Bombing infrastructure

[Xendance]

Right now there's no way for a bomber to destroy infrastructure in Civ V (unless that I'm completely blind). So my suggestion basically is that make it possible. It would make air warfare somewhat more interesting, and warfare in general a lot more interesting.
This would also prevent the defender from shuttling troops instantaneously to the place where you are attacking, if you have bombed the roads that is.

Thoughts?

 

[skallben]

I think AI would handle it badly but it would make air defenses so much more important, bombing railroads would be a high priority. But how would you defend against, say battleships, only counter would be to sink them.


When it comes to buildings, it's not really that fun when everything breaks, think having to rebuild 600 hammer buildings...Maybe have repair option or something like the tiles. But it would be alot more realistic and make wars lots more dangerous and destructive.

 

[Camikaze]

Welcome to the forums, Xendance.

I don't have the game yet, so I'm curious to know exactly what is meant by 'infrastructure'.

If referring to roads and railroads, then yes, that is a good idea. If referring to buildings as well, I only think it's good to a limited extent. You'd want to make it quite hard to actually destroy a building, given that a loss of production and the bonuses involved with a building is quite a hefty hit to take.

 

[Xendance]

Yes, by infrastructure I meant roads and railways. I figured that the ability to bomb farms, trading posts and other improvements would be a bit too much.
Though that could work if anti-air units would intercept aircrafts based on the flight path of the bomber (so basically if the AA gun is in between the target of the bombing run and the 'home' of the bomber), rather than the area near the bomber target area. Then you wouldn't have to saturate your lands with AA guns.

 

[Nick Doom]

Would be cool to bomb away the roads round the enemy capital cut off all trade
So if I get this right it would be like range pillaging sound good I mean it does not destroy improvements in civ 5 it just make them need a little repair taking them out of action for a turn only if you have a free worker

 

[Nick Doom]

sorry for got to add

But how would you defend against, say battleships, only counter would be to sink them.

how els would you deal with a battleships irl you sink or chace it away (i say always have subs on your cost line )

 

[Ironmonger69]

"Ranged pillaging" is an excellent description of the effect it should have, but unlike pillaging with a land unit, there should be no gold recovered from it. That's assuming you still get gold from pillaging.

I also like that pilaging only disables the improvement, not destroys it.

Scorched earth was a tactic I loved to use in Civ IV to keep a pesky Civ I didn't want to eredicate from getting out of hand again anytime soon.

 

[Ironmonger69]

Artillery should be able to do this, too

 

[lordqarlyn]

Yes, by infrastructure I meant roads and railways. I figured that the ability to bomb farms, trading posts and other improvements would be a bit too much.
Though that could work if anti-air units would intercept aircrafts based on the flight path of the bomber (so basically if the AA gun is in between the target of the bombing run and the 'home' of the bomber), rather than the area near the bomber target area. Then you wouldn't have to saturate your lands with AA guns.

I disagree about bombing improvements. Since air warfare began, that's been a key strategy in conducting war. It needs to be included in Civ 5 too. Especially in view of the number of units you can have is dictated by the number of resources you have (for units requiring resources of course). I for one feel if I am fighting a modern power, a very urgent need to attempt to take out their uranium mines ASAP, then followed by their oil and aluminum sources.

Fighters can already be set to intercept other aircraft, if a civ fails to implement a fighter network over his territory, well, that's his problem.

 

[lordqarlyn]

"Ranged pillaging" is an excellent description of the effect it should have, but unlike pillaging with a land unit, there should be no gold recovered from it. That's assuming you still get gold from pillaging.

I also like that pilaging only disables the improvement, not destroys it.

Scorched earth was a tactic I loved to use in Civ IV to keep a pesky Civ I didn't want to eredicate from getting out of hand again anytime soon.

Artillery should be able to do this, too

Agree with you on both points.

 

[Kissa]

Yes, by infrastructure I meant roads and railways. I figured that the ability to bomb farms, trading posts and other improvements would be a bit too much.
Though that could work if anti-air units would intercept aircrafts based on the flight path of the bomber (so basically if the AA gun is in between the target of the bombing run and the 'home' of the bomber), rather than the area near the bomber target area. Then you wouldn't have to saturate your lands with AA guns.

To balance that, the possibility to destroy a road or a railroad could be difficult, and need a lot of bombing missions (2, 3 or more).

Promotions could reduce the number of bombing missions, Accuracy etc.

(i think that Dale's DCM MOD has a variable percent of Building destruction in city from bombing, or range attack from 1 to 2 ?)

Could this be extend to road and rail road and improvments ?

-Roads, railroads, improvments and buildings (in cities) could have damage statistics and a particulare amount of difficulty to be distroyed,

-could be protected by stack of military Units, repared by workers, even stack of workers to speed up,

-the bombing missions and range attack mission, or pillaging could be made stronger with promotion like "Accuracy", etc.



More, rebuild a 600 hammers improvment destroyed, could be faster for the owner because you allready have the Tech and "savoir faire".

 

[SkepticalSinner]

Absolutely yes.

And there should be a % Chance to cause the tile to be "pillaged" OR alternatively, the turns to repair could be the variable. (Or if you're feeling frisky, both)