Why can't I bomb tile improvements anymore?

[hardcore_gamer]

In Civ 4 one of my fav tactics during the modern era was using airpower and naval power to bomb the living hell out of enemy civs and destroy all of their tile improvements with my bombers/aircraft and guided missiles thus causing famines among other things that damaged the enemy civ without having to resort to direct ground warfare. It was one of the things that made air power so useful and so important.

However, in Civ 5 this is for some reason no longer possible and aircraft as well as guided missiles can no longer attack tiles but only ground units, cities and other aircraft!

Why? Its not like this was invalid tactic or anything! I mean even the AI knew how to and did this every now and then so its not like it was an exploit!

I hope this ability gets added back later, and if not then I would like to know if there is some way to mod it in.

 

[Davor]

Sadly CiV is a different game. Different game different tactics. Rememeber that CiV has less option and choices. "Streamlining" to make the game more simpler.

 

[hardcore_gamer]

Sadly CiV is a different game. Different game different tactics. Rememeber that CiV has less option and choices. "Streamlining" to make the game more simpler.

Oh no, not this cra* again.

I agree Civ 5 is suffering from many shortcomings, but frankly I am sick of every other thread being spammed with claims of "OmFG EveRY PROBleM iN ZHE GAMe is to BLAMe oN tHE GAME BEing StreamlineD FOR ZHE DiRTy MasseS CIV 5 SUUXXOORSS!!"!

Removing the tile bombardment option doesn't do anything to streamline the game, so that can't be the reason.

Moderator Action: Trolling
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[HighHandz]

I would like it back too. I also miss map trading!

 

[Nefairius]

Really don't understand the reasoning behind removing air bombardment. Too powerful maybe? Take out the oil... (or well, really aluminum since it totally replaces oil so quickly) Outside of that I don't see any reason aircraft shouldn't be able to bomb tiles.

 

[shinkicker]

I was pretty disappointed when I sailed down Elizabeth's coastlines with 4 battleships and all I could shoot up were her cities.

All those lovely farms and trading posts - impervious to my gunfire!

 

[hardcore_gamer]

Take out the oil...

Anti-Aircraft weapons are in the game for a reason.

or well, really aluminum since it totally replaces oil so quickly

To be honest I think this is even more stupid.

Oil use to be a highly valuable resource as was aluminum since both was needed to build modern weapons. Now ONLY aluminum is needed for modern weapons. I mean WTH? I can build a whole fleet of jet fighters WITHOUT needing any oil?!?!?

The list of horrible design decisions that don't make even a shred of sense just continues to grow doesn't it?

Hopefully, it will be possible to mod the game so that 2 different types of resources are needed for the same units. It if turns out that the game is hardcoded to only allow each unit type to be associated with one type of resource at a time then I just might have to.......sight.......start of agree with the whiners that the game is dumbed down as opposed to having simply traded in old mechanics for new ones.

 

[dexters]

Favours human players.

Civ3 vanilla had a really nice working AI where if an AI has naval power they would send their navy to bomb the living hell out of your coastal tiles.

They got bugged and patched or whatever in PTW and C3C, so they just keep bombing your cities , red-lining your unit and not doing anything about it.

Essentially the game went backwards. in Civ4, AI used bombers like siege units, again preference on bombing units. Not tiles.

In the hands of a human player, bombing tiles is overpowered. So I'm fine with it gone.

 

[Davor]

Oh no, not this cra* again.

I agree Civ 5 is suffering from many shortcomings, but frankly I am sick of every other thread being spammed with claims of "OmFG EveRY PROBleM iN ZHE GAMe is to BLAMe oN tHE GAME BEing StreamlineD FOR ZHE DiRTy MasseS CIV 5 SUUXXOORSS!!"!

Removing the tile bombardment option doesn't do anything to streamline the game, so that can't be the reason.

Yes it does. Now you have less options to think about so the game is sped up. Or has the options been removed so you don't have to think about it so it's been dumbed down?

Why are you sick of it though? It is the truth isn't it? I don't here Firaxis saying other wise and defending their product they put out.

 

[hardcore_gamer]

Favours human players.

Civ3 vanilla had a really nice working AI where if an AI has naval power they would send their navy to bomb the living hell out of your coastal tiles.

They got bugged and patched or whatever in PTW and C3C, so they just keep bombing your cities , red-lining your unit and not doing anything about it.

Essentially the game went backwards. in Civ4, AI used bombers like siege units, again preference on bombing units. Not tiles.

In the hands of a human player, bombing tiles is overpowered. So I'm fine with it gone.

I don't agree with you. In civ 4 using too many bombers and aircraft to attack enemy cities without having destroyed enemy units within the land prior to the air attacks would often leave your air force in tatters. It was balanced enough in my opinion, plus the AI also bombed your tile improvements when it could.

Yes it does. Now you have less options to think about so the game is sped up. Or has the options been removed so you don't have to think about it so it's been dumbed down?

Why are you sick of it though? It is the truth isn't it? I don't here Firaxis saying other wise and defending their product they put out.

