valamas
Prince
What will defend against Stealth Bombers?
A city with 10 Jet planes on intercept and AA gun does not work.
A city with 10 Jet planes on intercept and AA gun does not work.
Defend from Stealth Bombers
- Thread starter valamas
- Start date
valamas
Prince
The have these abilities
Abilities: Penalty vs. Naval, Evasion (100), Air Recon.
Evasion, does that mean evasion from interception? Does 100 represent a percentage?
The Stealth Bomber, with cavalry/tank spotter Offense is ridiculously powerful in Civ 5. One way to combat it might be to get your own stealth bombers and start by killing all the spotters. With out the advance land units and spotters, stealth bombers are not any where near as effective. AI isn't capable of defending against the SBO. In multi-player, a good tactician might be able to.
snarzberry
Emperor
I've never seen the AI build stealth bombers in my games, they usually go for nukes - which they do build and use.
Air combat overall is not working the way I wish it would in civ 5. Interception and jets/fighters should provide way more coverage from bombing runs IMO. Essentially I think the game would be a lot better if it was practically impossible to have a bomber survive a run against a city that has fighters/jets stationed in it (or at least that it would be severely damaged most of the time, and shot down the rest). This would put more of a premium on the attackers fighters/jets in order to clean out the enemy air, battle of Britain style, before you could successfully pummel the defences down with bombing raids. I'm sure that's the way it's intended to work, but it doesn't really play that way. Interception is too weak or it's actually not working properly.
As DaveMcW said, if your enemy does have a large air force then the most efficient way to destroy it is nuking the city acting as airbase. Again I wish this would be practically impossible in the case of A-Bombs as you're actually flying a bomber into an airspace heavily controlled by enemy fighters so IMO it should be shot down most of the time, the percentage of bombing success getting smaller and smaller depending how many fighters are in the city. With nuclear missiles I'm okay with that delivering a knock out blow.
Air combat overall is not working the way I wish it would in civ 5. Interception and jets/fighters should provide way more coverage from bombing runs IMO. Essentially I think the game would be a lot better if it was practically impossible to have a bomber survive a run against a city that has fighters/jets stationed in it (or at least that it would be severely damaged most of the time, and shot down the rest). This would put more of a premium on the attackers fighters/jets in order to clean out the enemy air, battle of Britain style, before you could successfully pummel the defences down with bombing raids. I'm sure that's the way it's intended to work, but it doesn't really play that way. Interception is too weak or it's actually not working properly.
As DaveMcW said, if your enemy does have a large air force then the most efficient way to destroy it is nuking the city acting as airbase. Again I wish this would be practically impossible in the case of A-Bombs as you're actually flying a bomber into an airspace heavily controlled by enemy fighters so IMO it should be shot down most of the time, the percentage of bombing success getting smaller and smaller depending how many fighters are in the city. With nuclear missiles I'm okay with that delivering a knock out blow.
Certainly, the one time I managed to get to Stealth in MP, I owned the board.
I agree with Snarzberry that interception should be stronger - jet fighters and mobile SAMs ought to have a change of intercepting SBs and A-bombs should be interceptable by anything - I actually think it might be a bug that they're not, as they say they've got Evasion(50), which suggests that they should be intercepted 50% of the time by air defences.
I agree with Snarzberry that interception should be stronger - jet fighters and mobile SAMs ought to have a change of intercepting SBs and A-bombs should be interceptable by anything - I actually think it might be a bug that they're not, as they say they've got Evasion(50), which suggests that they should be intercepted 50% of the time by air defences.
+2 for Snarz, the SB would be more fun if you had to use a mixed army to ensure air and ground superiority prior to sending in your wave of bombers. As is you build as many as you can and some fast ground unit and hope the unhappiness from all the cities on fire doesn't get to you.
Cutting off the aluminium supply is a good idea, too. Unless it's bugged (and as far as I know, it isn't), cutting off your opponent's aluminium supply will mean the Stealth Bombers suffer from the strategic resource penalty. Doesn't kill them, but reduces the damage they'll do to you.
Against the AI I go directly for Stealth bombers.... When i have 5+ the game is over....
In the last game the only thing preventing me from taking over the whole map in 40 turns (huge map) was my happiness and the movement of the mech infantry capturing the cities.
They are so OP it makes everything trivial... especially once they get +1 attack a turn and + in repair....
In the last game the only thing preventing me from taking over the whole map in 40 turns (huge map) was my happiness and the movement of the mech infantry capturing the cities.
They are so OP it makes everything trivial... especially once they get +1 attack a turn and + in repair....
JeanBaptiste
Warlord
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2011
- Messages
- 177
Sure in SP that works, the AI takes ages repairing pillaged tiles. But a human player wouldn't be dum enough to leave a strategic resource undefended. Especially if he has a limited supply of it. But a nuke would do it of course, also in this case.
MaximusK
Warlord
They should limit the # of aircraft you can have in a city to 3-5. Also, limit the number you can buy to 1 per turn like other units. This would solve the problem of spamming SB.
Similar threads
- Locked
