Bombers nerfed? or City Defences buffed?

[Manol0]

I came back in the game after 7 months of absence. Well I got surprised seeing that the Bomber meta doesnt work any more. My bombers were total ineffective against a city with 105 city walls; doing maximum damage less than 2% per hit. Last game I played in summer I won a conquest victory deity standard map before 300 turn using this tactic cuz I was needin only 4-5 bomber hits to break down 150+ city walls.
However the most unexpected surprise was that even GDR range attack was making only 4-5% damage per hit (agaist that 105 city walls city) ... while it could destroy 200 city walls with 2-3 shots before.
I searched on the net for civ vi updates and I found out that last one was in May (before my last summer game) and none change was made as for Bombers and GDRs siege capabilities.
I m confused and I really cant figure out what I m missing.
PS: I have the save if needed

 

[Linklite]

That's odd. To confirm, you had the siege cannon upgrade for the GDR?

 

[Manol0]

That's odd. To confirm, you had the siege cannon upgrade for the GDR?

No... but still...

 

[MrRadar]

PS: I have the save if needed

So... could you upload it? Else the best we can do is continue with wild guessing

 

[Manol0]

So... could you upload it? Else the best we can do is continue with wild guessing

Started new game... and I lost the autosaves.

 

[Buktu]

Does 150+ and 200 city walls refer to their HP? Like medieval walls. Remember that Urban Defense walls got 400 HP. 36 from 200 is a far greater % than 36 from 400 so even if you deal the same amount of damage it feels way less against urban defense. And an AI that has researched advanced walls is likely going to have stronger units and thus higher CS cities as well.

Anyways here is the math. Bombers have 110. Against a 105 city they should do (randomness neglected) around 36 damage with the first hit which is around 9% of urban defense HP (400). Ofc the damage should increase with every hit.
I can imagine is that there were AA Guns damaging your bombers before their strikes which leeds to less damage. Another guess is that you were lacking resources (alu for bombers for example) so their strength got reduced. Also they AI you attacked might have had some bonusses against you like diplomatic visibilty to boost their cities CS for the actual damage calculation.

I am not an expert with GDRs since I almost never use them. But I guess without the siegecanons promotion their ranged attacks count as normal ranged which means -17 combat strength against walls (so 103 in case of a GDR) and only 50% damage dealt to walls. That would mean a GDR does (again randomness negelected) around 13 damage to 105 CS urban defense with the first hit which is 3,25% of urban defence. Melee attacks against walls only deal 15% damage so eventhough you have 130 strength on GDRs melee attacks you still deal around the same amount of damage (around 12 or 3%) while also taking damage yourself in return.
With the siege cannons promotion however you get rid of both the -17 and the 50% damage plus you get +30 on top. In the given example your damage increases to around 181 which is about 45% of urban defense HP (or around 14 times the damage you deal without the promotion).
If you dont have access to siege cannons for GDRs (or simply not enough uranium for lots of them) you should go for rocket artillery armies since they are superior to (jet) bombers and you will have more oil than alu most of the time anyway. RA armies have 117 base bombardment strength and can get +5 from a general (also +1 movement which means move and shot without the promotion), +5 from a drone (also +1 range) and +10 against districts from their T2 promotion so they are 137 in total (or 127 unpromoted) which results in 107 damage in the given example (72 without promotions, jet bombers deal only 54). If you bring a supply convoy and some military engineers they are quite mobile as well. With a range of 4 (or even 5 with their T4 promotion) its easy to use lots of them together as well.

 

[Linklite]

No... but still...

GDRs have always been pathetic against city walls without the siege cannons. Buktu has done the maths which I'm assuming is accurate, but I'll never build GDRs without siege cannons for that reason. Theu just don't do anything otherwise.

Bombers have in my experience always been reasonable (a few attacks is enough), so I don't know. It's been a while since I've used them, but that strange. GDRs definitely need the siege cannons though. Maybe you got them before and that's what you're remembering.

