Stealth Fighters?

"Got something against the F-22? "

Well, no. Actually, just checking, it IS the F-22 I have in there, lol, I had someone's JSF unit in there and took it out because I thought that the F-22 I found looked better. I forgot I did that. Anyway, yes, I also think that is a good modification, makes more sense.

Overseer, I do not think the longer range recon of the stealth fighter in anway justifies its existence. Besides, I have Wyrmshadow's SR-71 in my mod as well, talk about long range recon, I can check out stuff on the other continent sometimes with that baby... :D

I wish recon missions could be shot down, that would make the game more exciting.
 
We got satellites in game and need to do aerial reconnaissance?

Five Worlds:

Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System.

Another couple of words:

Spy satellites...
 
Aerial recon is still useful. You can use it to:

Check the sea off your coastline for approaching enemy naval forces.

Check radar towers in enemy territory to see what units they have stationed on them prior to attack.

If conducting a bombing campaign against resource or luxury tiles, overflights can determine if they are being or have been reroaded.

Determine what attacks any allies you may have in a war are launching against cities out of your visible range.
 
Aerial reconnaissane should be unneeded after the advent of spy satellites and radar. Allies when at war, should tell you their deployed troop locations and share enemy sightings so you can fight your part of the war better.

A spy satellite net can track a US carrier battle group the entire time it is out at sea.

I see a diplomacy screen location when you can ask for an allies war report and it gives you for just your turn, a picture of their deployment and spotted enemies.
 
Sattellites are limited in their scope and can be shot down. A non-geosynchronous sattellite will spend the majority of its time in a position from which it cannot deliver any information. In modern war where even a few hours is important, this is far too great a gap in the information web.

Also, they are quite new - if I had to put them into the civ3 tech tree, they'd probably come with some obscenely late tech. Yes, I know we've had sats since the 50s, but the sats we're used to today that can take incredible pictures, infared, heat signatures, et cetera, are indeed quite new (introduced in the 80's I think).

As for paras and helis, I find them very useful, in the right circumstances. Coupled with a good airforce, they can drastically speed up campaigns. Got a mountain chain you need to get over? Just cut off roads with the bombers and drop in your paras. Got a city on an island you need to defend or capture? A heli with three infantry will serve you in good stead of a static force. Island hopping campaigns move much more quickly, large jungles and mountains are simply by-passed.

Also, I just think it's fun to use them. Sure, I could just bull rush with tanks and assualt boats, but where's the fun in that? I take a lot of joy from planning my assualts to be as fast and brutally debilitating as possible. :evil:
 
I tend to use Stealth Fighters, in some games i even use it more then the Stealth Bombers, it has stealth, a decent range, can perform precision bombing like the Stealth bomber, but more important, it only costs 120 shields which means i can have a lot of them. I put the Stealth Fighter in the poor man´s army category, and that is what its function really is, C3C provides a lot of the units all over the 4 eras to allow weaker factions to still keep in the game.

Also the stealth fighter has a higher defense and can kill enemy interceptions while the stealth bomber can´t, so they can be used in manual interception missions.

It has more range then a normal bomber and costs only 20 shields more, against human players it can be a very deadly weapon because it combines low-cost with precision long distance striking.

I don´t think it´s a useless unit, i rank it with the Explorer, Paratroper, Longbowmen, Guerrila and Explorer. While not popular against the AI, aganist cunning human players these units provide the extra flavour to your strategic options to try and win a game.

An explorer is 20 shield costing but has a 2 turn minimal to be built, it can explore 6 tiles regardless of terrain and pillage, for thats just incredible for such a small cost, even on modern times.

A Longbowmen has 4 attack and defensive bombard of 2, for a low cost and requires no strat. resources = priceless.

A Guerrila upgrades from a MDI and provides a balanced 6/6 unit with a defensive bombard in industrial times for low cost = it´s an early TOW basicly and a way to get rid of your MDI´s = priceless.

A Paratrooper can be airlifted from an airfield to another airfield like a teleport, instant defenses or garrison troops for new fronts/ocupied territories = priceless

An helicopter can carry your TOW´s over the enemys vessels and drop them on your invasion stack after the initial landforce as been weakneed, reinforce islands from airbases and so on.

C3C is one of the best made strategic games no doubt.
 
Helicopters cannot fly very far, so you won't be reinforcing too many islands that way, unless they are right near your mainland.

The no resources unit tree can be occasionally useful, though I think the AI benefits more from it than the player, who is going to make more of an effort to get strategic resources and luxuries through war and manipulation than the AI does.

Paratroopers - you can airlift anything else via airport too, so why bother with these? They are only good for paradropping into areas with NO airport, and again their range is not very great - and it seems to me they ALWAYS get killed, whatever they are doing.
 
Helicopters cannot fly very far, so you won't be reinforcing too many islands that way, unless they are right near your mainland.
You're doing it wrong. :p

If your object is to reinforce, what you do is rebase the helicopter with the infantry on it to the city in need. Right click the city, wake the infantry in the heli, and bam, instant city garrison. One heli with three infantry can keep up a mobile defense of a small group of islands, a network of helis can defend around 20 times more cities than the infantry would be able to without the helis. Simple economics if you ask me.

Of course, some prefer using airports. And this is of very little use without an island group in the first place, so I don't deny that true use for this is limited. But it does work in the right places.
 
Paratroopers are the suck. Marines are better, you can directly capture a city from the transports, move the transports into the port and offload. I got two transports of marines and the other twenty transports are tanks, SAM, RA and Mechanized Infantry. The assault force is 6 panzer corps, 60 Mechanized Infantry, about 24 SAM and the rest are rocket artillery. Not counting the four carriers loaded with a single Stealth bomber each.

If you could attack on the same turn as you drop, it'd be different. And if there were different Airborne units such as anti-tank and air defense, it'd be better.

But for now, they are at best a diversionary red-shirt for the enemy, even on the attack they suck.

Stealth fighters are only good for reconnaissance. Their attack strength isn't good enough. It seems regular jet fighters do more damage per attack.
 
I have to agree about Paratroopers, (they even look stupid!!) I thought they would be a great way to send guys behind enemy lines to take & hold Resources & Luxuries. But they have a range of about 8 and die pretty damn fast.

Marines are incredibly useful, i tend to go for the 'Iwo Jima' approach. Total Airial & Naval bombardment combined with an amphibious assualt. A few carriers, destroyers, battleships & cruisers guarding a stack of 1-2 transports full of marines, and a lot more Inf, Arty, or Mechinf and Tanks. Tis the key to that continent! :)

Yeah, Stealth Bombers...have uses, but are generally too expensive. Stealth Fighters...one of the worse units in the game.
 
Back
Top Bottom