POLL: Do you think the B-52 would be a valuable asset in Civ3?

[GraveEatr]

This ties into the thread I just posted about the B-52 unit graphics.

Everybody interpretation is different, but this would be my idea on the Buff's stats:

Prerequisite: Rocketry
Shield Cost: 25
Operational Range: 8
Bombard Str: 16
Rate of Fire: 3

[Mizaq]

It wouldn't make sense to add the B52 because the whole thing with the B52 is that it has a huge range, but in civ3 the aircraft are limited to a range of 8. You shouldn't be able to launch these from aircraft carriers, and what enemy city are you likely to bomb that is 8 squares away from one of your cities?

[GraveEatr]

Well, look at the B-2 Stealth Bomber that is in Civ3. That thing is capable of doing intercontinental bombing missions. In Kosovo and in Afghanistan, the B-2 flew non-stop bombing missions based out of Missouri. Of course the Buff can do the same thing, but it isn't designed as well for it.

You're right, you shouldn't launch B-52's off of the carriers in the game. But then again, you shouldn't be able to launch the Stealth Fighter, Stealth Bomber, or the WWII style bombers off of them either. I myself have tweaked my B-2's perform much like the ICBM's: with unlimited global range. To make up for it, I made them pretty costly on the shields to build, so that you (or the computer) can have an entire fleet of Stealths.

Back to the Buffs: Once the expansion pack comes out and you can build airfields, you could then perform bombing missions behind enemy lines from them, giving the Buff a little more of a "realistic" application.

[Joe R. Golowka]

I would give it unlimitted range.

[CivGeneral]

This ties into the thread I just posted about the B-52 unit graphics.

Everybody interpretation is different, but this would be my idea on the Buff's stats:

Prerequisite: Rocketry
Shield Cost: 25
Operational Range: 8
Bombard Str: 16
Rate of Fire: 3-GraveEatr

Hmm. We can make the Stealth Bomber a little more expensive and the B-52 a choice for a civilization that does eather does not have the Tech or just want a cheaper bomber .

[Jon Shafer]

Not a bad idea Civfan, but I think that there are enough aircraft already covered. The modern era flies by as it is, adding another unit would only clutter it up more. Kind of like adding a new wooden ship with Magnetism.

[Sava]

Trip, you just disagree with everyone don't you?

I think the unit has merit, but for playability sake, I would have to vote to keep it out. It's not the B52's fault, its the way Civ 3 is designed. IMO Civ 3 is a step backwards in the genre. The game is limited in terms of MODing and considering Sid had 6 years to make a sequel, it is very poor.

[Pythagoras]

If you add another 'step' to the upgrade line then thats just going to make it even more of a pain. Now once Ive built a couple bombers, Ill get the B52 tech and have to upgrade, but once I have some of those Ill get stealth... grumble

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by Sava
Trip, you just disagree with everyone don't you?

I think the unit has merit, but for playability sake, I would have to vote to keep it out. It's not the B52's fault, its the way Civ 3 is designed. IMO Civ 3 is a step backwards in the genre. The game is limited in terms of MODing and considering Sid had 6 years to make a sequel, it is very poor.

Hey, you're agreeing with me, does that count? ^_^

I just think that you can research plenty of units within the timespan of the game as it is. There are 5 (6) air units, which is quite a lot (even though the Stealth Fighter is fairly useless) as it is. If there were more attributes for units to have, then 5 might not be a lot. But right now, basically all you have is A.D.M and a couple other things to choose from (precision bombing, etc.) that aren't all that differentiating.

[Sava]

yeah I suppose

[Panag]

hi ,

yes , Firaxis please put it in , ....as a second or third UU , ...

"carpet" bombing , it should not hit a lot , except when on roads or so , range at least 20 , .....

have a nice day

[zulu9812]

Since the Bomber only has a range of 6, and has no upgrade, i use the B52 as an upgrade for Bomber, with these stats:

Cost - 16
A/D/M - 0/2/1
Op. Range - 8
Bomb Str. - 8
Bomb. ROF - 4

PreReq. - Fission
Resource - Oil

Flags - Lethal Land & Sea Bombardment, Immobile

[Panag]

Originally posted by zulu9812
Since the Bomber only has a range of 6, and has no upgrade, i use the B52 as an upgrade for Bomber, with these stats:

Cost - 16
A/D/M - 0/2/1
Op. Range - 8
Bomb Str. - 8
Bomb. ROF - 4

PreReq. - Fission
Resource - Oil

Flags - Lethal Land & Sea Bombardment, Immobile

hi ,

okay , but the B-52 should fly further , with this editor at least 8 squares , no upgrade , that would be to easy , it should be a UU , and it should move twice , but only on time for a bombing run , ...
needed , OIL , to fly on , RUBBER for the sockets and the small parts , and ALUMINIUM for the airframe , ...

the chance to intercept the B-52 should be lets say 15-20 % , ...

have a nice day

[CivGeneral]

Since the Bomber only has a range of 6, and has no upgrade, i use the B52 as an upgrade for Bomber, with these stats:

Cost - 16
A/D/M - 0/2/1
Op. Range - 8
Bomb Str. - 8
Bomb. ROF - 4

PreReq. - Fission
Resource - Oil

Flags - Lethal Land & Sea Bombardment, Immobile
-zulu9812

Oh yea . Replaces the B-17 bomber in Civ3 after the descovery of fission. Discovery of fussion? I understand that the real B-52 can be used both as a Atomic Bomber or conventinonal Bomber but Civ3 can only have one or the other. Personaly I would go with the conventional bombing. kind of hard to flag an Atomic bomber that would Fly-by drop "The Bomb" on a city with out having the B-52 be a "Use once" unit. Insted I have the prereq. on Rocketry ( Thats when the jet fighter appeares)

[zulu9812]

I simlply used Fission as the prereq. so as to give players enough time to use the original Bomber before upgrading to a B52. So Rocketry would do just as well. I actually use the graphics as a new bomber type, rather than as a dedicated nuclear bomber.