Moderator Action: Image removed.

 

[lordqarlyn]

well why don't they tweak the AI to do the same to you?!? Besides, that's why we have fighters and anti-air units! It's stupid that the developers removed a perfectly legitimate warfare strategy just because "it's unfair"!!

Well boohoo, life is not fair, and war is not meant to be fair! I'm gonna download the first mod that implements this feature.

 

[leafs43]

Civ 5 went expressly to land units being able to ravage.

I think they did it that way because ravaging from at least sea was almost undefendable if you didn't have a comparable navy.


Now if you ravage tiles you have to do a trade off as cities can now attack on their own.

 

[lordqarlyn]

Civ 5 went expressly to land units being able to ravage.

I think they did it that way because ravaging from at least sea was almost undefendable if you didn't have a comparable navy.


Now if you ravage tiles you have to do a trade off as cities can now attack on their own.

LOL then build a freakin navy! Submarine units in Civ 5 DON'T require a resource, are cheap to build, and attack other ships well! Sheeesh!

 

[Venger]

I don't miss sea bombardment of tiles AT ALL. Always thought it was ridiculous. No way a Frigate could ruin your Sugar plantation.

Even now, not a big fan of it even from the air, except maybe for railroad or road destruction. To think you destroyed farmland with your F-16 is stupid.

Now with ground units - I get that. And I think the Civ5 method of pillaged land is actually VERY good.

 

[Tsathoggua]

I was pretty disappointed when I sailed down Elizabeth's coastlines with 4 battleships and all I could shoot up were her cities.

All those lovely farms and trading posts - impervious to my gunfire!

I'm disappointed that on any map type other than maybe Pangaea, 4 battleships is an automatic back door into any empire.

 

[Tsathoggua]

Even now, not a big fan of it even from the air, except maybe for railroad or road destruction. To think you destroyed farmland with your F-16 is stupid.

What is it about farms that make them immune to a well-placed surface-to-air missile?

 

[brianshapiro]

Oh no, not this cra* again.

I agree Civ 5 is suffering from many shortcomings, but frankly I am sick of every other thread being spammed with claims of "OmFG EveRY PROBleM iN ZHE GAMe is to BLAMe oN tHE GAME BEing StreamlineD FOR ZHE DiRTy MasseS CIV 5 SUUXXOORSS!!"!

Removing the tile bombardment option doesn't do anything to streamline the game, so that can't be the reason.

What if you think it was done to streamline the game but think streamlining is good? I don't know why you're getting mad about it!

 

[AriochIV]

Tile bombardment is just one of about a dozen missing features from Civ IV that I'd like back.

Another annoyance with the new air system is the removal of the Recon mission, and that even conducting a strike or air sweep mission doesn't give you any extra visibility around the mission area. The new "Air Recon" ability just shows you what's around the base, which is mostly useless.

 

[Justicex]

I don't agree that it is all that realistic anyway. In the middle and dark ages and beyond, it was all left to the ground units because there was no air units. Also, it became necessary to shorten sieges by eliminating sources of food, water, materials to repair weapns, make arrows, etc. It's all about cutting off the supply lines.

In the modern age, if you are Barack Obama at war, and you are paying $20 billion per plane, not to mention fuel, ammo and manpower costs, you are NOT going to dust a crop field with napalm just to mess with the Taliban. Exposing that unit to that kind of risk, for that little reward is mind-bogglingly stupid. Bombing a mobile encampment, a supply convoy, a city, THOSE are good uses for the modern-age units.

I'm not saying that it cannot be done, nor that it is not a viable tactic. Your airforce's PRIORITIES should be elsewhere. Since your ground units are already there anyway and will destroy much of the terrain just marching over it, It's their job to "clean up the mess" while the airforce weakens the city's defences.

Me personally, when I march on a city, I leave as much untouched as possible because I never met a new city I didn't like. It's a little hard to rule when there's nothing left to rule over....

 

[hardcore_gamer]

Tile bombardment is just one of about a dozen missing features from Civ IV that I'd like back.

Another annoyance with the new air system is the removal of the Recon mission, and that even conducting a strike or air sweep mission doesn't give you any extra visibility around the mission area. The new "Air Recon" ability just shows you what's around the base, which is mostly useless.

Yes, I miss that as well.

Though to be fair, being able to send your aircraft deep into foreign lands even if you had no open border treaties without it having any affects on relations with the country that owned the land you were basically and openly spying on made very little sense.

To think you destroyed farmland with your F-16 is stupid.

A rain of bombs resulting in a massive firestorm won't destroy a farm?

If anything, bombers should be more devastating against farms then other targets because the fire could spread much more easily on massive farmlands weak to fire.

In fact now that I think of it actual bombs might not even be needed, for all we know it could be enough to simply spray some sort of airborne toxic over the farmlands that kills the harvests.

It's a little hard to rule when there's nothing left to rule over....

By this logic nukes should not be in the game either.

And not everyone wants to take over the civ that you are at war with, sometimes you just want it dead.