OMFG...I lost a battleship to a frigate!!!

[6K Man]

But it would probably be an improvement - it doesn,t make much sense that a nation with the ability to build battleships would still have frigates around.

I think that at a certain time - maybe 50 turns after the obsoleting technology has been discovered, or perhaps after an additional age has passed - one should be forced to either upgrade obsolete units or disband them. As you say, militaries with masses of very obsolete units didn't keep them around for decades on end when they were capable of building better ones.

 

[Evie]

Wolfshanze, you still have to explain how else Civ is supposed to model all those out of combat losses, if we assume the combat is not an abstraction of a lot more factors than just "two ships fighting" (including minefields, freak accidents, etc).

Because, frankly, if Civilization is supposed to use realistic combat, then it should be realistic about those things too.

Personally, I'd rather keep the combat abstractions than start adding new elements to the game (there is such a thing as too much elements to keep track of in the game) ; it add uncertainty to warfare. And that, in my opinion, is much more important to the feel of the game - there is always a very real chance your war plan WILL go wrong ; and as they say, no plan ever survive contact with the enemy.

 

[Gyhth]

The justifications roll-on...

Not buying any of them... pretty sure no modern Battleship in the history of warfare has ever been sunk by an age of sail vessel.

Yes... Civ4 is abstract... but it's simple enough to mod even those percentages into something much, much more unlikely to occur then Firaxis left it as. I refuse to allow Firaxis to give frigates a decent chance of sinking modern ships (and Firaxis did just that). Instead of justifying it... I've worked on fixing it.

You seem to believe that your mod brings more realism, and that it is superior to Civ itself. My questions then are simple:

Does your mod make it so that when you take a city, any ships in it are given to you? I mean, realistically, you wouldn't sink ships if you can take the crew off of them.

If a ship is in a city/in harbor, do you use the crew of the ship as a unit to defend the city? In modern times, that's what would happen more often than not.

If the ship isn't given to you, the attacker when you take a city, is it then put out to sea? As if the city is lost, odds are the ship would leave port and get away so the ship at least survived.

If you completely destroy a civilization, do you make it so that any ships and units automatically gift themselves to another nation, or stay as their own nation attacking you in hopes of revenge? That's what happens when a civilization is lost, the people still long for it and fight to get it back, the units/people don't just disappear.

Can you destroy an entire city with a nuclear blast? If you launch a nuclear bomb, an entire city would be destroyed, and few people would survive. Fallout would appear in a very large area, for a very long time, and it wouldn't be possible to get rid of it.

Can you destroy an entire city with aerial attacks? It's been possible to do this for a while now, so I was wondering if you added this feature. By destroy, I mean basically raze with their defenders unable to do anything, even infantry and other gun-powder units who do not have an anti-air attribute.

Civ isn't mean to be realistic, it's mean to be enjoyable and fun, not something that is a battle-simulator for possible future attacks. There are a lot of things in Civ that aren't possible in actuality, but that's because they make the game enjoyable. With your mod, you make it near impossible for anyone behind, by even one tech or one resource, of doing anything defense worthy. Civ attempts to make the game fun and enjoyable, no matter how far behind you are in techs or units. Your mod may be a bit more realistic, but it's definitely not a be all end all. I'm sure there is a lot of things in your mod that are completely unrealistic, but people like you like it because you find it enjoyable, so why knock those of us who find things like a frigate being able to actually do something towards end tech to be enjoyable?

 

[mourndraken]

Does your mod make it so that when you take a city, any ships in it are given to you? I mean, realistically, you wouldn't sink ships if you can take the crew off of them.

If a ship is in a city/in harbor, do you use the crew of the ship as a unit to defend the city? In modern times, that's what would happen more often than not.

If the ship isn't given to you, the attacker when you take a city, is it then put out to sea? As if the city is lost, odds are the ship would leave port and get away so the ship at least survived.
...

Hi Gyhth Some mod components can be added to Wolfshanze's Mod.

The first is called Get 'Em. This mod component allows you to configure the chance and specific units available for capture. We are not yet done. Cities can't be captured by ships and and land units cannot engage naval units. That's what kills the naval units.

There is another sweet mod component called Flying Mod . This componet allows choppers to fly over ocean to attack naval units. Just by defining new terrain types in the code. I believe that it can be tweaked to allow land units to engage naval units on city terrain.

I haven't tried to combine these two because the possible use of such code never really hit me until now..

 

[Gyhth]

Hi Gyhth Some mod components can be added to Wolfshanze's Mod.

The first is called Get 'Em. This mod component allows you to configure the chance and specific units available for capture. We are not yet done. Cities can't be captured by ships and and land units cannot engage naval units. That's what kills the naval units.

There is another sweet mod component called Flying Mod . This componet allows calvary choppers to fly over ocean to attack naval units. Just by defining new terrain types in the code. I believe that it can be tweaked to allow land units to engage naval units on city terrain.

