Intercontinental warfare-foolishness

[WeaselSlapper]

I rarely use carriers in Civ 4. I can usually find another country, that has an open border agreement with me, to base my planes within striking distance of the enemy nation. Though, I can see situations where it could be a challenge to find a friendly civ that is not on the same continent as the enemy, thus making it easy for him to destroy your re-based planes.

Kinda off topic but I'm going to post it anyway. The way I use Carriers in Civ IV is to get planes into the heart of enemy territory and use my fighters to destroy improvements, mostly resources. I usually get two carriers in a stack with 6 fighters with the proper ships protecting. Doing this I can cut the AI off of any resource I want that isn't in a city assuming they can't find anyone else with that resource whose willing to trade it (my fighters can destroy improvements a lot faster then their workers can build them. This works really well if I can cut them off from oil early in a war. If they can't build tanks how can they expect to stop mine.

 

[_hero_]

I really want to know how you are going to transport your army with 1 unit per tile. Are you going to have to have 10-20 transport ships along with a comparable number of battleships just to mount an effective invasion or will the 1 unit per tile not apply while they are in transports? This is a major concern for me.

 

[Ahriman]

Read the other threads. Transports are gone; land units can automatically turn into weak transports to cross water.

 

[civ_king]

I wonder how future era battleships will play, with a range of 200 Miles they should have like 20 tile range

 

[_hero_]

Read the other threads. Transports are gone; land units can automatically turn into weak transports to cross water.

Hadn't seen that. Thanks.

 

[Hadrean]

I wonder how future era battleships will play, with a range of 200 Miles they should have like 20 tile range

Remember, balance will be more important than realism, so I don't think we will have 20tile bombarding battleships, on an earth map, it would be something like shooting Moscow from Rome.

 

[Chief of Staff]

I'm wondering if air carriers will now also host bombers besides fighter. It seems unrealistic to think carriers only carries fighters. Also, to be honest, 3 air units seems to be far too small capacity for a carrier in Civ4. I think it ought to be raised to 5 air units in Civ5 or something like that.

 

[civ_king]

I'm wondering if air carriers will now also host bombers besides fighter. It seems unrealistic to think carriers only carries fighters. Also, to be honest, 3 air units seems to be far too small capacity for a carrier in Civ4. I think it ought to be raised to 5 air units in Civ5 or something like that.

They don't carry bombers...

 

[Chief of Staff]

They don't carry bombers...

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Doolite's raid on Japan during World War II with bombers get launched from carrier?

EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doolittle_Raid Yep, they were. "Sixteen B-25B Mitchell bombers were launched from the aircraft carrier USS Hornet deep within enemy waters."

 

[Hadrean]

I believe B-25's are a relatively small bomber, and I wouldn't exactly want to have B-17s or giant stealth bombers have carrier capability. Regardless, I think that the limit should be raised. I never used carriers in cIV because it was obvious that if you had battleships, you practically beat anything else in the ocean.

 

[civ_king]

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Doolite's raid on Japan during World War II with bombers get launched from carrier?

EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doolittle_Raid Yep, they were. "Sixteen B-25B Mitchell bombers were launched from the aircraft carrier USS Hornet deep within enemy waters."

those are really small bombers, typically when one thinks of bomber it is more of B-52

 

[trickofthehand]

Carrier based strike aircraft are responsible for more actions on the enemy than our land-based aircraft. While they will never compare with the power of traditional heavy bombers, carrier based planes still pack quite a punch that should be represented in Civ 5.

Also, the Doolittle raid was not the norm for carrier based aircraft. Those bombers were the exception as they were specially modified and stripped to bare bones in order to actually launch from an aircraft carrier.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Carriers will probably carry 1 air unit (the one air unit that can be in that Hex)

However that one air unit will be significant in terms of its power.

