Combat

[Daimos]

I haven't gotten this game yet, so I don't know what it's like but here's a quote from a gaming website.
This is talking about weaker units defeating significantly advanced units.

"But even if you accept that a substantially weaker unit could win these combats, it just seems wrong that knights can defeat helicopters."

They did it again? That's just very wrong and impossibly irritating.

[Daimos]

I have to admit that I play as a complete warmonger. Peace doesn't last long in my games. So, if I put lots of effort to advance my tech tree I expect to be able to plow over my enemies. That's the whole point.

[Nailfoot]

Well, the thing here is the gunship acts like a land unit. It cannot go over water, so it make since from that view that other land units have a chance to attack it. Personally, I think maybe the gunship picture and description should have been replaced with someother land based unit. Calling a unit an air-based unit, but being able to take damage from a knight is silly.

Incidentally, jets and bombers, etc, can only be damaged by units having an air-intercept ability. Gunships would have worked better if they also could only be hindered by air-intercept. But, the gunships do look very cool!

[Fried-Psitalon]

Re: Combat

Originally posted by Daimos
I haven't gotten this game yet, so I don't know what it's like but here's a quote from a gaming website.
This is talking about weaker units defeating significantly advanced units.

"But even if you accept that a substantially weaker unit could win these combats, it just seems wrong that knights can defeat helicopters."

They did it again? That's just very wrong and impossibly irritating.

The battle in question was ridiculous - they took a seriously damaged helicopter and threw it against a full-strength knight. So, yes, the knight won.

If you put Mike Tyson with both arms cut off and his mouth muzzled against a local badtown boxer, the unknown guy will win with that kind of handicap.

That article annoys the crap out of me.

[Stuie]

Re: Re: Combat

Originally posted by Fried-Psitalon
If you put Mike Tyson with both arms cut off and his mouth muzzled...

It's good you remembered to muzzle his mouth or he might bite the guys ears off.

[Navyman]

The helo might have been damaged but the fact still remains that a helo that is well enough to still go out and fight is still a combat worthy helo. Any combat worthy helo can defeat the best trained and healthiest horse rider.

Unless of course the horse rider has a stinger missile...

[Tacit_Exit]

No Knight would be complete without his trusty Excalibur

[Daimos]

If it flies above the tree tops then it shouldn't be hit by a guy on a horse. If he was atleast firing a bow then I could somehow let it slide once in a while.

[Daimos]

Wow, a guy from India now controls Excalibur.

[Akaoz]

I assume (thus making an ass of u and me) that the Knight unit represents an army that includes at least some bowmen and even some bows for the knights. Also, in my minds eye I imagine that by the time a knight can run into a helo, some black market stingers have filtered down to the tech-impared.

I don't have a problem with a full army of elite knights being able to finnish off a struggelign helo unit that is bearly able to operate. Maybe they where able to overrun the helo base?

(In Vitetnam there were apperantly stories of helos coming back with arroes in them...)

[RGBVideo]

The battle in question was ridiculous - they took a seriously damaged helicopter and threw it against a full-strength knight. So, yes, the knight won.

Why should a knight have any chance of inflicting any damage to an aerial unit, anyway? It doesn't have proper ranged weapons (like elite archers, who could aim their arrows to shoot the helicopter-drivers head ).

[LordTheRon]

Originally posted by VJ

Why should a knight have any chance of inflicting any damage to an aerial unit, anyway? It doesn't have proper ranged weapons (like elite archers, who could aim their arrows to shoot the helicopter-drivers head ).

Easily. The knight could throw his lance at the helicopter and hitting the fuel tank, pilot, rotors or whatever. Perhaps this particular knight was the reigning olympic javelin champion!

Come on people, don't get too serious here. Some things might be very improbable but nothing is impossible.

[Navyman]

Yeah, just like in theory a spearman could jump onto a tank and open the hatch and spear all the crew... hey it could happen... McWorld...

lances aren't meant to be thrown

Knight - helo is the new spearman - tank?

[RGBVideo]

Come on people, don't get too serious here. Some things might be very improbable but nothing is impossible.

Yes it is. There's no way in hell any person is going to throw a lance of any weight >50 m (what kind of range does a gunship demand for a kill, anyway? They could easily take a horse out from 800m) directly upwards.

Come on people, don't get too serious here.

I've been serious about this since civ2 came out: what on earth is the point of building expensive helicopters if they have no bonus whatsoever against land-based units? They've probably ducked the question again by giving choppers artificially high attack values

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by VJ

Why should a knight have any chance of inflicting any damage to an aerial unit, anyway? It doesn't have proper ranged weapons (like elite archers, who could aim their arrows to shoot the helicopter-drivers head ).

Well, since there aren't any instances otherwise of 'accidents' causing heli-crashes in Civ, think of it as that; the Knight had nothing to do with it, it was just sitting there taking the heli's pounding, and then the pilot made an error and crashed.