(IS THIS A BUG?) Stealth Destroyer won't defend carriers and transports

[CloudedSun]

This was recently reported by Kimango in the main BTS forum here:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=236379

In essence, stealth destroyers stacked with carriers and transports are running away when attacked by battleships, missile cruisers and old destroyers, thus leaving the transports to get sunk.

Should they really be doing this?

 

[Cabay Jet]

What I think is happening here is that the battleships and destroyers can't see the stealth destroyer. When a battleship moves into the same space as a submarine, the submarine is "pushed" out of its previous space. I think the same thing is happening here.

 

[snow666]

And they cannot see submarines either....Which a normal destroyer can.

Cheers,

Snow

 

[kimango]

For the same reason, they can't guard oil platforms or fishing boats either...I really hope this is fixed, they are really good naval units.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Perhaps they need a 'Defend/Escort' or a 'Stealth' option (depending on which setting is default) so that way they can attack if they need to.

 

[Cabay Jet]

Good point, snow. After destroyers are obsolete and submarines are still roaming around out there you kinda need something to detect them.

 

[dfi]

Perhaps they need a 'Defend/Escort' or a 'Stealth' option (depending on which setting is default) so that way they can attack if they need to.

They need a defend or evade toggle... They should always be stealthed. See a bunch of transports alone... and... are they alone?

I think i would be just as disappointed if you had to make them visible just to defend.

 

[DemonMaster]

Stealth ships aren't escort ships, at least not in the real world, they are built for offensive operations, to launch it's missiles undetected (at least the swedish version), they do not replace the escort destroyer. There is a reason for why the entire swedish navy aren't made up with Smyge (the name of the swedish stealth ship), it is compliment not a replacement (and expensive).

I believe that for the same reason a submarine isn't used as escort (at least I haven't heard of any submarines escorting the british trans-atlantic transports during WWII).

On the other hand a stealth ship can use different configurations (it's missile batteries can quite easy be replaced for other types of missiles AAM, etc.) so it should be able do to escort missions (even if it's a waste of resources, a ship built for escort should be better).

 

[CloudedSun]

Stealth ships aren't escort ships, at least not in the real world

In reality, that's correct. There's a wealth of great info out there about stealth ships - wikipedia is a good place to start.

However, in the game, stealth destroyers act as an upgrade for the destroyer unit. Thus whatever else they do they need to be able to fulfill the same roles as the standard destroyer. As things stand there's a powerful incentive not to research stealth simply to make sure you can keep building cheap escort warships.

Perhaps an alternative solution might be to keep stealth destroyers as they are, but not make them the upgrade for destroyers. Some other unit, say a missile frigate, could be introduced to cover the role.

 

[DemonMaster]

Or perhaps given a choice to ships in general - escort. Wasn't that a feature in another civ game (or game). So if you press the escort button, the ship (no matter what type) act like an escort for other ships in the same square.

 

[CloudedSun]

It might even be possible to do an escort mission simply using the promotion system.

You'd have a stealthy 'promotion' which means a stealth ship acts like it does currently. That'd also give you an action button which would remove the stealthy promotion and replace it with an escort promotion. That second promotion would remove the ship's ability to auto retreat thus forcing it to defend stacks, and would also give an action button to revert back again.

Right, I'm off to learn how to mod Civ IV from scratch

 

[KrikkitTwo]

In reality, that's correct. There's a wealth of great info out there about stealth ships - wikipedia is a good place to start.

However, in the game, stealth destroyers act as an upgrade for the destroyer unit. Thus whatever else they do they need to be able to fulfill the same roles as the standard destroyer. As things stand there's a powerful incentive not to research stealth simply to make sure you can keep building cheap escort warships.

Perhaps an alternative solution might be to keep stealth destroyers as they are, but not make them the upgrade for destroyers. Some other unit, say a missile frigate, could be introduced to cover the role.

Or both Destroyers and Battleships could upgrade to the Missile Cruiser (Perhaps the Destroyer could be an 'OR' upgrade.)

 

[gunter]

That's an issue that must be fixed,just for the sake of admiral Nelson !

In addition the stealth option must be turned on or off depending on players needings.

Thanks

 

[kimango]

Or both Destroyers and Battleships could upgrade to the Missile Cruiser (Perhaps the Destroyer could be an 'OR' upgrade.)

Nono, the missile cruiser cannot defend against air units in game, which is stupid, since that is what Ticonderaga's are built for lol, so the destroyer role is STILL NEEDED

And i disagree that stealth ships cannot be escorts par se - in any case, perhaps if fixing the stealth will break the game, then they should be a totally new unit with no upgrade path to them, and the destroyer replaced by an "anti-air destroyer" (with secondary anti sub, of coruse) with upgraded anti-air intercept. The graphic will of course be the Burke class DDG, which will complement the Ticonderaga missile cruiser graphic.

