I hope they make ships more important.

[Toadman2]

OK, Here is a the solution and it's accurate and simple. This will make Naval units the powerhouses that historically they were.

Naaval Assault: All standard naval units that have a melee ability can assualt land and city targets. They should be able to attack land units that are on the coast as a melee unit and capture cities like a melee unit though you may go through a lot of them to finally capture a large city.

Bombardment: Naval units should be able to bombard cities with various effects that could be random to keep the game run smoothly and quickly.
1) Permanent population damage instead of just attack damage as the ships blows the city to pieces. This will put the fear in the populace of a fleet showing up on your coastal cities!
2) Structural damage. Yes your factories, market places, banks, etc. can be permanently destroyed too by incoming metal at 1,000 fps. That too will scare the crap out of the mayor!

Think about it. What was the reaction when the royal navy, Vikings, Romans, Greeks, etc. showed up off the coast with their weapons bearing on them. "OH CRAP"!

"Rape, pillage, death, and destruction"

Fleets should have this effect and people will build more to at least keep others in check.

If most of your cities are on the coast and you do NOT build a good fleet, another could come in with theirs and reduce your empire to cinders much like pillaging mounted units by destroying your infrastructure and population.

"Run to the Hills"!

 

[Sestey]

OK, Here is a the solution and it's accurate and simple. This will make Naval units the powerhouses that historically they were.

Naaval Assault: All standard naval units that have a melee ability can assualt land and city targets. They should be able to attack land units that are on the coast as a melee unit and capture cities like a melee unit though you may go through a lot of them to finally capture a large city.

Bombardment: Naval units should be able to bombard cities with various effects that could be random to keep the game run smoothly and quickly.
1) Permanent population damage instead of just attack damage as the ships blows the city to pieces. This will put the fear in the populace of a fleet showing up on your coastal cities!
2) Structural damage. Yes your factories, market places, banks, etc. can be permanently destroyed too by incoming metal at 1,000 fps. That too will scare the crap out of the mayor!

Think about it. What was the reaction when the royal navy, Vikings, Romans, Greeks, etc. showed up off the coast with their weapons bearing on them. "OH CRAP"!

"Rape, pillage, death, and destruction"

Fleets should have this effect and people will build more to at least keep others in check.

If most of your cities are on the coast and you do NOT build a good fleet, another could come in with theirs and reduce your empire to cinders much like pillaging mounted units by destroying your infrastructure and population.

"Run to the Hills"!

GREAT idea, I love it. As long as they make the AI the way it should be, I would love that.It would make naval costs (which are more expensive than land) higher and thus justified because of the impact on the lack of a navy. Great civilizations have risen and fallen to either having a superb navy, or lack of one...it's about time the civ series that core foundation is at the heart of this concept to understand this.

I would also add I want naval vessels to carry my land units. If we have to stack planes on carries, then we should have to stack x amount of land units on a "carrier" ship like in cIV 4. If the ship gets sunk they die-simple. Enough of this embarked stuff. An embarked unit of infantries storming D-Day never got captured by German ships and sunk. However, infantry IN transport ships did. It is more fun, and more realistic than what it is now. Do not however, let ships stack. I think that is the basic foundation to a proper and fun amphibious invasion.

Next, since well, forever, these road trade routes we have in civ 5 are frustrating for me..for a couple reasons: Even in today's world, where we have planes that can transport goods around the world in a day, and we also have super-highways that can deliver goods via land in unprecedented time historically...over 90% of goods traded are via ships. This is why since the Sumerians to today water passages have been so vital, and this concept needs to be tapped into in civ. Germany and Russia have fought over and over again to gain access to more and better water ways. While roads linking cities are a good start to good trade as well as transportation, it is much more beneficial to have trade along rivers, and oceans. Harbors and sea ports needs a complete overhaul.

Finally, am I the only one who finds amphibious invasions way more fun than land ones? It's the only reason to play the Vikings, and why they kick so much you know what. To surprise Napoleon of Catherine after declaring war on me 4 times so far for no reason, and to wipe them out by strategically go around their massive wall of units on my borders and attack them from the rear where they least expect it is just gratifying and wonderful to me. A well planned land invasion is fun, but to me nothing like a full out naval invasion. And this is when the AI is oblivious to naval assaults (like they are felines or something haha) Just imagine how fun it will be when it the game has a challenging AI!

 

[dexters]

It's off topic, but this is absolutely true. Having to build a city just to get a resource is silly. If i'm two spaces away from Iron, I should be able to build a remote mine... you would have to secure it with military and if another civ built a city and it was in their borders, you'd lose it, but at least you could take advantage of the wilderness around your cities without building new cities just for resources.

