revamped air-force

[Blitersety]

In CivII you could do as much with the air-force as the army. In CivIII, you could hardly do anything! I think that in CivIV, they should restore the flexibility of being able to move the air units all over the map and so-on. This would be really cool. You should also be able to carry nuclear missles in certain airplanes so that you can bomb anywhere and not be restricted to keeping the missles in the city they were created in, especially if it is an in-land city that can't load nukes onto submarines.

 

[ybbor]

you do know you can move airplanes right? just hit re-base?

 

[CurtSibling]

I hope to see a more useful implementation of air units in CIV4.

The CIV3 system was too distant and lacked involvement.

.

 

[Gogf]

Another note: Tactical Nukes (the ones that could be loaded onto submarines) can be moved in Civ3.

 

[sir_schwick]

These suggestions are based on modifying the Civ 3 air system, so they may be way off:

1) Re-base should be a free move and not take an entire turn. This would tremendously increase the usefulness of air units.
2) After a certain tech(Radio?) you can assign fighters/bombers to 'close air support' for a particular unit. AS long as that unit is fortified/attacks within range, the aircraft will provide more powerful bombardment(more accurate targetting data, spotters). If they attack, they your units help in the attack. If they are attacked, same still goes.
3) You can assign fighters to escourt bombers on their sorties.
4) Nuclear bombers should be units that can only be used once for 'dropping the bomb'. They would cost less than equivalent missle systems. They are also avaliable earlier.
5) Transport Helicopters should be able to extricate troops as well as deliver them to the field. They can also transport Artillery(okay, it was light guns in Korea, but it was still arty).
6) Attack Helicopters should be able to have the same 'close support' abilities as Fighter/Bombers. They should also have mundo bonuses vs. armor. They should also be able to base more places.

 

[Blitersety]

you do know you can move airplanes right? just hit re-base?

Yes, I know that. I also agrre with those of you who have said that re-basing shouldn't deplete the unit's turn.

 

[Nobody]

I also agrre with those of you who have said that re-basing shouldn't deplete the unit's turn.

Why i think it should stay the way it is, it isnt like when america (best airforce) was getting ready for kosovo (Best air war) they had then in position instantly. it takes time, if you want speed like the way america can stealth bomb the middle east, then just give units huge ranges

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

The biggest problem with the Civ2 system was that it was so darned exploitable. I remember lots of games where I couldn't attack a ground unit, because an air unit was right on top of it ! The so-called 'bomber wall' became such a nightmare-not to mention the Micromanagment involved in keeping tabs on ALL your air units-to see if they had been out for 1 or 2 turns.
I think that Civ3 air wars are the best way to go, but with the improvements mentioned by Sir_Schwick.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Gogf]

These suggestions are based on modifying the Civ 3 air system, so they may be way off:

1) Re-base should be a free move and not take an entire turn. This would tremendously increase the usefulness of air units.
2) After a certain tech(Radio?) you can assign fighters/bombers to 'close air support' for a particular unit. AS long as that unit is fortified/attacks within range, the aircraft will provide more powerful bombardment(more accurate targetting data, spotters). If they attack, they your units help in the attack. If they are attacked, same still goes.
3) You can assign fighters to escourt bombers on their sorties.
4) Nuclear bombers should be units that can only be used once for 'dropping the bomb'. They would cost less than equivalent missle systems. They are also avaliable earlier.
5) Transport Helicopters should be able to extricate troops as well as deliver them to the field. They can also transport Artillery(okay, it was light guns in Korea, but it was still arty).
6) Attack Helicopters should be able to have the same 'close support' abilities as Fighter/Bombers. They should also have mundo bonuses vs. armor. They should also be able to base more places.

Sounds good, but rather than the way you mentioned nuclear bombers, certain bombers should be able to carry nuclear bombs. You can then load a nuclear bomb onto them, and they will be able to fly a "Nuclear Bombard" mission (no other bombard missions can be flown with a nuclear weapon on board).

 

[Hyronymus]

I'm against rebase missions not taking 1 turn. How long does it take to rebase a bomber from Andrews Airforce base too an airfield in the Balkan (does anybody KNOW (=! guessing)). You don't move a nuclear missile that easily either, let alone a helicopter.

 

[Penitent]

Fighters should intercept any enemy air units that enter your territory and attack them straight away just inside the border. As the invader you would have to send in a fighter "escort" beforehand to clear out the enemy fighters, so that your bombers could reach their targets safely, or fighters could be attached to bombers to defend them en-route.