 

[Padje Dog]

Bomber in the sky
Bombs falling from up so high
Land like marshmallow

Haiku ode to Intercontinental warfare-foolishness

 

[Naokaukodem]

Well, if they are going to use espionage of this sort, I wish that it would be passive instead of active espionage. What I mean is that instead of having to make a decision to spy on enemy units every few turns, you just pay a flat rate and the info is always available via your spies or whatever. I mean this more realistic- your spies aren't just going to sit there and say nothing to you about a massive invasion force approaching your cities just because his government didn't specifically ask that day. He is gonna tell you about it asap.

That's exactly what I meant. A little like the Civ4 vanilla espionnage, where you can see the amount of military forces/GNP in a panel, but for incoming invasions also, although i can't see a good way to implement this, particularly in multiplayer.

 

[White Elk]

"troops transforming into transports"?!? A bunch of guys spread across
the oceans as they merrily float to the target? What are they transformers?

I like the tactical implications of one unit per hex. But won't it be odd to float your units across the seas unrestricted? I like transports (land, sea and air) and would like for naval battle units to stick to the one unit per hex; but I'd want for transports to be counted as civil units that can transport one military unit (I'd prefer though that they transport a couple few units each). That way you have to build, protect, and position the transports. You maneuver units to the transports... not float any ole unit from any coastline anywhere in the world. I hope that the engine is built such that this rule can be modified.

(And I guess land transport is out... either that or everyone gets a jeep @ techX... and what about paratroopers)?


*Of course I haven't played the game yet so my opinion is rash and perhaps unfounded. I haven't seen this rule play out in the context of the full game. Yet the idea of being able to willy nilly float units across the seas does not seem correct to me.

 

[Ahriman]

"troops transforming into transports"?!? A bunch of guys spread across
the oceans as they merrily float to the target? What are they transformers?

Uhh, not, they get into ships, its just that building and micromanaging separate transport units is boring as hell.

I really like the change, it makes units in transports big floating targets that are hard to protect from the enemy navy.

This in turn makes a navy *useful*, and actually able to protect you from an inter-continental invasion.

 

[Danielos]

Wasn't it confirmed somewhere that transports are indeed out, replaced by land units transforming into ships?

That is precisely how it already works in the wonderful game Rise of Nations. You can see whole armadas of land units transporting over there, and it is always such a joy when you manage to sink some of them...

 

[White Elk]

To each their own as to micromanaging. Is why I hope this rule is not hardcoded so it can be modded. I get that for some (many?) the managing of transports could be a bore. But also there is micro-management in moving all these single units while moving a defensive ring along with them. Oy, I envision a mess of unit movements.

I would also say that the old transports were weak and needed protection. Nothing really changed here did it? Could also make a transport defend at zero. And the old transports could move multiple units so you had more eggs within a single, fragile basket. I don't see the ground breaking change here... beyond increasing the amount of units moved.

Another concern is that the AI failed at naval invasion in previous versions. Whats it gonna do now? Send out loads of unprotected floaters to add to the butchers bill? The Civ5 AI is different so maybe it handles it well enough. Will see, can't guess. Just don't like the idea of non-restricted naval transport.

 

[Danielos]

To each their own as to micromanaging. Is why I hope this rule is not hardcoded so it can be modded. I get that for some (many?) the managing of transports could be a bore. But also there is micro-management in moving all these single units while moving a defensive ring along with them. Oy, I envision a mess of unit movements.

I would also say that the old transports were weak and needed protection. Nothing really changed here did it? Could also make a transport defend at zero. And the old transports could move multiple units so you had more eggs within a single, fragile basket. I don't see the ground breaking change here... beyond increasing the amount of units moved.

Another concern is that the AI failed at naval invasion in previous versions. Whats it gonna do now? Send out loads of unprotected floaters to add to the butchers bill? The Civ5 AI is different so maybe it handles it well enough. Will see, can't guess. Just don't like the idea of non-restricted naval transport.

At least you can now do all this naval micromanaging in turns. In Rise of Nations you do it in real time and often under attack from the enemy...