 

[Manol0]

Does 150+ and 200 city walls refer to their HP? Like medieval walls. Remember that Urban Defense walls got 400 HP. 36 from 200 is a far greater % than 36 from 400 so even if you deal the same amount of damage it feels way less against urban defense. And an AI that has researched advanced walls is likely going to have stronger units and thus higher CS cities as well.

Anyways here is the math. Bombers have 110. Against a 105 city they should do (randomness neglected) around 36 damage with the first hit which is around 9% of urban defense HP (400). Ofc the damage should increase with every hit.
I can imagine is that there were AA Guns damaging your bombers before their strikes which leeds to less damage. Another guess is that you were lacking resources (alu for bombers for example) so their strength got reduced. Also they AI you attacked might have had some bonusses against you like diplomatic visibilty to boost their cities CS for the actual damage calculation.

I am not an expert with GDRs since I almost never use them. But I guess without the siegecanons promotion their ranged attacks count as normal ranged which means -17 combat strength against walls (so 103 in case of a GDR) and only 50% damage dealt to walls. That would mean a GDR does (again randomness negelected) around 13 damage to 105 CS urban defense with the first hit which is 3,25% of urban defence. Melee attacks against walls only deal 15% damage so eventhough you have 130 strength on GDRs melee attacks you still deal around the same amount of damage (around 12 or 3%) while also taking damage yourself in return.
With the siege cannons promotion however you get rid of both the -17 and the 50% damage plus you get +30 on top. In the given example your damage increases to around 181 which is about 45% of urban defense HP (or around 14 times the damage you deal without the promotion).
If you dont have access to siege cannons for GDRs (or simply not enough uranium for lots of them) you should go for rocket artillery armies since they are superior to (jet) bombers and you will have more oil than alu most of the time anyway. RA armies have 117 base bombardment strength and can get +5 from a general (also +1 movement which means move and shot without the promotion), +5 from a drone (also +1 range) and +10 against districts from their T2 promotion so they are 137 in total (or 127 unpromoted) which results in 107 damage in the given example (72 without promotions, jet bombers deal only 54). If you bring a supply convoy and some military engineers they are quite mobile as well. With a range of 4 (or even 5 with their T4 promotion) its easy to use lots of them together as well.

The defence points of the city were 105 HP. However I remember that enemy has GDR close to the city so I assume it was damaging my bombers without me noticing it; so they were less effective.
Rocket Artillery armies are not so suitable for conquest victories since they lack in mobility so I always prefer going the bombers meta.
As for the GDR's I forgot they need the siege upgrade to be effective against cities and I got confused.
Anyways thanks a lot for you time to make all this analysis.

 

[Buktu]

Rocket Artillery armies are not so suitable for conquest victories since they lack in mobility so I always prefer going the bombers meta.

Thats why I suggested to add a great general, a supply convoy, a drone and military engineers to build railroads. 4 movement points when every tile just costs 0,25 combined with a range of 4 to 5 is quite impressive. Sure its a micromanage nightmare but the result is just so good. Most cities you want to attack are just around 4 to 5 tiles apart anyway so I prefer raw strenght over the ability to rebase my bombers.
Ofc bombers are strong as well but they get less good once the enemy has some AA capabilities. If you can rush them in the tech tree you are unstopable for a while but later on their damage can be shut down effectively like you just experienced.

Anyway both strategies wreck the AI in the end

 

[Manol0]

Most cities you want to attack are just around 4 to 5 tiles

I m not sure I understand what you mean. For a dom victory you need to take all the enemy capitals. So I suppose building infrastructure in conquered territories to move your artillery in order to attack enemy after enemy;takes too long.

as well but they get less good once the enemy has some AA capabilities. If you can rush them in the tech tree you are unstopable for a while but later on their damage can be shut down effectively like you just experienced.

Very rarely I faced air defences even if enemy had the techs. AI never builds SAM and few times I needed to make my own SAM's to hit its Fighters. Actually the only air defence I may meet is if AI has GDR or destroyer close to the city I hit.

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

Was actually hoping there'd be a nerf when I read this.
Civ 6 domination is just busted for me once bombers come into play, the game goes from medium/hard'ish to super easy once I get those up.
I often dread the point where I get Advanced Flight, because while the game was fun up until then, it sure no longer isn't after that.