I haven't tried to combine these two because the possible use of such code never really hit me until now..

I wasn't really showing an interest in the mod, I was just trying to illustrate a point. Some of us more or less like the way Civ works, and enjoy attempting to rationalize the outcomes of battles and things like that. I was just attempting to show that the game does still appeal to many of us as is, and that his mod isn't all that realistic either.

 

[mourndraken]

these things can be added to any game

 

[przemuch]

oh, come on, just imagine you get a pop-up: "Steven Seagal has been born in away land" the second before you lose Battleship to Frigate (or let's say, it gets "liberated")

there are many factors involved in war, so this 1-5 % is simply corresponding to unpredictable, weird, heroic, traitorous, cowardly or crazy behaviour we humans are pretty well known for

 

[phoinix]

I agree with Wolfshanze on the battleship vs frigate topic. I mean sure freak accidents happen but:

It is far better to implement them as another form of random events ("like an inner explosion caused your battleship to sink") than as your 15 cannon inch battleship lose to a frigate. I would give a chance less than 0.05% of a frigate sinking a battleship and a chance of 2-3% of a frigate withdrawing from combat from a battleship. I mean battleships have radars, superior speed and a range of 10+ miles, and I bet they could sink a frigate with a single shot.

As far as naval warfare i would like to see shore defences. I mean that when the defenders see an enemy task force approaching the shore, well they would do something!

Also about the modern era frigate topic I think that it would be best to automatically pop a message saying "Our admiral think it would be best either to upgrade our current naval force or to withdraw them" and give you 2 options. The upgrade one would cause gradually all your ships to be upgraded. It could take for example 10 turns or more with a cost of hammers and gold per turn. Not anything huge like now though. The time and hammers to upgrade would be a bigger factor. The withdraw from service option would give you instantly some gold (scraping the old ship). The message could pop on the fifth turn of modern era for example. What do you think?

 

[Ammar]

I would give a chance less than 0.05% of a frigate sinking a battleship and a chance of 2-3% of a frigate withdrawing from combat from a battleship.

The odds for the battleship winning are displayed at >99.9%. IF it is at full strength. So that does actually work out for you.

 

[mourndraken]

oh, come on, just imagine you get a pop-up: "Steven Seagal has been born in away land" the second before you lose Battleship to Frigate (or let's say, it gets "liberated")

yeah didn't you know it was the combat cook that took out your BS ?

 

[Wodan]

Civ, as a game, is specifically designed to give older units a fighting chance. If simply having more advanced units meant automatic victory, then it wouldn't be a game, it would be an exercise in seeing who can tech the fastest.

That said, I do enjoy Wolfshanze's mod. You all should try it out before you knock it. Personally, I enjoy it not because of any "realism" concerns, but because it adds more cool toys.

Wodan

 

[hornfaust]

Perhaps if you actually adressed the justification instead of rolling your eyes, it would be a little bit more convincing.

Personally, as I stated before, there are SEVERAL factors - not otherwise accounted for in the game that can easily explain why a battleship would fail to destroy a frigate, and be destroyed itself.

Here are a list of battleships that were lost to mines, storms, accidents and the ilk :

Mines
(Russia) Navarin - struck a mine at Tsushima.
(Russia) Petrovavlovsk - Struck a mine early in the Russo-Japanesse war
(Russia) Peresviet - (Second sinking) Struck a mine in January 1917.
(Soviet Union) Novorossiysk - Probably struck an abandoned german mine in 1955
HMS Invincible - struck a mine in the Dardanelles.
HMS Ocean - struck a mine in the Dardanelles.
HMS Audacious - struck a mine in October 1914
HMS King Edward VII - Struck a mine in January 1916
HMS Russell - Struk a mine in April 1916
IJN Yashima - struck a mine early in the Russo-Japanesse war
IJN Hatsuse - struck a mine early in the Russo-Japanesse war.
(France) Bouvet - struck a mine in the Dardanelles.

Accidents
USS Maine - Exploded in Havana harbor, most likely an accident (despite contemporary accusations of sabotage) in 1898
HMS Victoria - rammed and sunk by HMS Camperdown in 1893.
HMS Montagu - Ran aground in May 1906
HMS Bulwark - Magazine explosion in 1914
HMS Vanguard - Magazine explosion in 1917
(Russia) Gangut - Hit an uncharted rock and sank in 1897
(Russia) Imperatritsa Mariya - Magazine explosion in October 1916
(France) France - Hit an uncharted rock and sank in 1922
(France) Liberté - Caught fire and exploded in 1911
(Spain) Espana - Ran aground off Morrocco in 1923
IJN Kawachi - Destroyed by an internal explosion in 1918.
IJN Mutsu - Exploded in harbor in 1943

Sabotaged
(Italy) Leonardo da Vinci - 1916
(Austria) SMS Viribus Unitis - sunk by Australian frogmen attaching mines in 1918.
And frankly, anyone who claim that combat in Civilization is NOT an abstraction of several factors (which include mechanical failures, mines, natural hazards, etc) is at least as delusional as you accuse us of being.

