Quick Answers / 'Newbie' Questions
- Thread starter Civrules
- Start date
Roland Johansen
Deity
Wow, I never realised air power was quite that powerful. I guess I should build more bombers in my games.
A question, what sort of ratio of bombers to fighters would you build against a human player who was fairly equally matched to you? Would it be better to just build mostly bombers and not worry about fighters? Or the reverse? Or a balance?
I think that I agree with A4phantom. But it is a bit risky in case the opponent starts bombing you too. Don't bomb with wounded bombers though as they do die.
I think the trick is to know where the weakness in the fighter network of the opponent is. This can be found by using spies (or religion spying). And then you can dedicate your 50 bombers to the attack of 1 city while the opponent has to divide its 50 fighters over 5 cities. I think in a human-human war, it becomes more a war of information and anticipation of the opponents moves.
Because bombers are rarely shot down, it's not that costly. But you shouldn't bomb without a purpose. There should be some result. Maybe it's easier to bomb an opponent into the stone age, then to defeat its defenders if they are on another continent or if the city has a huge amount of defenders. They know that a certain city is going to be bombed when you approach the city with a huge land based stack.
If you can destroy/capture a city with the main fighter/bomber force of the defender, then you might have won the war. Maybe it becomes cost effective to use the nuke even with the SDI when huge amounts of units are concentrated in one city.
This is all theory of course as I've never played a competitive multiplayer game before.
(By the way, I think the lethality of interceptions is way too low in this game.)
^^ theory for me too, since i never play MP
BUT
fighters cost less than bombers
siege units are used more in MP than in SP (at least more than the AI in SP)
bombers do colateral damage
siege units are immune to colateral damage (warlords XP)
So it's very possible that bombers do nothing more than fighters in MP!
(and i disagree about lethality : air units don't kill units, so there is no reason that they should die often)
BUT
fighters cost less than bombers
siege units are used more in MP than in SP (at least more than the AI in SP)
bombers do colateral damage
siege units are immune to colateral damage (warlords XP)
So it's very possible that bombers do nothing more than fighters in MP!
(and i disagree about lethality : air units don't kill units, so there is no reason that they should die often)
Roland Johansen
Deity
Hmm. What if you could press a button on the computer that would halve the hitpoints of all the defenders in a well defended city and remove the cultural defence but would cost you say 100 hammers (modern age, normal speed). Would you take the deal?
For me, that is what fighters and bombers do in the modern age. You invest some hammers in them which you'd otherwise invest in artillery and then can keep reducing the defences to negligible amounts when you want. And now and then you'll have to replace a fighter or bomber.
In single player, I usually send in some fighters first who will get hurt by the defending fighters and other anti air units and then I send in the bombers. That is probably also the best thing to do in multiplayer.
1. If a fighter intercepts a fighter, do they duel or is the intercepted fighter automatically the one damaged?
2. Do fighters intercept recon missions?
3. If I bomb your city, and your fighter intercepts, and it's within the range of one of my Combat Air Patrol fighters, will my fighter try to intercept your interceptor?
intercepted fighter is automatically the one damaged
never happened to me, and I do a lot of recon missions, so I believe not
yes, if your fighters are in interception mode
Roland Johansen
Deity
That is true. But to avoid confusion: both the attacking plane and the defending plane can do the interception. Only one of them intercepts and the other is damaged. The defending plane has a better chance to intercept. Bombers cannot intercept.
I agree.
Are you saying that if plane A bombs a city and is intercepted by plane B which defends that city that another plane C can intercept plane B? I've never seen that before. In my experience, interceptions are only one on one.
Yes, I've experienced this where plane A is my bomber, plane C is my fighter in a nearby city and plane B is an enemy fighter. If I recall correctly, the bombing mission fails but the bomber returns to base unharmed. Net result, one damaged enemy fighter that can't intercept again in that turn.
hum, i was answering based on experience only
a little SDK peeking should be done here.
I believed (now you gave me doubts) that the attacking fighter never intercepted but could be covered by another fighter "at range".
But maybe you're right, and it's simply the attacking fighter who "intercepts" the interceptor.
Underrated
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2007
- Messages
- 14
Interesting discussion on air power, I haven't gotten there yet.
I'm playing old world - new world, and I'm now liberating the new world, LOTS of barbarians, and barbarian cities - is this normal or because I set barbarians on raging hordes?
Will the barbarians fight me as unified empire, or does each barbarian state rely on only itself, with no hope of help from other barbarian cities?
Also, I don't see any mounted or gundowder barbarians - is this an restriction on the barbarians or have they just not discovered those techs and resources yet?
Thanks.
