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

So I just finished up a game... and I have 2 new issues...

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Kyroshill, Dec 22, 2010.

  1. Kyroshill

    Kyroshill Huh?

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2008
    Messages:
    642
    1 - So Hiawatha is ramping up SS production... and is clearly going to beat me to it... so I have no choice but to invade.... I've got plenty of oil, he has little, and he lacked aluminum (or so I thought... he must traded for some)... so I've got 5 tanks... 2 rocket artillery and several MIs... he's got a few MIs... some infantry, and a bunch of AA...

    So my airforce is having little luck getting started since he has like 4 AAs in range of what I need to strike.... so I have to rest them... my invasion starts OK... I take Brantford fairly easily, but have a LOT of open ground to Onandaga (and he has the GW)...

    Here's my issue... over the next few turns, he uses his airforce to isolate my units, and then overruns my ENTIRE invasion force of land troops using only AAs and a SAM... even using the SAM to recapture Brantford....

    Now it seems a little silly (reality-wise) for an army almost entirely comprised of AA should clean up against tanks and MI... shouldn't AA be a separate unit class (with machine guns as well if they were back in the game) that can only defend. I mean aren't AA emplacements basically stationary and defensive? And they shouldn't be so damned effective against melee troops...

    2 - I lost the game since I couldn't get to Onandaga in time... he launched the ship and there was nothing I could do about it... so I get my defeat screen... it shows my empire in ruins and says I was overrun by my enemies... I was??? :confused: when did this happen? I cannot believe that with all the deficiencies in the victory endings (no vids... no recaps), that there is apparently only ONE defeat screen... no matter what victory condition is enabled? :thumbsdown:

    Oh well.... on to the next game I guess....
     
  2. Sonereal

    Sonereal ♫We got the guillotine♫ Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    14,877
    The AI spams AA units like you wouldn't believe it. I complained about the same issue in another thread I think about AAs being able to attack.
     
  3. Kyroshill

    Kyroshill Huh?

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2008
    Messages:
    642
    Oh I believe it... :eek::lol:
     
  4. Sonereal

    Sonereal ♫We got the guillotine♫ Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    14,877
    It doesn't help that AAs nerfed is a strange way. The fact that all units have AA capabilities.
     
  5. MAntoninus

    MAntoninus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Messages:
    87
    Completely agree/verify.

    Something in the AI is evaluating the AA very highly and building craploads of them...and heck, they're effective as presently configured.
     
  6. attackfighter

    attackfighter Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,010
    Location:
    Intellectual Elite HQ
    in WW2 the germans repurposed AA guns to fight soviet tanks, because at some point the Soviets had tanks that were simply too well armoured for the current panzer models to penetrate
     
  7. Sonereal

    Sonereal ♫We got the guillotine♫ Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    14,877

    The 88 wasn't meant for anti-infantry and in-game is better represented as the AT gun. After all, what's the point of AT guns if AA guns double as AT?
     
  8. Polish

    Polish Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    195
    Location:
    Avilton, MD
    Yes, the most effective anti-tank gun in the entire second world war was the German 88mm which started life in 1917 or so as an anti-aircraft gun. It was so effective they wound up mounting it in the Tiger tank. They also used a quad 20mm mount as the Americans used the quad .50 cal mount. Both were intended as AAA, but were hellishly effective against personnel, soft vehicles, and lilghtly armored ones. I really have no problem with AAA units being able to function in a ground attack role. Think of them as Luftwaffe divisions;-)
     
  9. Sonereal

    Sonereal ♫We got the guillotine♫ Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    14,877
    Except that begs the question of what's the point of building any other unit? I can argue that an infantry unit should, in theory, be anti-everything as well. For gameplay purposes, AA guns shouldn't be able to attack and only be able to strike at aircraft.
     
  10. Polish

    Polish Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    195
    Location:
    Avilton, MD
    In fact the 88 as originally mounted is a dual purpose gun--AAA or ground attack. Many stories of how frightening the GIs found the quick firing 88 when they were being shelled by them, not to mention all the tank kills they racked up even before they were put into a single purpose anti-tank mount.
     
  11. Man vs Civ AI

    Man vs Civ AI Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Messages:
    66
    I guess he went to space, found some alien friends :scan: with advanced weapons who wiped you out. :(
     
  12. ApocalypseMao

    ApocalypseMao Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2010
    Messages:
    30
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    A large caliber AT gun and a large caliber AA gun are identical in that they both have the same requirements, a high velocity for it's projectiles. In the AA gun's case, velocity determines how high the gun can shoot. For the AT gun, velocity equals penetration. The only practical differences are a high angle mount for the AA gun and type of projectiles (Timed HE vs AT). Both are useless for anti-infantry work but low altitude AA guns were usually machine guns or autocannons in the 0.50" to 3" caliber range. Both Nazi Germany and the Allies were known to mount them 4 or 6 to a half-track and they're pretty brutal vs infantry. GI's named them the "Meatchopper" for a reason. :lol:
     
  13. Sonereal

    Sonereal ♫We got the guillotine♫ Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    14,877
    I'm not disagreeing with you on that. I'm disagreeing with the point of having an AT gun if the AA gun in game just as effective against tanks with the added benefit of being incredibly effective against aircraft.
     
  14. Polish

    Polish Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    195
    Location:
    Avilton, MD
    In game play terms all units have some AAA capability. The specific AA units only more so. Perhaps you should think of them as regular ground attack units with beefy AAA sections which makes them pretty effective in both roles. I don't remember what the AA unit numbers are, but are they somewhere between Infantry and MI?
     
  15. ApocalypseMao

    ApocalypseMao Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2010
    Messages:
    30
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    For gameplay purposes, you're right. The 88mm was most successful as a tank killer when mounted into Tanks or Tank Destroyers. The 88mm AA gun was actually thrown into service due to an emergency. IIRC, the Allies tried a tank counterattack during the German invasion of France and the standard 37mm AT gun was found to be ineffective but the 88mm worked great. They were hard to conceal due to the high angle mount and difficult to move so tanks could outmaneuver them. In game, they probably need a penalty vs Armor and Infantry. They're support troops and not expected to fight at the front unless you have no choice.
     
  16. Sonereal

    Sonereal ♫We got the guillotine♫ Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    14,877
    There's a problem with all units having AA capabilities, especially melee and pre-Modern units.
     
  17. Polish

    Polish Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    195
    Location:
    Avilton, MD
    In gameplay terms, doesn't the AT gun get a bonus against tanks that the AA does not? Wouldn't this make the AT guns automatically more effective against armor?
     
  18. Polish

    Polish Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    195
    Location:
    Avilton, MD
    I agree that it is annoying to have airplanes take damage from ancient units, but I guess it wouldn't be much of a challenge if they had no chance to hit back, but I do think it makes sense for all units from rifles on up to get some AAA capability, especially as you move to Infantry and later where units actually have dedicated AAA support sections.
     
  19. SuperJay

    SuperJay Bending Space and Time

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Messages:
    3,273
    Location:
    Shacklyn
    That's just messed up. I think AA units should be highly specialised - basically siege units for aircraft. Minimal offensive power against mainline ground units like tanks. An AA gun facing a a tank on equal ground should get destroyed.
     
  20. Sonereal

    Sonereal ♫We got the guillotine♫ Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    14,877
    Does it though? I can accept infantry on up being able to hit WW2 era fighters but Civil War era riflemen?
     

Share This Page