What exactly is wrong with Air combat?

[FearSunn]

Agreed. May need to be matched with a gold bonus to cover maintenance costs, not sure how well the AI handles that currently.

Not very well. In one of my mods I was forced to introduce special routine to help AI with gold when it is close to bancrupcy. I've simply give AI player some bonus gold subject to his number of cities and some other criteria. With this "bailout" routine AI became unbeatable on Deity.

 

[Yavid]

My biggest issue with air combat/ using bombers is the fog of war. I get that you can't hit what you can't see but is there nothing out there to let me pierce the fog of war. What good is it to have bombers with such long range if they can't hit anything deep inside enemy territory. Give me a spy plane, let aircraft reveal what they fly over, something.

 

[mr_siika]

I tend to use spies to allow me to attack 'hidden' cities. Or I send religous units...

 

[Tech Osen]

My biggest issue with air combat/ using bombers is the fog of war. I get that you can't hit what you can't see but is there nothing out there to let me pierce the fog of war. What good is it to have bombers with such long range if they can't hit anything deep inside enemy territory. Give me a spy plane, let aircraft reveal what they fly over, something.

Like Mr Siika said: use spies, you want one in enemy territory for listening posts anyway. Increased diplomatic visibility gives +3 combat strength. Just make sure to push him forward before you capture the city else he gets moved back all the way to your capital.

 

[Disgustipated]

Still... That ignores one of the biggest advantages of air power, reconnaissance.

Which civ version was it that allowed you to do reconnaissance missions?

 

[Haig]

Currently playing game as USA and I've seen surprisingly good air unit use by AI.

My two nuclear strikes by using bombers were intercepted by fighters and another one got downed by a jet fighter.

My units were also attacked by jet bombers.

Maybe there was a sneaky change in the code last patch, or ai is just very inconsistent on its air power use.

 

[MrRadar]

Which civ version was it that allowed you to do reconnaissance missions?

Civ IV, of course
Yes, the absence of air recon is quite an oversight, it could be brought back.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

Still... That ignores one of the biggest advantages of air power, reconnaissance.

Which civ version was it that allowed you to do reconnaissance missions?

If you put a fighter on patrol, it will provide visibility from that location, so that's pretty much a reconnaissance mission.

I preferred Civ 5's approach, where you had visibility out from any airbase to the range of the planes there.

Currently playing game as USA and I've seen surprisingly good air unit use by AI.

My two nuclear strikes by using bombers were intercepted by fighters and another one got downed by a jet fighter.

My units were also attacked by jet bombers.

Maybe there was a sneaky change in the code last patch, or ai is just very inconsistent on its air power use.

Pretty sure it's just randomness. The AI will build planes post R&F, and if they're on patrol they'll respond appropriately i.e. intercept incoming planes. The AI will also use Bombers, it just won't use them every game. Mostly when it uses Bombers, it uses them to pillage districts

The AI weakness in airplanes is mostly:

(1) Low prioritization. Even with the high cost of modern units, on higher levels the AI could have more planes earlier than it does, if they ranked higher in the build priority order. I'd say AA Units have been given zero priority, but then since the other AI don't build many planes, I don't build AA Units either.

(2) Not using Fighter-class planes to attack units, even though they're more effective at this than Bomber-class planes.

(3) Not recognizing the threat posed by defending enemy airplanes, and therefore not bringing AA Units or Fighter cover escort.

(4) Continuing to bomb cities that have already been reduced to zero health points, rather than shifting to new targets.

Note that even if this is solved, I'm not sure air combat in Civ 6 will ever be as interesting as it was in Civ 5. The whole patrol mechanism is a tedious and unnecessary step relative to the Civ 5 approach. And if the AI is ever taught to build AA units, air units will likely be immediately obsoleted, as the high cost of building them (including having to lay aerodromes) won't be worth it once the AI starts using AA units

 

[Yavid]

The AI is terribly equipped the had an opponent that is strong in air power. It does not seem to recognize the danger it is in with someone with a strong airforce on it's board. Past games if you were strong in one area of warfare the AI would make sure it was strong in the counter for it. In this game it simply is not true.

 

[MrRadar]

The AI weakness in airplanes is mostly:

(1) Low prioritization. Even with the high cost of modern units, on higher levels the AI could have more planes earlier than it does, if they ranked higher in the build priority order. I'd say AA Units have been given zero priority, but then since the other AI don't build many planes, I don't build AA Units either.

(2) Not using Fighter-class planes to attack units, even though they're more effective at this than Bomber-class planes.

(3) Not recognizing the threat posed by defending enemy airplanes, and therefore not bringing AA Units or Fighter cover escort.

(4) Continuing to bomb cities that have already been reduced to zero health points, rather than shifting to new targets.

From this list it seems that FXS did not have time/resources/priorities to properly code air combat (among many other things) and just quickly put together something for starters and left the whole thing until better times which haven't come yet.

(2) is particularly saddening. In one game I used @FearSunn's Airpower fix mod. My ally American AI filled their skies with those shiny P-51s, I could barely see the ground through them, but when an aggressive neighbour started taking their cities, who had to intervene and save them? Yes, me. All those air UUs were just heaps of wasted cogs for Teddy, they did nothing, although they could grind the invaders to dust. And I still did not need to build a single AA unit, four fighters were quite enough.