Get out of here with your list. 1893 until 2008 and that's all you have? You're saying that 1 ship a year out of all the naval battles yearly would be lost to a ******** match up. Those aren't even naval defeats those are accidents. I could take game events and I lose the ship or if the other civ had the tech for water minefields (like forts). However Frigate defeating a battleship would never happen. You could have 150 Frigates approaching a Battleship and a Battleship would destroy them all before one was within a mile. THEY ARE WIND DRIVEN WOODEN SHIPS YOU CLOWN.

If you have to sit down in a think-thank to figure out how it COULD happen it shouldn't be in the game. I am sure I could come up with a reason how a warrior unit should be able to found a town like settlers in a extreme situation.

One major thing in this game needs to happen, certain units need automatic victories over certain classes like rock paper scissors. You can have random accidents to lose military units, that happens throughout history.

A gunship could NEVER lose to any non-projectile units. How does a swordsman or spear man even reach let alone look at a gunship? There is a reason people get conquered quickly when they are using inferior units.


Your list has what 25 cases world wide in over a hundred years? Even if we took you moronic argument, that's still one a year vs. the entire navy's of countries. I think it is fairly clear what happens to wooden ships if one incendiary bomb hits them.

Anyone who posted on this subject rationalizing, might as well say that maybe if you bread radio active spiders you could create a huge army of spidermen.

We all know i should be fixed.

Moderator Action: Warned! - Flaming
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[gettingfat]

This is a game. As Wodan said, it gives the older units a chance to fight.

In real world, weapons upgraded in a much gradual manner. Bows and crossbows can beat early muskets easily. Earlier planes crash by themselves frequently. It's not like frigates suddenly become destroyers and only after 150 years of research they become stealth destroyers. So this is not realistic to start with. I wonder why some posters need to call people "clowns" to make their argument over some poorly defined concepts.

And what's so good if that's an automatic win?

 

[Supr49er]

Wow... you guys are still trying to justify it... unbelievable.

Talk about living in la-la land.

Clearly thr frigate was led by Steven Seagal, who boarded the Battleship, killed the crew and scuttled it.

 

[6K Man]

I find it odd how some people will scream and beat their chests about frigates beating destroyers/battleships, but I have never seen any complaints about how so many combats (i.e. all of them, other than those involving siege weapons or the occasional withdrawal) end in the utter destruction of one of the units involved. Battles in which one side is completely annihilated don't happen nearly as often in reality.

That, IMO, is the most unrealistic element of Civ4 combat, but you never see anyone modding in a fix for that.

 

[Plinko16]

Look, the OP never posted a combat log (he can't because he never saved!), we don't know what strength level the battleship was at, what promotions were in play or what tech levels were going on with his opponents.

Did one of his opponents bomb the battleship with fighters/airships between rounds? - It's not always easy to catch that. Did he get attacked by other ships between rounds and not realize it?(happens to me sometimes when I have a lot of fights between rounds)

That said, if #7's combat-round odds are right, the chances would be about 1:9000 or so (for a full strength frigate vs. a slightly damaged battleship). So, extremely unlikely, but not so unlikely as to be unheard of among a large sample size, such as Civ IV players attacking with odds greater than 1000:1.

On Friday someone won a lottery with the odds of about 1:173000000. I'm sure all the whiners would say that game needs to be re-designed, too.

 

[hornfaust]

This is a game. As Wodan said, it gives the older units a chance to fight.

In real world, weapons upgraded in a much gradual manner. Bows and crossbows can beat early muskets easily. Earlier planes crash by themselves frequently. It's not like frigates suddenly become destroyers and only after 150 years of research they become stealth destroyers. So this is not realistic to start with. I wonder why some posters need to call people "clowns" to make their argument over some poorly defined concepts.

And what's so good if that's an automatic win?

Basically I think if you are two ages above another unit you shouldn't lose ever. There is no way, and i do mean no way.

You shouldn't have a chance to win in a fight, you shouldn't be able to overload a opponent with vast numbers with clearly inferior weapons. This would force people to catch up in tech rather than load up on frigates or caravels to take out a destroyer. Basically if you don't have a destroyer, you SHOULD be screwed until you do.

P.S. Longbowman do beat Musketmen and its not a problem with me, that is fine. Naval and Air Battle is another situation and SHOULD be remedied.

 

[Supr49er]

Welcone hornfaust.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Well in Civ Revolutions a 7 to 1 matchup means automatic success (and no damage) so looks like the Spear v. Tank has been resolved (although Battleship v. Frigate is only 5 to 1)

 

[hornfaust]

Well in Civ Revolutions a 7 to 1 matchup means automatic success (and no damage) so looks like the Spear v. Tank has been resolved (although Battleship v. Frigate is only 5 to 1)

Good form.