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

Modern Era naval warfare reworked in BtS?

Discussion in 'Civ4 - General Discussions' started by marioflag, Jun 8, 2007.

  1. marioflag

    marioflag History Addict

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,902
    Location:
    Napoli, Italy
    From the info we have we have at least another 3 naval units in modern era in BtS, and we have now trade routes pillageable.
    What will be the differences between modern era era naval warfare in Civ4 and BtS?Do you think units will have same stats or there will be a great overhaul also of units available in Civ4?

    Considering that now we have at least 7 warships instead of 4 in modern era, i expect a major overhaul of Battleships and Destroyers.Battleships perhaps could get an added option to bombard land improvments.It would be also interesting to know what will be the usefulness of Stealth Destroyer and Missile Cruiser (AEGIS?).Is also in your opinion Attack Submarine a Nuclear Submarine or a Submarine with better stats?
    About Destroyer and Stealth Destroyer what will be the differences?
     
  2. Edgecrusher

    Edgecrusher King

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2006
    Messages:
    915
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    double post, sorry.
     
  3. Edgecrusher

    Edgecrusher King

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2006
    Messages:
    915
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    I thought that it basically created a Rock-Scissors-Paper effect.


    Attack Submarine Takes down a Battleship, because right now, Battleships aren't really counted except by other Battleships.

    Now to take out these new Attack Submarines, you need a new Destroyer

    Battleship would still be able to beat the new Stealth Destroyer.

    I was also guessing that the Missile Cruiser now becomes a mechanism to transport and launch the new nuclear missiles. Escentially an AEGIS.

    For what its worth, I wish they used more interesting names. Say "Predator" for the new Submarine and a "Hunter" for the new Stealth Destroyer. The concept of a Stealth sea vessal is pretty obserd, because any movement on the water can be traced by simply observing the fact the water is moving. I suppose there is some way it could avoid Radar, but thats just me. I thought the names Hunter and Predator would work because that is escentially there "roll" Much like the original destroyers got there name because their roll was to "Destory", enemy Torpedo Boats (Boats that were developed to take down bigger, slower ironclads, dreadnoughts, cruisers and other ships of that era. Hunter would work because its "Hunting" the new submarines much like a safari hunter tracks lions and other targets.
     
  4. Dida

    Dida YHWH

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2003
    Messages:
    3,426
    Now that they have an attack sub unit, it will only be natural that the current sub will be modified as a boomer, which is used to transport SLBM. Submarines are separated into 2 broad categories, attack and boomer subs.

    Missile Cruiser has a variety of uses, but I have yet to learn that they are used to launch nuclear missile. AEGIS cruiser is a powerful air defense unit, not a nuclear ballistic missile launching platform.
     
  5. fjoder

    fjoder Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1
  6. Vietcong

    Vietcong Deity

    Joined:
    May 29, 2003
    Messages:
    2,570
    Location:
    Texas
    i hate r-p-s
     
  7. Poppis

    Poppis Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2006
    Messages:
    134
    Location:
    Finland
    True, but take a look at this from wikipedia:
    The Aegis system is being enhanced to act in a Theater Missile Defense role, to counter short- and medium-range ballistic missiles of the variety typically employed by rogue states (see Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System).

    So if the missile cruiser represents AEGIS, maybe it will be able to protect our stacks from tactical nukes.

    EDIT:

    Oh and a quick search from Wikipedia also revealed three destroyers using stealth technologies:

    Type 15A Kolkata class destroyer, Indian Navy, first ship, INS Kolkata launched 29 March 2006.

    Type 45 destroyer, Royal Navy, first ship, HMS Daring launched 1 February 2006.

    Zumwalt-class destroyer, US Navy, construction is scheduled to begin in June 2007.
     
  8. GoodGame

    GoodGame Red, White, & Blue, baby!

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2004
    Messages:
    13,725
    It begs for an updated promotion system, but I doubt we'll get even one new naval promotion. General Matt is working on a nice Naval Expasion Programme mod now, though.
     