Note that even if this is solved, I'm not sure air combat in Civ 6 will ever be as interesting as it was in Civ 5. The whole patrol mechanism is a tedious and unnecessary step relative to the Civ 5 approach. And if the AI is ever taught to build AA units, air units will likely be immediately obsoleted, as the high cost of building them (including having to lay aerodromes) won't be worth it once the AI starts using AA units

Again, this is, sadly, true. Aerodrome buildings are superexpensive, and somehow I have an impression that a pitiful biplane costs as much as a space shuttle to produce.
Military runways/air force infrastructure could be included into the Encampments as another alternative to Barracs/Stables and Armories - it is military field after all, and Aerodromes and their buildings made completely civilian for amenities, cultural, tourism, trade or whatever civilian bonuses.

 

[Disgustipated]

Military runways/air force infrastructure could be included into the Encampments as another alternative to Barracs/Stables and Armories

Good idea. These should be a 4th Encampment building rather than a unique district. After all, in my country, our air force was originally part of the U.S. Army. Only after WW2 did they separate.

 

[Tech Osen]

(2) is particularly saddening. In one game I used @FearSunn's Airpower fix mod. My ally American AI filled their skies with those shiny P-51s, I could barely see the ground through them, but when an aggressive neighbour started taking their cities, who had to intervene and save them? Yes, me. All those air UUs were just heaps of wasted cogs for Teddy, they did nothing, although they could grind the invaders to dust. And I still did not need to build a single AA unit, four fighters were quite enough.

This is also my experience: they now seem to prioritize Flight, build aerodromes early and quite a few planes, and then do nothing useful with them. I've once, since this game was released, have a tank attacked by an AI biplane. There is something broken in the AI routine for this.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

Military runways/air force infrastructure could be included into the Encampments as another alternative to Barracs/Stables and Armories - it is military field after all, and Aerodromes and their buildings made completely civilian for amenities, cultural, tourism, trade or whatever civilian bonuses.

Agreed Agreed Agreed!! The Aerodrome should not be a military district, it should be everything you pointed out.

Again, this is, sadly, true. Aerodrome buildings are superexpensive, and somehow I have an impression that a pitiful biplane costs as much as a space shuttle to produce.

I usually go to space before I build a biplane, and so do the AI civs, so you may be on to something. Those fixed wing planes are SO complicated compared to rockets.

I've once, since this game was released, have a tank attacked by an AI biplane.

That's once more than I've observed or heard about. I honestly didn't think the AI knew it could attack land units with Fighter-class planes.

 

[FearSunn]

Ok. Lets have a check list what Fighter-class should do and what it actually does:
1) It definately intercepts bombers (nothing to fix here).
2) In my last game AI Fighter attacked Missile Cruiser ship (surprisingly).
3) I've never seen it attacking land unit (this is the main problem).

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

2) In my last game AI Fighter attacked Missile Cruiser ship (surprisingly).

Combined with Tech Osen's observation, though, it suggests a more subtle problem than I assumed. I just figured the AI didn't know Fighter-class planes could do anything other than intercept. This suggests the AI does know Fighter-class planes can attack, but for some reason doesn't use them to do so.

Why? Does it prioritize the Fighter's intercept ability, and doesn't want to lose that by using the Fighter on attack? Does it check for plane attacks at the wrong time in the combat sequence for the attack to look optimal? Does it assume the presence of AA Units or intercepting Fighters if not conclusively ruled out, and therefore decline to attack out of fear of being shot down? Does it evaluate Fighter attacks like melee attacks instead of like ranged attacks, and therefore worry about return damage and decline to attack?

 

[FearSunn]

I have a save from this extraodinary event (fighter attacking ship) and experimented a little bit more with this. I've moved embarked mech-infantry into fighter range and again surprisingly fighter attacked this embarked infantry! I've got combat log with "Your infantry was strafed by enemy fighter...". So there is a special term for this "strafed". Never seen this before.

 

[Yavid]

I have used spies to "fix" this. The point of me bringing it up is more of a I shouldn't have to.

 

[Tech Osen]

Does it prioritize the Fighter's intercept ability, and doesn't want to lose that by using the Fighter on attack?

Far as I know you can attack with a deployed fighter and it will still intercept on the following opponents turn. Not sure though, since I very rarely have to intercept anything.

 

[Yavid]

Far as I know you can attack with a deployed fighter and it will still intercept on the following opponents turn. Not sure though, since I very rarely have to intercept anything.

Yes, fighters can be on patrol and attack ground units then return to patrol before the end of your turn. Matter of fact after the attack they return to patrolling

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

Far as I know you can attack with a deployed fighter and it will still intercept on the following opponents turn. Not sure though, since I very rarely have to intercept anything.

Yes, fighters can be on patrol and attack ground units then return to patrol before the end of your turn. Matter of fact after the attack they return to patrolling

Thanks. I assumed otherwise. My bad for extrapolating Civ 5 rules to Civ 6.

EDIT: Not just Civ 5, but any wargame I've ever played. The old grognard in me is taxing my poor memory, and I can't for the life of me think of a game where an air unit used on an offensive mission was also able to be used for a defensive intercept mission on the opponent's turn. Like desert being easy terrain to move through, this might be a Civ wrinkle that takes me a while to assimilate. Sometimes I still catch myself wanting to march my troops around the desert instead of straight through it.