 

[Manol0]

once bombers come into play, the game goes from medium/hard'ish to super easy once I get those up.

Although it's true; leave the meta alone.
And yes I have fun with it.

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

Although it's true; leave the meta alone.
And yes I have fun with it.

While I absolutely agree with that, I also don't like to artificially limit myself.
It just feels very wrong to not be able to use certain core mechanics of the game, because you just utterly break the AI then.
Air combat mechanics and air defence is interesting, and I would love to see it work properly.

 

[Buktu]

I m not sure I understand what you mean. For a dom victory you need to take all the enemy capitals. So I suppose building infrastructure in conquered territories to move your artillery in order to attack enemy after enemy;takes too long.

You online need the capital for the win condition, thats right. You cant just take one city and then move on to the next empire (where you will face the same problem) most of the time though since the capital will likely flip independent after a few turns if you do. Exceptions are capitals right at your border (but then again your artillery does not have to move far) or if you can take all capitals in just a few turns.
You also need some bomber bases next to your opponents empire even with 15 range on your jet bombers.
For me this means I take nearly all the cities so my arty armies just have to move a few tiles every turn or two. 3 to 6 military engineers are usually all it takes for me to build the railroads I need.
In the end the only difference to bombers might be that I put my time in railroads while you put yours into more air strikes.

Very rarely I faced air defences even if enemy had the techs. AI never builds SAM and few times I needed to make my own SAM's to hit its Fighters. Actually the only air defence I may meet is if AI has GDR or destroyer close to the city I hit.

This might be true though, didn’t play alot against the AI lately.

While I absolutely agree with that, I also don't like to artificially limit myself.
It just feels very wrong to not be able to use certain core mechanics of the game, because you just utterly break the AI then.
Air combat mechanics and air defence is interesting, and I would love to see it work properly.

It would be cool if cities and encampments got passive AA strength at certain techs. I thought about something like 80 to 90 at advanced ballistics just protecting the districts tile and something like 90 to 100 at guidance systems protecting a 1 tile radius around the district. It does not make any sense for me that cities have garrisons automatically but none of them have AA once they are available.

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

It would be cool if cities and encampments got passive AA strength at certain techs. I thought about something like 80 to 90 at advanced ballistics just protecting the districts tile and something like 90 to 100 at guidance systems protecting a 1 tile radius around the district. It does not make any sense for me that cities have garrisons automatically but none of them have AA once they are available.

Yeah that would be a pretty basic change that would go a lot in balancing bombers.
You can't have a design where bombers absolutely dumpster cities and ground units and where the only counterplaying being fighters/AA units, while at the same time making the AI absolutely inept at using (or even producing) those units to begin with.
That the dev team still hasn't seen that problem by the last patch they released just baffles me.

 

[Disgustipated]

My jet bombers were still pretty good in my last game against 100+ defense cities. Though GDR's still work better. Regular bombers just aren't going to be enough.

My last game was quite exciting in terms of late game combat. Faced off against around 15 GDR's as the Aztecs just went crazy conquering other civs. They had nuclear sumbarines when I was still going around with Jongs. I will say jet bombers are effective against GDR's if they are in the water. But they will be destroyed attacking them on land. And of course the AI stupidly moves them into the water. Though I admit I had the advantage being on a naval type map. I needed missile cruisers and a couple of GDR's of my own to eliminate their army. Jet bombers alone can't do it, and that's fine and as it should be.

 

[aieeegrunt]

Was actually hoping there'd be a nerf when I read this.
Civ 6 domination is just busted for me once bombers come into play, the game goes from medium/hard'ish to super easy once I get those up.
I often dread the point where I get Advanced Flight, because while the game was fun up until then, it sure no longer isn't after that.

Add it to the list of Terrible Mechanic That Is Also Terrible History. Douhet has been discredited in literally every single war since flight was invented

 

[PiR]

First shots can be less effective than the later shots. But I don't remember the explanation why.

 

[Alaindor]

I guess it's because as the walls dwindle down, their defensive power does so also and the city gets hit at full strength eventually (I don't remember the figures but that's the mechanic)