 

[DemonMaster]

Destroyers shouldn't upgrade to stealth ship since it is a very different typ of ship. There should be an "improved" destroyer available along with the missile cruiser.

 

[frob2900]

A stealth "on" or "off" setting would most likely require an SDK fix. With XML it is possible to allow e.g. destroyers and stealth destroyers to be built at the same time (a patch has been posted by CivDude86 in this thread).

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Nono, the missile cruiser cannot defend against air units in game, which is stupid, since that is what Ticonderaga's are built for lol, so the destroyer role is STILL NEEDED

And i disagree that stealth ships cannot be escorts par se - in any case, perhaps if fixing the stealth will break the game, then they should be a totally new unit with no upgrade path to them, and the destroyer replaced by an "anti-air destroyer" (with secondary anti sub, of coruse) with upgraded anti-air intercept. The graphic will of course be the Burke class DDG, which will complement the Ticonderaga missile cruiser graphic.

Actually in that case the 'OR' upgrade would be good
Destroyers upgrading to SDs or MCs means that whereas a Destroyer used to be a fully functional escort by itself, NOW you need both an SD and an MC to defend a tile fully. (and Destroyers won't obsolete until you have both of them)

 

[Thalassicus]

Destroyers shouldn't upgrade to stealth ship since it is a very different typ of ship. There should be an "improved" destroyer available along with the missile cruiser.

My Longbowmen can upgrade to Mechanized Infantry *shrugs*

Upgrades aren't a matter of realism, it's game balance. Same reason why Missile "cruisers" can't defend against air attacks. It seems perfectly logical for Stealth Destroyers to simply be Destroyers that are also invisible. Why invest the hammers or upgrade-gold if the unit isn't clearly better?

 

[DemonMaster]

My Longbowmen can upgrade to Mechanized Infantry *shrugs*

Upgrades aren't a matter of realism, it's game balance. Same reason why Missile "cruisers" can't defend against air attacks. It seems perfectly logical for Stealth Destroyers to simply be Destroyers that are also invisible. Why invest the hammers or upgrade-gold if the unit isn't clearly better?

I do think that upgrades are a convinent thing so the AI doesn't running around with spearmen in the modern times as it often did in the civ games. But an AI running around with destroyers instead of Stealth destroyers is no problem with me.

To upgrade a longbowman to a rifleman, simply exchange his bow for a rifle, and then make that rifle automatic and yes an Infantry. If you then give him something to drive - Mech Infantry.

Personally I don't like Frigates - Destroyers upgrade either, but hey dress your old frigates with steel plates and exchange the guns for more modern guns, okey some (faintly) logic here. But to remove the hull and all external weaponry add Stealth technology hull and internal weaponry instead (yes stealth ships doesn't have missile batteries on the deck, it's inside the ship). It seams that it would be more effient to build a new ship.

It should be a standard destroyer and an Improved destroyer, like Spruence class destroyers and then improved Spruence class destroyers (none are stealthy, but the latter has improved radar and improved weaponry I believe. Or if you like it a Pre-WWII destroyer and a Post WWII destroyer.

But as I said above, a stealth ship can be configurated to act like any type of ship (missile strike ship, anti-submarine ship, anti-air ship). There was a mod (I don't remember which, FFH, I think) when you got a choice when you left port on what to focus on men, cargo, etc. The same could be done here, when you leave port with a stealth ship, what will it act like.

 

[Thalassicus]

If you then give him something to drive - Mech Infantry.

Think of it in the same way, you're building a new ship and moving the crew from the old ship to the new. It's the same as building a vehicle, retraining your Infantry, and moving them into it. Another example would be upgrading Galleys to Galleons. It just pays instead of for the new vehicle and retraining costs.

In this case you're decommissioning the old, outdated DDG Arleigh Burke (or earlier) class vessel, retraining the crew, and moving them to a new descended of the LCS design, Zumwalt class, or a similar equivalent.

Then again, there's still the inherent paradox of naval ships in Civ, where you build lots of large, expensive ships (Battleships and CG's) as your primary naval force, with only a few small ships (Destroyers or DDG's) for support roles and air defense... the quantities are reversed from real life, where in actuality it's the cruisers that you have only a few of for anti-missile and other anti-air defense, a few carriers, and most of the fleet is comprised of Destroyers or the future LCS's. Hmm... I wonder if there's a way to reverse that...