Tanks with collateral damage

[TheAlkymist]

Hi, hope I have posted at the right place. Not used to this forum yet.

I have a problem playing civ BtS. When I get tank and try to promote them with collateral damage (barriage 1 or something, +20% collateral damage?), the tanks still don't want to deal collateral. Is this usual, someting new added to BtS? I find it confusing to be able to promote with collateral if it's not working.
Could this be because I installed the BUG mod?

Haven't played BtS for a while, so I don't know if this is a bug or how BtS is.
Could anyone help me, for example, should I reinstall BtS or something?

 

[dirtyparrot]

IIRC, tanks in BTS no longer give collateral damage. The promotion should have been removed, but I guess somebody forgot. BUG doesn't have anything to do with this.

 

[Joecoolyo]

No it isn't a bug, in the 3.17 update they made it so any unit that doesn't originally deal collateral damage can't get the barrage promotion, so no more collateral tanks ( I know, we all miss them ).

edit: dirtyparrot, seems like you can hit the enter button faster than i can

 

[Ginger_Ale]

If you want to play v3.17 with collateral damage re-enabled for tanks, you can check out the unofficial patch. I've used it, and it works fine...

 

[jhans24]

Thanks for the helpful answers. I had been promoting my tanks with this promotion. I guess I should pay better attention to my combats and I play 3.17. dummy

 

[TheAlkymist]

Thanks for the help.
Could not understand what was wrong. Guess firaxis should do something about this, it is quite annoying to have a promotion-option that is of no use.

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

Shoulda removed the tank City Raider function instead of Collateral Damage. The way 3.17 does it makes no sense. Tank gun fire definitely creates a wide enough blast field to cause some collateral damage, but they are lanky, slow, and difficult to maneuver inside cities (unless on main streets/avenues).

 

[budweiser]

Well, I can see an assault gun being a city raider. Collateral damage would be something like self propelled artillery, not really a tank. A tank's gun was smaller than an artilley piece and would have had a flatter projectory.

 

[mechaerik]

Tanks are useless and clunky on city streets. They are easy targets for someone hiding in the urban jungle. Even the assault guns can't do much against a much more mobile and smaller target that can quickly turn and run.

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

Well, I can see an assault gun being a city raider. Collateral damage would be something like self propelled artillery, not really a tank. A tank's gun was smaller than an artilley piece and would have had a flatter projectory.

A tank shell landing within 10 feet will cause shrapnel injuries and within 5 feet will definitely provide for some impact casualties. If a tank fired shell hits a concrete structure, the projectiles created from that explosion can cause collateral damage. Which, granted, isn't guaranteed to deal damage to military units, however, if you have an entire unit of tanks (represented by 1 animated character on the screen) shooting, you're bound to do something to enemy forces. And you mean trajectory not projectory.

 

[theskibum]

Seems to me they nerfed collateral off of tanks to force people to re-combine arms warfare in the modern era.

Artillery too slow you say, why yes it is...but bombers aren't and they don't even have to be on the front lines. Nothing better than a border city or two with an airport and 6 bombers with 2 fighters/jets (defense against air assault) bombarding a for a few turns before your tank stack can reach thier city. I find if I promote a couple tanks with drill for stack defense and the rest with CR, I can have all the blitzkrieg I can handle combined with bombers.

 

[Antilogic]

...if your opponents don't have any planes, that's a great idea. I've found that I need significant numbers of fighters, though (at least 2:1 against my bombers and a numerical superiority) to let my bombers suceed in their missions.

 

[theskibum]

...if your opponents don't have any planes, that's a great idea. I've found that I need significant numbers of fighters, though (at least 2:1 against my bombers and a numerical superiority) to let my bombers suceed in their missions.

Seems like in my games the AI either doesn't prioritize flight, or they don't build enough fighters to pose a real interception threat to my bombers. Besides I look at bombers as if they were seige weapons. They aren't too costly hammer wise, so if I lose 1 or 2 per city I take, its no different than losing a few cats or trebs doing a city seige early on.

 

[mechaerik]

One word: SAMs.
The AI loves their SAM infantry, and you don't need flight for them.

 

[theskibum]

One word: SAMs.
The AI loves their SAM infantry, and you don't need flight for them.

Agreed SAM infantry can be a headache. Usually best to try to fight your big rivals before they get rocketry. I would still take bomber & tanks for blitz war on a large neighbor over trying to duke it out slowly by stacking arty with tanks. Of course once you get robotics this becomes moot.

 

[Phoenician]

I'm glad that they got rid of collateral tanks. In terms of game play it makes Artillery/ mobile SAM redundant and air bombardment somewhat redundant. I'm also glad they got rid of artillery firing from ships- that was just cheap and made air bombardment and amphibious promotion redundant.

 

[Fei Kelei]

I know that collateral damage from tanks would be more realistic, but I do think that the game is more balanced without it. Also, in my opinion, Marines should be able to get the city raider promotion, since that would make them actually worth using more in the game and would be pretty true to their function in real life.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Add me to the opinions that feel that a unit with collateral that has higher base STR than anything in its era and would overwhelm even its counter unit after 1-2 collateral rounds was a tad unbalanced. Tanks remain very good even now but are not a super standalone unit anymore.

 

[The_Reckoning]

I know that collateral damage from tanks would be more realistic, but I do think that the game is more balanced without it. Also, in my opinion, Marines should be able to get the city raider promotion, since that would make them actually worth using more in the game and would be pretty true to their function in real life.

Definitely. It'd make coastal cities so much more vulnerable too, which is also realistic. And the US unique unit would be much improved.