Does Anybody Else Miss Naval Combat?

[coolbrez]

I have yet to purchase the newest Civilization, however I have watched many streams and put extensive hours into Civilization V. After watching several playthroughs, it does look like a good addition to the series, but there is one thing I notice it's missing, and I don't know if anybody else feels the same way or not.
In Civ 5, one of my favorite stages of the game was after the Manhattan Project was finished and typically a Cold War commenced. I liked this stage the most in the game, but my absolute favorite part of it was building a fleet that could take on a global presence, and threaten other Civilizations with destruction. This blue water combat and strategy was, at least in my opinion, immensely fun. I notice that because of the absence of anything resembling nuclear weapons that blue water operations are pointless. "But wait!", you say, "Some of the Covert Ops are similar!" Sure, Covert Ops offer a way to cause destruction, but they aren't comparable to nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons are much more threatening, while the covert operations are more action based. Covert Ops are something that the enemy have no idea about until you make your strike. I don't want nuclear weapons to make a return, but I would like it if in future DLC they added something that played the same role. I was just curious as to whether anybody else felt the same way.

 

[etipton3]

I could't have could of said it better all myself. In my opinion blue the combat is boring bland. I like mass navy swim around sea shores scaring land rabbits. CIV 5 had many great stages exciting opportunities to be exited about and i was excited. I feel like were downloaded a bad mod with BE, but the whatever. Back to CIV 5 for me, giant death robots and shiny nukes galore!

 

[Ryika]

Don't really know what weapons of mass destruction have to do with naval combat... but imho they're boring and I'm glad they're gone. A game that is designed around tactical battles and not nuking an army and rolling over cities sounds way more fun to me. But obviously, game needs a lot of polishing to make these concepts work better.

And sea-to-sea-battles are definitely one of the problems. Lack of unit types and AI capability make it really boring. However, they're effective and an really easy way to take cities coastal cities - add some aircraft carriers and you have the perfect tool to provide cover for an assault force to take more cities inland. So I can't really agree that they're "pointless".

 

[Ryoga]

Naval combat in Civ BE is... limited... but certainly not missing.

You can't expect to destroy everything with your fleet like you could do in Civ V, and the survivability of the ships is decidedly lower, but you certainly need those naval units if anything else to protect your land based ones from sea dragons when they cross the sea.

Air units have pretty much received the same treatment and are now mostly useful for support and not much more than that.


As for nukes... they have a very bad problem in Civ V: the first to push the button wins. Using nukes in Civ V feels like cheating.

I'd be glad to have them back, if they somehow fix them.

 

[Gort]

I'm not sure why they didn't put in melee ships to go with the ranged ships.

At the moment, ships seem pretty badly implemented - the way they get one-shotted by anything ranged and are simultaneously one of the most expensive classes of unit is just disappointing.

I think they originally meant for them to use their ranged strength to defend against ranged attacks like the other ranged units but forgot to enable it for ships.

Late game they get quite funny as well, when your hovertanks become better ships than the ships.

 

[Qbix]

Ships seem to profit the most from upgrading them via Affinities. Start weak, end strong. Paired with anti-air support they are formidable.

But I also miss the variety. Having two aerial and two (later three) naval unit types was cool, so obviously BE feels like a downgrade, multiple perk choices or not. Maybe they could give all unit types fixed affinity related upgrades. Would make the Affinities more distinct, reduce the balance issues and enable them to spend some of the free'd perks on new unit types.

 

[Xenotitan]

If they gave a nerf to the hover units, to where they couldn't end their turn on canyons or the sea, it'd leave more room for the naval units to do their thing.

 

[Roxlimn]

I'm not sure why they didn't put in melee ships to go with the ranged ships.

At the moment, ships seem pretty badly implemented - the way they get one-shotted by anything ranged and are simultaneously one of the most expensive classes of unit is just disappointing.

I think they originally meant for them to use their ranged strength to defend against ranged attacks like the other ranged units but forgot to enable it for ships.

Late game they get quite funny as well, when your hovertanks become better ships than the ships.

Ships are VERY, VERY good. The only reason they're halfway balanced is because a good part of their movement is locked in a building quest, and they're one-shotted by range at lower levels. It's far, far easier for me to believe that they initially made Ships into just Ranged At Sea and then a playtester pointed out how broken that was.

But I also miss the variety. Having two aerial and two (later three) naval unit types was cool, so obviously BE feels like a downgrade, multiple perk choices or not. Maybe they could give all unit types fixed affinity related upgrades. Would make the Affinities more distinct, reduce the balance issues and enable them to spend some of the free'd perks on new unit types.

It feels like a considered development, actually. In Civ V, you hardly had any use for Fighters because the AI doesn't really do Interceptions. CivBE actually still has the same problem. The end result is that in Civ 5, the only aircraft ever worth building was Bombers.

