Why is war so unrealistic in Civilization V?

[NebulousJaguar]

However, that said, there was one time when my bomber somehow got show down by Medieval Knights on horseback

What kind of bomber, specifically, did you lose to the knights?

 

[Olleus]

The timescale on civ doesn't make sense, it takes years to enter or leave a city?!?

With that being crazy, how can you expect anything to be truly realistic

 

[Socratatus]

What kind of bomber, specifically, did you lose to the knights?

Does it matter? FYI it was a ww2 type bomber. And that should be `shot` not `show`, my typo error.

 

[Volcanon]

Does it matter? FYI it was a ww2 type bomber. And that should be `shot` not `show`, my typo error.

Was the bomber at 1/100? Bombers always take some damage even attacking outdated armies. Which is somewhat realistic tbh - ww2 bombers crashed a lot even sometimes from bomb misfires. Being on a bomber crew was dangerous.

 

[Socratatus]

Was the bomber at 1/100? Bombers always take some damage even attacking outdated armies. Which is somewhat realistic tbh - ww2 bombers crashed a lot even sometimes from bomb misfires. Being on a bomber crew was dangerous.

The bomber was indeed heavily damaged from other attacks. I remember that now. I did just pretend that it crashed from some kind of faulty part.

However, I know a lot about WW2 bombers. They didn`t crash that much compared to functioning (they weren`t WW1 crates). In fact many bombers managed to function with most of its engines gone and riddled with bullet holes. They were very sturdy.

Even a heavily damaged bomber could never be downed by a group of medieval knights.

But as I said, i just pretended it must have had a fault and crashed.