1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Fighter Interception - Should it have a warning in the Tooltip?

Discussion in 'Community Patch Project' started by Stalker0, Aug 6, 2020.

  1. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    6,756
    Currently when you go to attack a unit with a plane, if there is land based interception in range you get a warning in the tooltip (a red warning telling you the number of interceptors). However, there is no equivalent for plane based interceptors...you will get the yellow warning, but that's vague...there could be no interception there could be a lot.

    Currently this is intended, AA units are "always on". Plane interceptors are more of a mystery, are they on intercept, are there planes in the fog of war?, etc.

    I argued in my Air Promotions thread "https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/air-promotions.656331/" that there was already a number of factors that made interception "murky". Several of those factors were cleaned up in recent patches.

    I would now argue that the Tooltip system remains a key element of that murkiness. Also as someone who has lost planes to random interceptions I had no knowledge of, I would say its a key element of frustration in using planes. Therefore I would propose the following changes:

    1) The Interception Tooltip includes all aircraft currently capable of intercepting the square in question (this means they are in intercept mode and have the range to get to that square). In other words, the number of interceptors noted in the tooltip is 100% complete and accurate.

    2) The fog of war is not a factor of this, all planes, even ones I currently cannot see, are factored in.



    First, there are thematic elements. The current system is more akin to real life, pilots often didn't know what they were going to face when they got in their planes. My counter is the "gameplay trumps realism" argument. Just as when I attack with ranged units, I have a very good estimate of how much damage I do, or attacking with melee units I have a good estimate of how much damage I will take... planes should be afforded the same consistency. We have taken out a lot of the randomness of war to make CIV into a strategy game, and I see no reason that planes should be excluded from that.

    Second, there are computational elements. I'll need the devs to let me know if changing the interception tooltip would have a large computational change or not.

    Third, the one gameplay loss is the notion of using your fighters to "sniff out" whether there is any interception to be had. My argument is that this is not what the fighter unit is really designed to do in Civ. Its designed to knock out interception and provide interception....that's why I build them. I don't build them as a random sniffing sheep dog to find interceptors. So let the tooltip clearly tell me if fighters are warranted in a combat situation, and then I can make the strategic choice on whether to build them and deploy them.
     
    CppMaster likes this.
  2. Delvemor

    Delvemor Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2020
    Messages:
    73
    Gender:
    Male
    To say the unit line was not designed for sweeping enemy interceptors is simply untrue. There are promotions specifically for that role. It sounds to me it's more about your personal preference here. It would probably be less of a problem if we could still station as many planes in one city as before.
     
    vyyt likes this.
  3. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    6,756
    To clarify, I agree that sweeping (aka disabling) Interceptors is part of the job, as you said there is a whole line for that. I am arguing that having a Fighter do a sweep check on every square you want to hit with a bomber, because you have no idea if a plane interceptor is out there....but there could be, is what should be removed.

    I have no issue that if the tooltip says there are interceptors, to use fighters to counter them. That is completely a part of the Air combat minigame. But my fighters are precious (consuming oil, hammers, and air slots in my city that could go a bomber), and I would rather use my sweeps to disable actual threats....not to waste turns on "ghosts" that weren't even there.
     
  4. stii

    stii Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2010
    Messages:
    491
    My issue would be bombers are already so powerful, that I'm loath to make them even more powerful. Maybe if you made them weaker but more consistent it would be fine.
     
  5. a3kov

    a3kov Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2020
    Messages:
    244
    Gender:
    Male
    Currently there's are many issues with the way air combat works (I don't know if it's fixed in the newest betas, I play April version).
    • Bombers are too slow for offense before airports, not enough slots.
    • AI has WAY too many interceptors. It's not uncommon for an AI to have almost half his land army consisting of AA guns.
    • At the same time having too many AA guns makes them weak to land attacks, ..
    • Which brings us to the point where using tanks is always a better solution than bombers.

    The problem with interceptors in my experience is not that you don't know if there are any, but that there's too much of it, and "air sweep" is too inefficient due to oil and air slots limitations.
     
    SuperNoobCamper, vyyt and tothePAIN like this.
  6. stii

    stii Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2010
    Messages:
    491
    I think pretty much the opposite of this.

    AI doesn't build enough air defence or air units in general. The fact they need to connect oil might cause this to some degree. This means tanks are just another attacking units while air units are something utterly different so I want to use my oil on them. Air limit of 2 can be a pain preventing you from building loads of them early because your cities just aren't close enough but there are ways around that.
     
