Rocket Artillery: A bit too good against cities

As far as I've seen all siege units have progresses by adding 40-50% power with each upgrade.

This is not true to Rocket Artillery, with its whooping 100% power upgrade from Artillery (28->60).

When you add to that, that they have +200% combat bonus vs cities just like older siege units, it gets really ridiculous. Even very strong cities can be reduced so zero health with couple of RAs. Plus they are ultra mobile, compared to older siege units.

Personally, I think they are too good, for their class.
Sure Stealth Bombers or Bazookas are better on open terrain. But against cities, RA is like one tech level further then it should be.


I think they would be better balanced with +100% bonus vs cities.
Do you agree?

 

Rocket Artillery are supposed to be too good. They're a late game unit, designed to be a closer if you need to rush before someone wins by time. All of the other end of the tech tree units are similarly powerful.

 

I do understand that they are good. But I think they are too good in their ability to level down cities.

The way how game is set up, there is no reason to use any other unit against cities.

All bomber units are weaker and will get damaged by city defenses.
Close combat units will get severely damaged also.

Bazookas are weaker then RA, and exposed.
Missile Cruisers will do their thing, but can't match 200% vs city bonus like RA.


Plus, they are not super later in tech tree like giant robots or xcom troopers.

 

Well, they are meant to help you quickly finish off remaining civs if you're playing domination game.

2 or 3 of them can level entire city in one turn - just add barracks\armory in few cities, so they instantly get "siege" promotion - and you'll roll over any civ. Few melee units to protect them from cavalry and capture cities, bombers to clear out AI units and Rockets to take down cities. Very simple.

 

Well, you just said how good they are.

Note that I have nothing against good units. I just think their power level is not on the same level as other units at same tech level. And only that for city attacks (their power on open field is balanced).


Now, just because they are "mop up crew" in many cases in the game, does not mean that it would not improve the game if they were more balanced.

 

The goal of any modern force is to keep the fight outside of the confines of a city. City fighting is bloody, nasty and inefficient and the last time anyone tried to do city to city style warfare was in WWII.

Rocket Artillery are not free, they require a coveted resource. If the enemy has a bunch of them, you know you can quickly gain air superiority because they won't have jets. If you can B-Line for X-Com, then those Rockets become an easy way for your enemy to waste their production.

 

Every victory is a science victory. You go to Internet for culture; you go to rocket artillery for domination. It is kind of like "You made it to teh end of the tech tree! Here are a bunch of free cities!"

 

RA are not the end of tech tree. Thats GDR.

 

yeah, but they require aluminium, which can sometimes be rare resource on the map, so it kinda balance it out. (I've played one map where only one CS had 3 coal on the enitre map and no one had aluminium. British Isle map. ) Kinda. We agree tho, they are five times more powerful then Artillery - higher power plus they don't need to set up.

 

Truth to be told, from all aluminum required units, RA seems most important one.

Oil based Tanks and Bombers are just less effective then their aluminum counterpart, while RA is much more then regular artillery.


Still, the biggest trouble with aluminum is that it essentially replaces oil as unit resource in post-WW2 era, and is also used for hydro plants and space parts.

Probably the reason why recycle centers give extra aluminum.

 

They come too early though. For some reason they're the FIRST "closer" unit, even though in every other era, siege comes last or second to last after all other unit types.

 

sure they take cities very easily.
But bombers make very short work of them, so it balances nicely.

 

Rocket Artillery can be shredded by fighters and jet fighters really easily. Personally I'm fine with them, they're pretty slow when you compare them to tanks. A city with huge borders won't be instantly alpha'd by rocket artillery and if you have at least one plane in the city on recon. U will see them coming before they can even see and fire upon your city.

However, Rocket Artillery is pretty awesome at support.

But cities with small borders will find themselves torn to pieces by rocket artillery because of their small borders. While we're at it, the city with small borders can be protected from rocket artillery with triplanes keeping the borders lit up so you can see them in advance.

 

But they do have one MAJOR disadvantage that none of those other units have: they are very, very slow. 1-2 hexes per turn without a road, tied with foot soldiers for slowest units in the game. When you're playing Deity and the clock is ticking, say you're about to CV, but have to kill off another AI before someone else wins a SV, waiting for those damnable rocket arty to get in position is the most agonizing thing, and not something you can afford to rely on. Bombers have a range of 10, can move on carriers, and can move to a new base instantly. XComs can hop over entire oceans in a single bound. When time is of the essence, Rocket Arty is the last thing you want to rely on. Therefore, if they get into position, they deserve to level the city's defenses.

They also use Aluminum, which is a premium resource in the late game.

 

let's be honest, pretty much every ground unit becomes obsolete when bombers show up. We are just lucky that AI uses it's bombers terribly (often suicide-dive them)

and dunno, maybe it's just me, but I never found any AA unit that much useful against fighters\bombers. It's just best to counter AI's aircraft with your own fighters (either dog-fighters or interceptors)