Damaged fighters can sometimes disengage from combat when redlined and heal quickly (for an ongoing air war, it would be no fun if one sides entire airforce got destroyed on the first battle), if two civs had airforces it would be difficult to use bombers but a good payoff if they reached their targets.

Radar towers would give benefits to fighters against attackers like in the battle of britain (when radar was invented it was used to spot german planes and let the RAF know their positions). such as multiple attacks for defending fighters or something.

You could use espionage to disable anti-air defences, or maybe to ground all air units in a city for a turn through sabotage.

 

[sir_schwick]

I'm against rebase missions not taking 1 turn. How long does it take to rebase a bomber from Andrews Airforce base too an airfield in the Balkan (does anybody KNOW (=! guessing)). You don't move a nuclear missile that easily either, let alone a helicopter.

My best guess would be about a week, including paperwork. That may be optimistic, but the planes can be flown over the Atlantic. Also, during Gulf War I, we moved our aircraft into relevant bases pretty quickly. However if this seems unreasonably, then maybe mission range should extend to within range of any airforce base.

Also, nuclear missles require incredible amounts of security and scrutiny in transportation. That is if you are referring to nuclear war-headed aircraft missles and other things such as that. ICBMs are nearly impossible to move, if not impossible. I think you have to drain the fuel from ICBMs to recover the warhead and electronics.

 

[Dachs]

Depends on the kind of ICBM. If it's liquid-fueled, then you shouldn't normally keep them fueled all of the time anyway, and they should be easy to move. I don't know about the solid-fueled ones, though.

Looks good so far, but I think that when an airbase is overrun by enemies in a war, it shouldn't be destroyed. There are plenty of examples of capturing airfields from WWI all the way up to projected Cold War scenarios. There's no good reason to not be able to use an enemy airbase if your troops control it (one of your units occupies the square).

 

[Colonel]

Any kind of ICBMs are not meant to be moved ever, they require a total disassembly and removeal of the warhead(s), and for one to move it at all another silo has to be set up before hand. This is of course by US standards.

Anyways, all I have to add is we need nuclear bombers with extremely long ranges and higher ranges for other planes

Also, need to include Biplanes, WW1 era planes, I hate how I just go from nothing to WW2 era Bombers and such.

 

[sir_schwick]

This is of course by US standards.

This is a bit off-topic, but should we be able to build 'discount nuclear power plants', via the Minatome model? Maybe they cost 1/2 the shield cost and 1 gpt, but have 1% chance of blowing any turn, 50% whenever city first enters disorder, and then it automatically blows after that. Could apply to ICBMs and other nuclear-related craft, but with less problems.

 

[Left]

I don't like the Civ II or III airforce sstem, but I think elements of it both could be combined into a good one.

First you would control our planes like you control your ground units, but at the end of each turn the plane would be returned to base. You could fly up to a enemy unit, and when you attack you are given the option of flying over or attacking. If you fly over say, a flak unit, it may shoot you down. Air superiority missions would stilll be available, it would be like fortifying. I think this system would be better for doing recon and those type of things.

 

[Sarevok]

yeah. Id like to be able to blow the living hell out of my enemies with air power.

 

[DBear]

I would like to see air and sea power balanced with land, as it is in Civ3, sea power is almost an afterthought.

 

[AKauhanen]

These suggestions are based on modifying the Civ 3 air system, so they may be way off:

1) Re-base should be a free move and not take an entire turn. This would tremendously increase the usefulness of air units.
2) After a certain tech(Radio?) you can assign fighters/bombers to 'close air support' for a particular unit. AS long as that unit is fortified/attacks within range, the aircraft will provide more powerful bombardment(more accurate targetting data, spotters). If they attack, they your units help in the attack. If they are attacked, same still goes.
3) You can assign fighters to escourt bombers on their sorties.
4) Nuclear bombers should be units that can only be used once for 'dropping the bomb'. They would cost less than equivalent missle systems. They are also avaliable earlier.
5) Transport Helicopters should be able to extricate troops as well as deliver them to the field. They can also transport Artillery(okay, it was light guns in Korea, but it was still arty).
6) Attack Helicopters should be able to have the same 'close support' abilities as Fighter/Bombers. They should also have mundo bonuses vs. armor. They should also be able to base more places.

Very good ideas. (Except the first).

 

[Gregski]

I like the civ 3 style air units better even if it is a bit underpowered. I'd prefer to be able to bombard units and bombard city improvements as two distinct options. Of course, there is no guarantee in either, but a greatly increased probability of 'hitting the right thing'. Taking out any city with bombers in civ2 was embarrisingly easy.