How do you attack a Fighter?

[Pgh Scott]

I can't figure out how to attack a fighter. You apparently can't engage them with your SAMs unless they attack you, and I can find no command for attacking them with your own fighters (which makes absolutely no sense to me). So is it impossible to do damage to a fighter unless they attack you first???

 

[BlackMage]

Unless you attack the city in which it is garrisoned, yes. To do damage to a fighter, you must either have SAM Infantry in the area to intercept, or fighters of your own on an intercept mission. When the enemy fighter is ordered on a mission, your SAMs and fighters all have a chance of intercepting it, doing damage and keeping the fighter from successfully completing it's mission.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but if you attack and capture a city with a fighter in it, the fighter is destroyed.

I think.

 

[AmnesiaA]

If you capture the city, all navy, air, noncombat, and great people units stationed in that city are destroyed.

 

[Pgh Scott]

Thanks for the info. It makes no sense to me that I can't order my fighter to attack an enemy fighter. :|

 

[Viperace]

This is one big minus of the game. I wonder why can't Firaxis let our jets do a fighter sweep mission ?? After all this IS what the modern warfare is:
achieve air superiority first, then fly in the bombers.

Send fighters to reduce the enemy defending fighters, then send bombers escorted by fighters to bomb the enemy. In civ4 however, this is not allowed .

If the enemy is on a defending mode, by putting a couple of fighter on patrol. U simply cannot destroyed their fighter with your own fighter. Ur fighter only got 2 mode 'bomb improvement/defense bonus ' and ' bomb enemy unit'. Either way, u send your fighter and HOPE that ur figthers will meet with their fighters. WTH ?? The outcome is:

1)Both fighters never meet, and your fighter proceed with the bombing run.
2)Both fighters meet, your fighter was damaged and theirs in full health.
3)same as 2. , but their fighter was damaged and yours in full health.

If u send a modern jet to an old patrolling fighter, I am not sure if the game let your jet (70% intercepting chance) do a 'intercepting roll' , or only the enemy fighter is allow to do the 'intercepting roll'. I do think that the latter is true. As i ve seen my jet being damaged by the AI's old-school fighter.

That is plain frustrating!!! All I want is kill off their fighters, I want to waste my jet on their fighter , give me an option to do 'fighter sweep' mission pleaseeeeeeeeeeeeee..........................................


This intercepting concept of civ4 is funny, this concept work for ground-vs-air. But air-vs-air doesn't really work that way isnt it?

 

[Jantis]

If you capture the city, all navy, air, noncombat, and great people units stationed in that city are destroyed.

I believe there is a % chance to capture noncombat units (workers/settlers) and convert them to workers for your side. This seems about the same chance as "stepping on" noncombat troops - you randomly either convert or kill them.

 

[Proteus]

If you attack a city where a (Jet-)fighter is on Intercept mission with a (Jet-)fighter of your own (i.e. you send him on an airstrike against the units stationed within the city)
your fighter has a chance to intercept the enemy interceptor (just as the enemy interceptor has a chance to intercept your fighter).

I don´t know how it is exactly resolved, but I assume that the RNG first determines if the defending fighter is able to intercept your attacking fighter and than, if the defender is unsuccessful the attacking fighter has a chance to intercept the defender.

 

[argaen]

I love how (using lost units mod) Biplanes can intercept my Stealth Bombers. It already made me cry that WWII era fighter planes could do the same, but now my even modern Jet fighters are being intercepted by these silly bastages!

 

[BigCMan]

This is one big minus of the game. I wonder why can't Firaxis let our jets do a fighter sweep mission ?? After all this IS what the modern warfare is:
achieve air superiority first, then fly in the bombers.

In my opinion this makes it more realistic. After all, if a fighter is garrisoned in a city, you can't just fly into that city to attack it. It makes modern warfare more difficult for sure, especially for ground assaults. But that's really how it is in the world we live in today.

 

[Proteus]

More realistic?

I don´t think so.
Planes could get destroyed on the ground as it often happened during air raids on enemy airfields in WW2 and even more modern wars (and sometimes also in WW1, but it looks like soime code of chivalry among fighter pilots prevented this from happening during most of the times of WW1)
With more modern weapons (bunkerbusters and the like) not even putting them into bunkers would prevent this (burying them like Saddam did during the last gulf war of course would prevent a destruction, but it would also prevent using them for missions )

 

[_speedy_]

Planes could get destroyed on the ground as it often happened during air raids on enemy airfields in WW2 and even more modern wars

Does the collateral damage from a bombing raid damage fighters on the square?

 

[JudgeDeath]

If you capture the city, all navy, air, noncombat, and great people units stationed in that city are destroyed.

Except Workers.