What exactly is wrong with Air combat?

[Tech Osen]

Fundamentally the biggest problem is not the AI but that air power is so expensive. At a minimum you have to hard build an aerodrome, fighter and bomber. Plus you would probably want to build a hangar to get XP. Then you also want to consider getting a military engineer to build a few airstrips. Plus it is very fiddly to move the units around and rebase. Firaxis should look at making air units cheaper to build and giving them a bigger range

I'm sorry but 4-5 turns (standard speed) to build a fighter or bomber is quite accaptable. If your cities can't muster that sort of production then maybe you need to look at your cities/cards/traderoutes.

 

[gozpel]

I will look into the mod, but really, the AI does a LOT of nothing during the game, except building more meat shields.

Vikings will even denounce you if you have no ships, and IF their cap is inland they can't build any themselves, so I used a quick run to see.

Yes, they denounced me and they STILL don't have a coastal city, and I have 2 galleys. Complete BS!!

Much later I have I have 4 battle ships and 2 caravels, they denounce me again!? They still don't have a single boat out themselves?

Why explaining the thing with boats, is that it is exactly the same in the flight era, they won't build them. The AI rather build a settler for a tundra town, instead of defense

 

[DemonMaster]

I will look into the mod, but really, the AI does a LOT of nothing during the game, except building more meat shields.

Vikings will even denounce you if you have no ships, and IF their cap is inland they can't build any themselves, so I used a quick run to see.

Yes, they denounced me and they STILL don't have a coastal city, and I have 2 galleys. Complete BS!!

Much later I have I have 4 battle ships and 2 caravels, they denounce me again!? They still don't have a single boat out themselves?

Why explaining the thing with boats, is that it is exactly the same in the flight era, they won't build them. The AI rather build a settler for a tundra town, instead of defense

Perhaps that's the reason they denounced you and not DoW'd you.

 

[Archon_Wing]

Fundamentally the biggest problem is not the AI but that air power is so expensive. At a minimum you have to hard build an aerodrome, fighter and bomber. Plus you would probably want to build a hangar to get XP. Then you also want to consider getting a military engineer to build a few airstrips. Plus it is very fiddly to move the units around and rebase. Firaxis should look at making air units cheaper to build and giving them a bigger range

But by the some token, you don't need that many planes either to do damage. 3-4 is typically good enough so you might need 1-2 aerodromes at best and some airstrips.

They're actually rather strong and can quickly KO civs even at tech pairty. On the defense, they can easily hold off more advanced enemies. Problem is most advanced players just zip through the tech tree and have already built all they need so there's no need to even war by that point. Hardbuilding anything at that point is suboptimal. The other thing is that there's no need to counter air units so that already makes fighters pointless.

 

[blackbutterfly]

...other thing is that there's no need to counter air units so that already makes fighters pointless.

So after 3500hrs of gameplay the AI finally built bombers and jet fighters and is taking part in air combat.

Previously only once ever was I attacked by a bomber in Civ VI. So I am actually relieved

How did this miracle happen? Well, I'm playing a super sized map. The Ancient World from the UN Earth Maps Pack: Indonesia TSL vs. mostly Europeans. I only had Japan and the Mongols in the East. Japan was conquered and Mongolia was allied...until Mongolia went to space.

Because of Indonesia's isolation culture victory is taking longer than usual...so IMO that's why this happened. Yes, it's hard to believe!

 

[Victoria]

I am assuming that they still have not fixed fighters on carriers?
... so for example can someone have fighters on their carriers and deploy them from there?
My issue is it has always worked in fire tuner but not in game.

 

[blackbutterfly]

I am assuming that they still have not fixed fighters on carriers?
... so for example can someone have fighters on their carriers and deploy them from there?

No fighter deployment on carriers.

I'm still playing this game and I used carriers to help move my bomber fleet around the world (treating them like mobile airstrips). I couldn't deploy a fighter from a carrier. I think this is b'cos the deployment is stationary while the carrier is mobile. They're really for bombers.

TBH rarely do you ever encounter jet bombers. I now deployed 3 fighters around that area/city in the screenshot and Mongolia have stopped attacking my navy, even though Genghis still has at least two jet bombers somewhere.

(FYI I did reload several times to figure out how to defend against a bomber attack...cos this is the first time really i've played air combat with the AI in Civ VI).

I captured video of a jet fighter intercepting my jet bomber attack. It's very strange. Unlike in Civ V a single jet fighter can intercept many jet bombers (as long as it survives).

 

[Bojevus]

It seems to me that the range issue is also a big one.

With early-stage airpower, sure. But by the end-game your bombers should be able to attack halfway across the map or more - on large maps it's absurd.

Relatedly, you should be able to base aircraft in allied cities and city-states. That's like half the US's actual global air superiority policy.

 

[blackbutterfly]

But by the end-game your bombers should be able to attack halfway across the map or more - on large maps it's absurd.

It looks to me like Firaxis devs had originally intended to have actual Stealth bombers like in Civ V and Civ Rev, for the Stealth tech. Perhaps it made no sense RN cos the AI currently don't do much air combat? IDK

IMO it will be added perhaps in the next exp. or as a DLC? Stealth bombers could have even more range and thus the ability to rebase further.

But 5 range for jet fighters make them very difficult to move around. Build/buy them in cities you want to defend. That means when the AI figure out air combat you must build an aerodrome (or airstrip) in frontier cities or within 10 (?) tiles of one.

