Civ 4 Watered Down?

[Willem]

Yeah, but we only put them in the water so we can put the fires out a little faster.

Hmm, submarines that burn up when they're in water and helicopters that fall from the sky. Do you sometimes get the feeling that our military has got things backwards?

 

[jefmart1]

Cruisers are not in Civ 4, because they are not an important modern weapon. What navies of the advanced world powers has cruisers? Does Austria have one? No. I rest my case.

The most powerful navy in the world, the US Navy, uses lots of cruisers. The future of the Navy is almost exclusively cruisers. Battelships have been completely retired.

Missile cruisers defend carrier groups against air attack, provide helicopter launching platforms, and a launch platform for Tomahawks and Harpoons. They strike land, sea, and air targets making them a powerful triple threat. They are also less crew intensive than an aircraft carrier (and battleships).

They are a key component of modern navies, so they should be included after Rocketry.

 

[jayeffaar]

And here I thought Canada had wasted money buying those submarines from the British. At least we can put them in the water.

Too bad we can't take them back out...

 

[Stellaaa]

You might be intrested to know that swisterland has a navy. It has 1 submarine and 2 destroyers.

A navy and the America's Cup. For a landlocked coutry, the America's Cup is even more impressive that 1 sub and two destroyers (although all you really need to win the AC is few billion dollars and a bunch of Kiwi sailors)

 

[pholkhero]

They are a key component of modern navies, so they should be included after Rocketry.

Go for it! Mod away!!

 

[Crighton]

@Lord O
Any word on why the Swiss have a Navy? wonder what them sneaky bankers are up to........

Battleships shouldn't be obsoleted in the game because the battleship has seen service all the way up to Golf War 1, they're heavily armored and can without much modification provide wonderful bombardment from their cannons, with some expensive retorfitting they can have a cruise missle functionality added to them.

It's just easier for a variety of reasons to build modern cruisers (some stealthness to them, high electronic, missle platforms, aegis, etc) than oppsoed to the crossbreed between destroyers and battleships that WW2 era drestoryers were.

I'd like to see the naval units selection added to if only for variety's sake let alone usefullness.

I'd really like to bring back the aegis cruiser and have it handle a sea born aa funtion, THAT could be extremely usefull in late era warfare.

~C

 

[Teg_Navanis]

You might be intrested to know that swisterland has a navy. It has 1 submarine and 2 destroyers.

Where did you get that info? Being from Switzerland, I don't know anything about a Swiss navy (except some armored speedboats to defend our lakes... ). Perhaps it's so top secret that only foreigners know about it, but I highly doubt it

Or do you by any chance mean Sweden or Swaziland? (Although Swaziland wouldn't make much sense either)

 

[pholkhero]

Maybe it wasn't a typo...maybe he meant Swisterland...i think gulliver travelled there

 

[Teg_Navanis]

I don't think Jonathan Swift knew about submarines and destroyers - on the other hand, he had a very vivid imagination...