy" a city, it must be destroyed.

Siege and helicopters can't clean up buildings/ruins/cellars. Allowing archers/cb/xbows to capture cities would make more sense as they can clean up buildings. Of course, if that was allowed we would never make other units than archers/cb/xbows until maybe cannons/artillery - melee units would be a rare sight :)
 
Siege and helicopters can't clean up buildings/ruins/cellars. Allowing archers/cb/xbows to capture cities would make more sense as they can clean up buildings. Of course, if that was allowed we would never make other units than archers/cb/xbows until maybe cannons/artillery - melee units would be a rare sight :)

You're sort of following my line of thought, but not quite. Because a helo or siege unit can't clear buildings, they resort to blasting the hell out of it instead. Hence the automatic razing.

I take as my example the Kenilworth Castle in Warwickshire England. It was built in the 1200s. In the English Civil War it was captured by the Roundheads. They took the castle with cannon. They were unable or unwilling to garrison it, so they stuffed the central keep with gunpowder and blew it up to keep it from being used by the royalists again. They sapped the walls and drained the moat too.
 
A military can't really secure and occupy a piece of land 100% without having boots on the ground.
 
A military can't really secure and occupy a piece of land 100% without having boots on the ground.

Everyong keeps saying this, but it also applies to tanks. And no, tanks can't clean out basements or whatever.

That said, I agree that balance is key here. It would be too much if Helis could sieze cities given their awesome movement.
 
I pretty much just went to his border with carriers and nuked it 3 times and it could be a manner of a few turns before Hiawatha moves his forces to his capital. At least I saved before the war. TY for the advice.

Next time, just send a tank or an infantry or two along with them. Nobody assaults another country with just helicopters, seriously. Not if they're expecting to conquer it and take cities, at any rate.
 
You're sort of following my line of thought, but not quite. Because a helo or siege unit can't clear buildings, they resort to blasting the hell out of it instead. Hence the automatic razing.

I take as my example the Kenilworth Castle in Warwickshire England. It was built in the 1200s. In the English Civil War it was captured by the Roundheads. They took the castle with cannon. They were unable or unwilling to garrison it, so they stuffed the central keep with gunpowder and blew it up to keep it from being used by the royalists again. They sapped the walls and drained the moat too.

For a castle that may happen, but razing a whole city takes effort. Even when a city (or part of a city) is nothing but ash and rubble you will frequently have lots of people hidden. Picking historical examples are always fun :)

Moscow after Napoléon sacked it in 1812 and it was torched by the russians, there were still thousands and thousands in cellars or huddling in the few remaining buildings. Another example is of course Stalingrad which was nothing but rubble trampled by boots on the ground, bombed by artillery and planes. Pretty much exposed to state-of-the-art city destruction and it still had thousands of civilians.

Which is another point - razing a city should probably require a military unit present doing mass executions "Warzaw uprising"-style until there is nothing left. Right now you can just choose raze and move your troops towards the next city. With the military away people will try to make the best of it. (Ok, I see salt+carthage argument :) )

Edit: word order
 
Everyong keeps saying this, but it also applies to tanks. And no, tanks can't clean out basements or whatever.

A 'tank' unit in Civ is the equivalent of an armored division. Armored divisions always have their accompanying integrated mobile infantry support, to one degree or another, depending on the country's army and their formational doctrines. Tank units can indeed clean out cellars and attics and take and hold cities and territory. Granted, most armies usually include separate infantry divisions in direct support of armored divisions for that purpose, but armored divisions are more than just a bunch of tanks rumbling around all by themselves.
 
Everyong keeps saying this, but it also applies to tanks. And no, tanks can't clean out basements or whatever.

That said, I agree that balance is key here. It would be too much if Helis could sieze cities given their awesome movement.

A tank is still on the ground. A tank can capture and hold a piece of land in a way that a helicopter can't.

Think of it this way. Imagine if there was an island that was unknown and just discovered by satellites yesturday. Several countries want to claim that island as their territory. If a helicopter flies over the island, there is not really a legitimate claim of ownership. But if a country brought tanks to the island and started driving around, and they were the first ones to do it, then that land can be rightfully claimed by that country. You basically just need humans on the ground, whether they are on foot, in a vehicle or horseback, it doesn't matter, humans are still on the ground.
 
Why the can't a heli capture a city that has no health! This game it was the last capital. IDK but I want to blow my brains out because of this game. Civ 5 and this nonsense.

Because it doesn't have a one man army like Rambo inside. It is ridiculous, a heli should be able to take a city. Air cavalry is used to land troops and create a perimeter.
 
I'm not sure but I sorta remember an mod in civ 4 where attack helicopter could take over cities. Several nations vanished overnight to me.

Its more of an gameplay reason why helicopters can't take over cities, they can attack them but the killing blow must be delivered by an ground unit.
 
Top Bottom