I'm playing old world - new world, and I'm now liberating the new world, LOTS of barbarians, and barbarian cities - is this normal or because I set barbarians on raging hordes?
Will the barbarians fight me as unified empire, or does each barbarian state rely on only itself, with no hope of help from other barbarian cities?
Also, I don't see any mounted or gundowder barbarians - is this an restriction on the barbarians or have they just not discovered those techs and resources yet?
Thanks.
Roland Johansen
Deity
I am sure (at least in civ 4 vanilla 1.52, where I did some tests), that the attacking fighter can intercept the defending fighter.
Allthough frankcor says he witnessed such a 'double interception where 3 planes are involved, I still am not convinced. Not that I don't trust frankcor or something like that. I'm just not easily convinced.
It could be tested or found in the SDK code. I'm not familiar with the SDK. Maybe we could ask it in the thread Combat Explained. VoiceOfUnreason seems to know how to take a peek in the SDK. I'll ask it now.
Allthough frankcor says he witnessed such a 'double interception where 3 planes are involved, I still am not convinced. Not that I don't trust frankcor or something like that. I'm just not easily convinced.
It could be tested or found in the SDK code. I'm not familiar with the SDK. Maybe we could ask it in the thread Combat Explained. VoiceOfUnreason seems to know how to take a peek in the SDK. I'll ask it now.
I have had a bomber protected by a fighter once (desert war scenario).Allthough frankcor says he witnessed such a 'double interception where 3 planes are involved, I still am not convinced. Not that I don't trust frankcor or something like that. I'm just not easily convinced.
But I often play late in the night and wouldn't swear it was so...
both : since there is no fogbuster on the new world, it's barbarian world. There are even more of those with raging barbs on.
barbarians (even units) don't work as a team.
BUT
they can all see what one of them can see.
The good thing is they won't send units from a city to another to defend it
The bad thing is you're at war with all of them.
lucky you
it's a function of techs that most civs know, AFAIK.
If most civs know gunpowder, they will have gunpowder units.
_alphaBeta_
King
I remember reading somewhere that barb units do not become more advanced than riflemen. That's a hard cap regardless of what the rest of the world is up to. I have also never seen a barb stronger than riflemen as well
Can't say, I rarely see AI Civs stronger than riflemen either
. I have a pretty weak opening game, so I stay at Noble, but I'm aggressive as hell, so by late game I'm far ahead. Next time I'll build more workers.I just picked up a new video card an, ATI Radeon X1950 Pro. I have checked out a few of my games and man, this card is IT!!! Doom 3 runs at ultra-high graphic settings without even a blip. Can someone advise the best settings to set the game to for the best over all visual display for Civ IV.
Lord Parkin
aka emperor
No, I disagree. Bombers will still be extremely powerful in MP, since no player builds only Artillery.
Does anybody know why this was done? I've found it exceptionally annoying in many instances that enemy siege units are invincible to collateral damage from mine.
Yes, if things haven't changed since Civ4 1.61 (where I tested it), then I think that the most advanced barbarian units are Riflemen and Cavalry.
Rancid Sushi
Last year's catch
Roland Johansen
Deity
Everything at the highest in the Options -> Graphics. (download the latest patch, I know some settings were changed in the latest patch).
Screen resolution? I have 1280 * 960. You could use even higher settings. But maybe some letters become too small ingame. If you have very good eyes or a huge monitor, you could try 1600 * 1200.
Anti-aliasing: 4
Graphics, Render, Globe : high
Enable: full screen mode, high detail terrain. Disable the rest. Show city radius, show health bars and detailed city info should be enabled or disabled as you like. They have nothing to do with graphics quality.
These are the options that I'm using and your graphics card is a bit better. So this should work well.
wohoo! this thread is a lifesaver.
ok, so if you have a city specialized for research, what sort of improvements do you want to do to your tiles? I am not sure if more cottages or more factories are generally better.
I am thinking you would just want a general all purpose city with whatever wonders/buildings that let you make scientist citizens. But then again, I don't know
edit: oh, and another question, when your cultural boundaries start to munch into an opponents fat cross, they loose production and you may get some resources, but other than that, you don't get the gold off a town or anything, right?
ok, so if you have a city specialized for research, what sort of improvements do you want to do to your tiles? I am not sure if more cottages or more factories are generally better.
I am thinking you would just want a general all purpose city with whatever wonders/buildings that let you make scientist citizens. But then again, I don't know
edit: oh, and another question, when your cultural boundaries start to munch into an opponents fat cross, they loose production and you may get some resources, but other than that, you don't get the gold off a town or anything, right?
Similar threads
