Im in the middle of a french game at the moment and im at war with the mongols. I put my battleships right next to one of his cities on the coast, but theres no option to bombard, and when i try to tell my units to move into the city (thought maybe thats how it was done) that doesnt do anything either.
Why cant battleships bombard?
- Thread starter Wolf52
- Start date
Snerk
Smeghead
Are you sure your battleship is on a tile right next to the enemy city?, because battleships are able to bombard enemy cities if they are in contact with the city tile... But then maybe its a bug...
Bushface
Deity
You can't bombard if the target city has no defence, but in that case your land units ought to be able to move into the city unopposed. Are you trying to do that, or to get them also to bombard ? If you can neither bombard nor move in, then you have a nasty bug to report in the bugs forum.
Snerk
Smeghead
You are aware of the fact that naval units can only reduce an ememy city's defence, and not attack enemy land units in the city.... right?
Bushface
Deity
Lots of units does not mean that the city has its own defence. No culture = no city defence unless it has Walls and maybe Castle. And no, you can't move a ship into a city that you do not own. Without land units you cannot take a city, nor can you ever bombard units inside a city. Seems unreasonable, but there it is. After all, in the 1800s in the real world Zanzibar surrendered to the British after a few minutes' bombardment by a small warship, marking the end of one of the shortest wars ever.
City defence is shown above the city-name label, beside a near-invisible dark tower symbol.
City defence is shown above the city-name label, beside a near-invisible dark tower symbol.
Well, the only thing I could guess is so you can't tear up someone's land through pure naval superiority, though, I still can't really see it, especially since in Civ 3 you had to have workers clear the craters before you could rebuild anything, a huge PIA that's gone in Civ 4.
acetoolguy
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2006
- Messages
- 60
Naval bombardment of land defences is way overrated..ask any WWII Marine.
The issue for 'realism' for naval bombardment is a little more complex than it may appear.
In WWII, naval bombardment was often far more effective than expected, for instance, the use of Destroyers' smaller guns at Anzio. Conversely, they were usually less effective than thought (Tarawa).
Sometimes, timidity of cammanders made them less effecitive, which is the issue behing the Gallipoli affair.
The key for CIV and most wargames is range. It makes sense they can bombard city defenses, since most coastal cities are actually right on the sea. Conversely, the road or mine in the coastal square may be too far in-land for the ships to be effective.
But don't overlook timidity. Very few battleship commanders will allow their ships to get near the shallow waters of the shore -- and if there is coastal defenses, its even worse. This is why small fire as an Anzio was effective, and the British retreated from Gallipoli on the heals of victory.
So I can name 15 wargames where battleships can attack the coast and not the units inland -- its a matter of the size of the hexes.
Obviously, the advent of missle fire and good tactics can change things. The New Jersey was pretty effecitve in Viet Nam. A more modern missile firing ship can do damage furhter inland.
But given historical reasons, I don't think its unrealstic to allow ships only to bombard the city.
Best wishes,
Breunor
In WWII, naval bombardment was often far more effective than expected, for instance, the use of Destroyers' smaller guns at Anzio. Conversely, they were usually less effective than thought (Tarawa).
Sometimes, timidity of cammanders made them less effecitive, which is the issue behing the Gallipoli affair.
The key for CIV and most wargames is range. It makes sense they can bombard city defenses, since most coastal cities are actually right on the sea. Conversely, the road or mine in the coastal square may be too far in-land for the ships to be effective.
But don't overlook timidity. Very few battleship commanders will allow their ships to get near the shallow waters of the shore -- and if there is coastal defenses, its even worse. This is why small fire as an Anzio was effective, and the British retreated from Gallipoli on the heals of victory.
So I can name 15 wargames where battleships can attack the coast and not the units inland -- its a matter of the size of the hexes.
Obviously, the advent of missle fire and good tactics can change things. The New Jersey was pretty effecitve in Viet Nam. A more modern missile firing ship can do damage furhter inland.
But given historical reasons, I don't think its unrealstic to allow ships only to bombard the city.
Best wishes,
Breunor
Snerk
Smeghead
Why does almost every thread end in a discussion of wether ww2 stuff did do something or didn't do something? fascinating!
Wolf52 said:
In CIV4, with surface ships, you can no longer bombard improvements on land, nor can you bombard enemy units. You can only bombard the city defenses and you should be able to bombard until it is weakened down to 0%. If you want to bombard improvements and units from the sea, you have to use Carriers w/fighters. Anyhow, there is a button and it will light up when you can bombard.
sweetpete said:Why does almost every thread end in a discussion of wether ww2 stuff did do something or didn't do something? fascinating!
Because world war two is
1) A modern war
2) A total war (involved not just soldiers)
3) A war that used all kinds of waepons and tactics that are like today's tactics ans weapons
Those are the main reasons
Sahkuhnder
Delusions of grandeur
sweetpete said:Why does almost every thread end in a discussion of wether ww2 stuff did do something or didn't do something? fascinating!
I can't speak for other threads but as this one is about battleships, using WWI and WWII for examples seems appropriate.
EDIT - same time cross post!
sahkuhnder said:
Indeed, when else were battleships used?! In my post, I mentioned WWI and WWII. (incidentally, didn't I mention the New Jersey in Viet Nam?) If we are talking about battleships, these are the eras! Battleships are obsolete now and the New Jersey use was not really cost effective. So, I think if we want to look at whether battleships can bombard, we need to look at when they were used!
Breunor
Dueck
Walrold
You can't seriously fight a war with just a navy. The only thing you can do with just a navy is blockad their cities and make sure they can't use their water tiles in their cities (which can usually starve some cities down). You can see whether or not you can bombard a city by if it has a white "+X%" under it, where the X is whatever the cultural defense of that city is. If your unit can bombard, it will have a bulls-eye icon in its orders menu. This will only decrease the +X% bonus, and will not damage anything.
On the other note, I'd like to see battleships and destroyers able to bombard coastal units down to maybe 90% strength.
On the other note, I'd like to see battleships and destroyers able to bombard coastal units down to maybe 90% strength.
Bushface
Deity
City defence in Civ 4 is a very abstract concept, based on the city's accumulated culture points - not counting walls and castle, which have become obsolete by the time battleships are available. If the bombardment is equally abstract, consisting of abstruse philosophical ideas, new art styles and similar, then and only then could there be a cultural reduction in the city. Moreover, the fighting units might reasonably be expected to be unaffected by this kind of bombardment. What does the average grunt know or care about Kierkegaard, Sartre or Jackson Pollock ? Or even, heaven save us, Tracy Emin ?
Only rarely have I managed to get a city's defence down to zero without capturing the place in a couple of turns or so, but in those rare cases I have noticed the defence value beginning to rise again. Would it return to the pre-attack level in time ? How much time ? Anybody know ?
Only rarely have I managed to get a city's defence down to zero without capturing the place in a couple of turns or so, but in those rare cases I have noticed the defence value beginning to rise again. Would it return to the pre-attack level in time ? How much time ? Anybody know ?