 

[CPWimmer]

Relatedly, you should be able to base aircraft in allied cities and city-states.

Yeah, that would be nice.

 

[King of Prussia]

from one of my games post patch.(not the only instance)

i don't really see the fighters attack, but they do intercept if the AI isn't having massive indecision about where to put them.

edit for clarity, the only mods i use are the ones i made to change the cost to making units.

 

[cinattra]

Yeah, they shouldn't treat the air units like the ground units. It is truly expensive to get an effective air force off the ground.

A second issue is that you have to build all the aerodome buildings before you can fly ground units between aerodomes. It honestly makes aerodomes useless for a long long time. An aerodome by itself should allow you to build planes. Add a hangar and you should be able to move military personnel and support units. Add an airport and you should be able to move the armored units.

I would like to see the addition of an air transport support unit which would allow your military units to fly out of any level of aerodome and air fields.

I think this is the problem with all of the modern military units. They simply take a long time to build. They need a fighter between fighter and jet fighter. They skipped over an entire generation of aircraft. The true cost of these fighters is in sustainment of the planes and should be reflected not in the upfront cost of production but in the maintenance cost.

 

[blackbutterfly]

from one of my games post patch.(not the only instance)

B'cos I play very aggressively even on large/huge maps the AI rarely ever gets a chance to advance itself to use air combat with me

I think that's why. (Also the AI have never dropped a nuke on me either...3500 hrs of gameplay and counting!) I play Deity.

So for me this little air resistance the AI put up was a very rare experience in Civ VI (but from what i've been reading on the forums this is pretty common among players).

 

[Patine]

Ah, the days of Civ2. Kamikaze fighter attacks ad naseum by the AI on your cities, nuclear missiles out of nowhere, and paratroopers pouncing on every city left undefended. The wet noodle Civ6 AI airpower is a pathetic gasp of what such power was back in Civ2 in the '90's...

 

[blackbutterfly]

Ah, the days of Civ2. Kamikaze fighter attacks ad naseum by the AI on your cities, nuclear missiles out of nowhere, and paratroopers pouncing on every city left undefended. The wet noodle Civ6 AI airpower is a pathetic gasp of what such power was back in Civ2 in the '90's...

I never played that game, cos it was before my time

SMAC/X was my first Civ experience and the best. It's kinda been downhill from there

I'm beginning to think Firaxis deliberately disabled AI air combat b'cos air defence in Civ VI is convoluted and difficult.

In Civ V and Beyond Earth to defend a city and units within that city's range you just place a fighter there and set it to intercept. Now, you've got to:

1. Build an aerodrome.
2. Build a jet fighter.
(Optional) 3. Build airstrip(s) or aerodrome(s) with 10 tile range to rebase the jet fighter.
4. Rebase the jet fighter.
5. Deploy.

(This is even harder to manage with 3-range regular fighters...unless you're America).

I guess Firaxis made it like this so fighters could be deployed to defend a district like a space port. So it's now a mess IMO.

 

[SaiH]

Relatedly, you should be able to base aircraft in allied cities and city-states.

Yes that would be nice. Or at least you should be able to build an airstrip in allied city state territory. I tried it, you can't do it now. Interestingly, you can build a missile silo in city state territory.

I am assuming that they still have not fixed fighters on carriers?
... so for example can someone have fighters on their carriers and deploy them from there?

That is an issue for me, too.
The whole deployment mechanic changed since vanilla. Due to some bugs, I suppose.
Fighters could be deployed on any tile that was in range of an airbase that belonged to you or to one of your allies. That was a nice idea but it was hard to tell to which airbase the fighter belonged. And of course there was the problem of stranded deployed fighters when the carrier moved away.
Possible solution: you can deploy a fighter on any tile that is in range of an airbase that belongs to you or to one of your allies AND that has a free airbase slot which is then occupied by that fighter (auto-rebasement when in deploy mode). Additionally there could be a penalty of 50 damage when the base gets captured, destroyed or out of range. So when there is a tile in range of the fighter that is also within the range of another airbase, you can still save the plane.

 

[blackbutterfly]

Possible solution: you can deploy a fighter on any tile that is in range of an airbase that belongs to you or to one of your allies AND that has a free airbase slot which is then occupied by that fighter (auto-rebasement when in deploy mode). Additionally there could be a penalty of 50 damage when the base gets captured, destroyed or out of range. So when there is a tile in range of the fighter that is also within the range of another airbase, you can still save the plane.

Yes, that might work, but I hate to say it, but the best and simplest solution is to allow fighters to be deployed on the carrier....and have it move with it.

And yes, that's more like reverting back to Civ V and BE but hey, old is gold

 

[SaiH]

Yes, that might work, but I hate to say it, but the best and simplest solution is to allow fighters to be deployed on the carrier....and have it move with it.

This can be an nice additional feature for fighters based on carriers and I like it. But it is only relevant for carriers.
I wanted to suggest a more general solution for all deployment situations.

 

[Victoria]

I like deployment, only issue with it the carriers.

 

[blackbutterfly]

This can be an nice additional feature for fighters based on carriers and I like it. But it is only relevant for carriers.
I wanted to suggest a more general solution for all deployment situations.

This is the major issue with air combat in Civ VI. It's very hard to defend a navy from air assault without being able to field fighters from a carrier at sea. Perhaps req. the carrier to be fortified and prevent it from moving if its fighters are deployed.

Bombers will destroy your navy even if they've got the air defence promotion.