  9. KrikkitTwo

    KrikkitTwo Immortal

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Messages:
    12,322
    Actually, It quite possibly is simply a New RPS system
    Battleship->Missile Cruiser
    Destroyer->Stealth Destroyer [this one is fairly certain]
    Sub->Attack Sub
     
  10. Poppis

    Poppis Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2006
    Messages:
    134
    Location:
    Finland
    This could actually be pretty good. Battleships would become more of a WW2 era ships which would then be replaced with the modern carrier battle groups(which would be protected with cruisers and destroyers).

    By the way, BTS introduces the new modile SAM and if the missile cruiser has some kind of anti-air abilities, could this mean that the air units have gotten some kind of a boost. I mean, why make new anti-air units if the air units already suck as much as they do now, right?
     
  11. Dida

    Dida YHWH

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2003
    Messages:
    3,426
    Carrier is so useless and navy in general that they are not worth being protected. At least capital ships should be able to bombard land improvement, to make them more threatening. Carriers should at least have their capacity doubled to be worth building. We should be allowed to attack land units with Missile cruiser, that's what the US did in Gulf War.
     
  12. Poppis

    Poppis Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2006
    Messages:
    134
    Location:
    Finland
    That's what I meant. If air units are going to get a boost, then there would be more reason to build carriers.
     
  13. chaz1356

    chaz1356 Warlord

    Joined:
    May 23, 2006
    Messages:
    115
    . .. .. .. . it, while were at it lets add sattillites. You can launch them after you research it and they can periodicaly search and see through the fog of war.
     
  14. Ramalhão

    Ramalhão Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2003
    Messages:
    237
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    São Paulo/SP - Brasil
    There could be more work in naval combat, as an addition of one or two classes (to make distinction between submarine and ships) and some promotions (so a cruiser could be shot by a submarine, but a destroyer could sink the submarine). A cruise missile unit (as the one in [civ3]) could be transported in some ships, it would be the return of naval bombardment, but limited to the number of missiles the ship is carrying.

    It could also be done in air combat, we need a distinction between helicopters and airplanes. Helicopters deserve to be a new class, they could move over shallow water tiles, but not ocean tiles, and attack from a ship. Several destroyers have the ability to carry one helicopter, so it could be an additional strategy. Helicopters don't suffer the effects of crossing rivers or seas, so no need to receive amphibious promotion, it's already "built-in" in this helicopter class.

    I don't know why Firaxis made a lot of classes for ground units (melee, archer, mounted, gunpowder, and armored), but they didn't make more classes for naval and air units.

    Maybe they'll use these ideas in another expansion pack or in Civ5. But hopefully some modders can implement them in the game :).
     
  15. angelus512

    angelus512 Warlord

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2005
    Messages:
    130
    I think the entire idea of a Navy in Civ4 thus far is pretty pathetic. I barely build them at all these days.
    However if the new AI knows how to use them as is claimed maybe that changes. Its just they are damn useless at current.
    BRING BACK THE BOMBARD ABILITY and extend it to 2 tiles inland now THAT would be useful.
     
  16. Tommy1234567890

    Tommy1234567890 Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Messages:
    298
    Location:
    Argentina
    Isnt this what we want?? at least for PvP it will make other players move their navies in numbers, have 3-4 groups each with 2 destroyers 3 Battleships and a few attack subs. Thus if there is an encounter the one with the grouped up navy will have the upper hand. Instead of sending 2-3 random ships put them together.
     
  17. Warspite2

    Warspite2 Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2003
    Messages:
    496
    I am certainly very happy to see there will be more modern naval units and its the ones I wanted! :)
     
  18. Gaius Octavius

    Gaius Octavius Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2006
    Messages:
    4,016
    One question: where is the cruiser? Oh, sure, we have missile (AEGIS) cruisers, but where is the WWII-era cruiser? It was in Civ 3.

    :(
     
  19. Say_my_name

    Say_my_name Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2007
    Messages:
    294
    Location:
    Germany
    I'll be happy if they give carriers a boost. Carriers were the dominating naval vessel of the later stages of WW2, while in Civ they are utterly useless.
     
  20. marioflag

    marioflag History Addict

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,902
    Location:
    Napoli, Italy
    I agree considering that they can't transport bombers perhaps enabling them to transport more planes should make them more valuable.Perhaps fighters in the Carrier should have an automated attack option against navies which attack carrier,in this way they would be less weak.
     

Share This Page