Ideas and Suggestions subforum have 3 threads on this.

I think the most sensible solution is to give Settlers the option to settle a colony (essentially a self-created puppet city) after a certain tech is researched. (Navigation or Astronomy)


You still get the higher unhappiness from puppet cities, but it opens the option for people to backfill parts of their empire, grab a resource that's just too far away with cultural expansion and obviously to settle overseas colonies to grab luxuries and resources.

 

[Buccaneer]

Interesting ideas. I really like Civ5's embarkments over transports, given the risks involved. However, I do think they made it a bit too risky for AI to do this well. What they need to do regarding navies is to have a nice, regular continuum from the ancient vessels to the modern ones. I guess that would mean creating more units in the existing techs.

 

[Bechhold]

It would also be nice if the AI acknowledged where your ships(fleets) were located i.e. near a city state in there sphere perhaps asking why they are based there etc.

 

[imperialman]

I'd also love a supercarrier unit that actually looks like a carrier from post ww2!

 

[Depravo]

Frigates with the range and multi-attack promotion are already city destroyers - but as you have all said that reflects their historic role in no way at all.

 

[King_Course]

I think the Ironclad and the Battleship should get the siege upgrade.

Besides of course the devs teaching the A.I. to play. I also think cityblockades should be more meaningful. One thing they could do, is to play into the A.I. weakness, and say hey! what the A.I. does that is so dumb is now actually a good thing to do! So if 2 naval ships bombard a city, and bring its defenses down, then usually you don't care because it cannot take the city anyway and it's getting it ships killed. But then under such bombardment, if a city is attacked with no defense left, it loses 1 pop instead.

Then a few ships bombarding a coastal city is something that must be adressed.

Why they make "melee" ships I'm not sure, and I'm not too sure i like it either. What kind of modern military ships are melee ships? Range has increased with technology not the opposite.

What I do see as a problem if the A.I. learns to fight, is that one fleet can swoop in with 5-7 movement, unload all it's firepower and basically oneshot another fleet. Maybe this will be remedied with the hp increase, so a fleet can meaningfully return fire before its sunk.

Another thing I'd like to see was to have carriers be able to stack parachute troops. maybe 2 units instead of a bomber. This way you can make a modern invasion, which is limited and maybe cant take a continent. But liberate a CS or take a coastal city and defend with the aid of navy. This would be a good way to distinguish modern warfare from B.C. warfare, seeing as of now its pretty much the same. And to do limited not so risky naval operations and invasions.

 

[King_Course]

Frigates with the range and multi-attack promotion are already city destroyers - but as you have all said that reflects their historic role in no way at all.

That is very incorrect. During the Battle of Copenhagen the British invented the bombardment of civilians in order to subdue. The attack was from a frigate fleet which were shooting fiery rockets into the city setting fire to it. Destroying 30% of the city buildings and killing 2000 civilians they eventually forced Denmark into surrender.

 

[Depravo]

Yeah I get that shore bombardment exists in real life but not as an effective alternative to land based artillery when attacking a major city over land.

I quite like King Course's suggestion to allow bombarding ships to kill population if city defence falls to a low level.

 

[Tantor]

Wiht the increased emphasis on naval raiding I believe it is obvious that they will include a countermeasure too. I think we will see a coastal fortress building like we had in previous Civ games.

 

[Sir Spanky]

The biggest problem with Navies is that there are no transport units of any type, except the carrier. Gives us Transports and take away Ocean Embarkment (Keep coast and maybe sea, although I dislike it) and now you will need a navy... simple solution, easy results. Get what you ordered...

Look into History and you will see only a few times where armies crossed any large body of water without transports. Embarking should be an Experience reward and not a freebie from technology, it would also make it more realistic and more strategic.

 

[Louis XXIV]

The problem is the AI is even worse at that than humans are. That's even leaving aside any awkwardness between 1upt and transports.

 

[ShahJahanII]

Yeah I get that shore bombardment exists in real life but not as an effective alternative to land based artillery when attacking a major city over land.

I quite like King Course's suggestion to allow bombarding ships to kill population if city defence falls to a low level.

This does seem like a good idea.
Perhaps aircraft should also be used to bombard certain buildings.

 

[Creepy Old Man]

It's probably too late to make this switch in CiV, but I think navies should use a mission mechanic similar to the current implementation of aircraft. Ships would be based in a city, and could have missions like

• explore - reveal some terrain
• patrol - combat any enemy ship that attempts a mission within the patrol range
• bombard - attempt to blow up land units / cities
• convoy - teleport a land unit from point A to point B
• blockade - reduce a coastal city's income and food supply
• rebase - rebase in a new city