  7. tothePAIN

    tothePAIN Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2018
    Messages:
    567
    Gender:
    Male
    Agreed. With only 2 slots per city until airplanes, which come late, air is easily countered by one or two AA guns.
     
    vyyt likes this.
  8. Delvemor

    Delvemor Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2020
    Messages:
    73
    Gender:
    Male
    Surely there was a good reason for lowering the limit number of airplanes in a city and I'm very curious about it. I otherwise don't like that much. On the other hand it makes me have more tanks than aircraft which is more realistic.
     
    vyyt likes this.
  9. Vhozite

    Vhozite Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2019
    Messages:
    92
    Gender:
    Male
    Is Interception by unknown planes really randomness though? I’d say that’s less randomness and more intended consequences for attacking without knowing all the information or taking the time to scout. The equivalent situation in land warfare is when you exhaust your movement points moving a unit on to a tile then get destroyed by a line of archers you didnt know were there. Or when you move your archer up 1 tile then Askia’s calvary comes out of fog from a mile away to body your out of position unit.

    Now with that said...can someone explain exactly how air sweeps work? Does it only clear one tile (does it clear tiles at all?)? If it does in there any way we can make it AoE? Like sweeping the tile you target and every tile adjacent?

    I don’t like the idea of magically knowing about interceptors you can’t see, but I also agree that it’s very “feels bad” to lose a highly promoted plane to interceptors you couldn’t really do anything about.
     
  10. a3kov

    a3kov Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2020
    Messages:
    244
    Gender:
    Male
    There's very short window before they research AA guns, during it they don't build many triplanes, it's true. But after AA guns they tend to spam it.
    AA gun heavily shifts the balance of air warfare to defense:
    - doesn't use slots
    - doesn't use strategics
    Once AA gun is spammable, there's no point to have bombers. To disarm interceptors you need fighters, which cost oil that you could use for bombers (or better, tanks!).
    In my games I build a few fighters just for extended vision, so 1 fighter per city for interception. If I need more interception I build AA guns, it's a no brainer.
    For land conquest tanks + AA guns is a very good combo (not that tanks are very vulnerable to air - just better to have AA support to reduce the risk of losing them).

    Naval is same - bombers are ok for fighting ships until destroyers arrive, and then it becomes "carpets of interceptors". Why would you spend oil on bombers at all ?
     
    vyyt likes this.
  11. stii

    stii Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2010
    Messages:
    491
    It is possible by the time we get to bombers I'm too far ahead for it to matter so it doesn't really matter what I'm doing.

    But I don't see the AI building many air units or anti air units. It certainly isn't spamming AA guns in my games.
     
  12. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    6,756
    Wanted to bump this again as it remains one of my last big frustrations with the game. I hate hate HATE sending a bomber in to an area that looks completely cleared and it just dies immediately to a fighter that is off in the fog somewhere that I will never be able to get to until I have actually beaten the forces in front of me.

    And note, even if I can see fighters from a city, they still don't show up as Interceptors (I know because in my latest game I lost several bombers to fighters from an enemy capital, that I have complete vision of. I thought they were not on interception hence why the tooltip didn't ping, but no they just died like chumps).
     
  13. Delvemor

    Delvemor Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2020
    Messages:
    73
    Gender:
    Male
    But again isn't the point of having sweeping fighters making sure the sky is safe for your bombers ? Just because it looks clear doesn't mean anything. I tend to use more fighters than bombers for that reason. I sweep/scout everywhere, as deep in enemy territory as possible, until I get the notification that no resistance was encountered. Then I use my bombers. My only complaint would be the lower number of airplanes we can have in a city then we used to. Otherwise the current meta is fine in my games. Very rarely does the AI spam a ton of AA units, and even then these units are not very good against proper combat land units.
     
    vyyt and Zanteogo like this.
  14. Zanteogo

    Zanteogo King

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2015
    Messages:
    690
    Has the fighter interception animation been fixed yet? Haven't made it to modern era in the new patch.
     
    vyyt likes this.
  15. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    6,756
    To put it in context, in my current game Sweden had 6 intercepting planes and 2 mobile sams on the battlefield in question. I consider that a pretty good chunk of interception.
     
  16. Zanteogo

    Zanteogo King

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2015
    Messages:
    690
    This is part of the reason when I make it to modern I don't go nuts on my airforce. The other reason is, even if you get lucky and the AI doesn't bother much with AA, planes don't really do much more than put small dents in most units or finish off an already near dead unit. Considering the oil needed for them, and how they tend to take a bunch of damage even with no AA defenses, I find they are mostly a "meh", class of unit now.

    Bombers are also pretty poor at dealing with cities now, when they used to specialize in them.
     
  17. Delvemor

    Delvemor Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2020
    Messages:
    73
    Gender:
    Male
    I agree and that's why I tend to have more fighters than bombers. I like the new mechanic of damaging the enemy aircraft stationed in a city if you're not intercepted too. Most of my fighters have promotions useful for sweeping too, while I use mostly mobile SAM for interception.

    I find bombers to be very useful when it comes to attacking soft targets such as siege units and finishing off wounded units without risking your own land units too much. I agree that they don't do nearly as much damage as they would do in vanilla against tanks or infantry, but they definitely have a role in my games. However, if the front line is vast and I could use more melee units, I usually spend my oil on tanks. I no longer specialize my bombers against cities, they sometimes take far too much damage in return, especially when the target AI has access to military bases.
     
    vyyt likes this.

Share This Page