It's better to roll that back to a simpler system and fix the Air Combat AI before reconsidering how and whether to complicate that all over again. At the very least it's one less completely pointless unit.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Well, probably it's my personal experience, but I never had that much naval combat as in CBE and I'm playing Civ since the first. Naval units are available early, they have good tange against land ones and are updated with affinity for free.

Carriers are great too, since air units are that much fun.

Levitating units partly replace naval units, yes, but Tanks require affinity 13 to be levitating and don't have ranged attack; Purity units have ranged attack, but require a lot of Floatstone and are locked to one affinity.

 

[Pietato]

The AI also sucks extra hard with ships. Those empty carrier zergs are deadly...

 

[Callonia]

Navy? My navy is made of hovering tanks that dominate the sea capable of launching a blitzkrieg. In other words, it is what would happen if certain WW2 german tanks would have done if they could levitate their way across the channel to hit UK.

Only reason to have some ships is to just look pretty that's all.

And why can't Purity ships cross land? They're levitating like your land tanks.

 

[sprang]

Only reason to have some ships is to just look pretty that's all.

Ships are for bombarding cities before your levitating tanks occupy them. Range and melee. Ships move so much faster, especially compared to late artillery, and don't need to set-up.

My late game board-sweep is T3/T4 ships + levitating tanks, with a carrier for interceptors. Ships are already at sea, but the T3 tanks are all parked on my coast waiting for the affinty upgrade. My fleet can clear their coast and have the defenses down before the first tank gets there.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Ships are for bombarding cities before your levitating tanks occupy them. Range and melee. Ships move so much faster, especially compared to late artillery, and don't need to set-up.

Yes, totally forgot about it. And if you have Observatory quest, they move like crazy.

 

[sprang]

Ships are for bombarding cities before your levitating tanks occupy them. Range and melee. Ships move so much faster, especially compared to late artillery, and don't need to set-up.

Yes, totally forgot about it. And if you have Observatory quest, they move like crazy.

The difference is crazy for ranged units. T4 hovertanks move 4. T4 hover artillery for Harmony and Purity only moves 3 if you take the perk (which I assume everyone does). Supremacy doesn't get the option, so SuperT4 artillery only moves 2. There is no way for these units to keep pace with your tank force.

In a combat situation, you need to worry about set-ups too, and only Harmony gets both the +1 move AND the -1 setups, for an effective move-3-and-shoot ability.

In an invasion, you bombard then melee with tanks, so the tanks you didn't need this turn will still have MP, but you used most of your artillery already so it has no MP. The tanks are already at the front line, so when they start moving, you're two turns ahead and waiting for the artillery again. Ships are just SO much easier to use with tanks.

AND they stack in water hexes with tanks! Which means just one offshore phasal transporter can bring in 7 tanks, 6 T4 battleships, a carrier, and 2 planes. Every turn.

 

[Anomandaris]

Yeah, that's precisely my tactic late game as well. Get your tanks in position with Phasal (the ships don't need it, they move so insanely fast), bombard with ships, take with tanks, repeat. Ships outrange cities. Supremacy ships can move in, fire, and move out, effectively being untouchable by non-ships. Nuff said.

 

[Callonia]

Ships are for bombarding cities before your levitating tanks occupy them. Range and melee. Ships move so much faster, especially compared to late artillery, and don't need to set-up.

My late game board-sweep is T3/T4 ships + levitating tanks, with a carrier for interceptors. Ships are already at sea, but the T3 tanks are all parked on my coast waiting for the affinty upgrade. My fleet can clear their coast and have the defenses down before the first tank gets there.

Well I would be happier if my Purity Ships could travel on land too.

And don't Dragoons move real fast? My navy tend to be composed of all dragoons with bunch of ships moving somewhere at random. Lev Tanks require floatstones.

 

[Roxlimn]

Dragoons move at 3, the slowest of the Hovertanks. Ships are very powerful units. Using them randomly is a waste of resources.

 

[pulzar]

Yeah, that's precisely my tactic late game as well. Get your tanks in position with Phasal (the ships don't need it, they move so insanely fast), bombard with ships, take with tanks, repeat. Ships outrange cities. Supremacy ships can move in, fire, and move out, effectively being untouchable by non-ships. Nuff said.

Doesn't that seem a little too easy? The AI is so bad with their navy, that you can do this at about any difficulty level.

Similar to the earlier argument that we don't need fighters+bombers since AI doesn't know how to use fighters, we might not want to have insanely powerful ships until AI can learn to use them.

 

[Xenotitan]

AND they stack in water hexes with tanks!

WHAT? I didn't know this!

 

[Anomandaris]

Well, yes, it is too easy. If have annihilated fleets equal in number to mine without loses or with 1/2 ships at the most. It is pretty sad, really. The AI doesn't know how to fight in the slightest.
This tactic is useful against cities and ranged units, though, as well as aliens. It wouldn't make a difference in multiplayer because any competent player would simply chase and retaliate, negating that advantage.