Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Air units are MUCH better now!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Air Units

    Originally posted by mintaka_au
    Warlord

    I have no problem with how you operate air units in Civ3. Big step up. The problem I have is that air units can't sink ships. This makes modern naval battles utterly unlike anything seen in history.
    Unlike Pyramids - they are realistically giving you free granary just like they did for Egypt. Also, why can't air units be as realistic as Leonardo's Workshop that upgraded Italian army in real life for half the cost).

    Comment


    • #17
      Here's my thoughts on air units--

      The more I play, the more convinced I become that Firaxis just cut & pasted the artillery code. I understand they were under time pressure, but I think that saying it was a "game balance" decision is a lame excuse.

      Sure, game balance is important, but having FUN is even more important. Soren mentioned in the AI chat that he wanted naval superiority to require lots of ship building, not just lots of bombers. Well, I think the solution isn't to limit the bombers offense, but rather increase the ships defense. So here's a of suggested solution:

      Keep the system the same, but with one important addition--allow air units to Attack naval units (and maybe ground units in open terrain). This way, air units can actually destroy ships and exposed land units, BUT they put themselves at risk in doing so. At the same time, certain units could have their defense increased against air units. Maybe create a mobile SAM unit. This way, bombers could either bombard and damage units with no risk (high altitude bombing), or attack and be able to kill but at risk of taking casualties.

      Comment


      • #18
        Airpower could have been correctly implemented had they added an Anti-aircraft unit. The unit could only defend against ground attacks but could attack air units that attacked the hex it was in and all hexes surrounding it. Possibly an upgrade with computers to give it a 2 reaction range with computers.

        Then aircraft could destroy units...if it dared.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by kruton
          Keep the system the same, but with one important addition--allow air units to Attack naval units (and maybe ground units in open terrain). This way, air units can actually destroy ships and exposed land units, BUT they put themselves at risk in doing so. At the same time, certain units could have their defense increased against air units. Maybe create a mobile SAM unit. This way, bombers could either bombard and damage units with no risk (high altitude bombing), or attack and be able to kill but at risk of taking casualties.
          I think you have made a good case but also explained why Firaxis did not do it. A couple of early screen shots had AA units on the map. This would have meant adding anti-air attack and defence strengths to all units and extra units specifically dedicated to shooting down planes. In the end, they chose to keep it simple instead. Planes have managed to sink individual ships (never whole fleets) but their loss rates have been much higher. Implementing a 1 in 8 chance of success while being shot down 5 times in 8 would not have made many people happy either. With carriers involved you also get into the whole M.A.D. scenario too about why can't they launch their fighters to intercept yours or counterstrike your carriers vs how CAP missions should work. All of these are better left to a proper wargame.
          To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection.
          H.Poincaré

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by PrinceBimz


            So you are saying air units can bomb any unit down to red but not destroy it completely? If so that means its not just ships but all units. I could have sweared that I had destroyed some land units with my bombers, don't know. The only thing I can think maybe I damaged it really bad and it moved out of view. But I thought I destroyed it completely. Anyway I imagine this was a design decision to have it this way? I can tell you that my airforce wreaked havoc on several improvements and units. Without it I would have never been able to back up the chinese forces that were near my border.
            The fact that bombardment can't kill units doesn't make art or bombers useless. Maybe you thought you were killing units with the artillery or bombers because they attacked a stack and the damaged unit went to the bottom after the attack(always happens to bring up a fresh defender)

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Herder
              Airpower could have been correctly implemented had they added an Anti-aircraft unit. The unit could only defend against ground attacks but could attack air units that attacked the hex it was in and all hexes surrounding it. Possibly an upgrade with computers to give it a 2 reaction range with computers.

              Then aircraft could destroy units...if it dared.
              What's needed is a worker command to build an airbase(no resources bonuses like in civ2 just a fortress that can station air units) where air units can run air superiority missions and bombing missions outside of a city or carrier. It would have to be built on flat terrain(plains,grassland, floodplane, or tundra) and would also have fortress like defensive benefits for ground units protecting it. This would help with the problems and complaints about only being able to run a helicopter 4 squares from one of your cities as well, which unless you build a special city to act as a base is totally useless.

              Comment


              • #22
                Yes, airbases should be added back into the game, but I don't think they should be like a fortress for defensive purposes, especially if you build one in enemy territory. Forward airbases are not traditionally hard targets...more like a clearing in forest or a streach of highway.... I also believe that airbases should be limited in the number of air units they can house, but maybe have an option to improve them with workers so that they can hold more units...and they can be DESTROYED by bombers, but fighters can also defend them. That doesn't sound too hard...they could add it like just another improvement.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Hmm, a bombable airbase improvement that can hold say 3 units? Sounds good to me!
                  To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection.
                  H.Poincaré

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I think some of you all have a few good ideas there. Even though aircraft cannot actually destroy a unit, I am still getting much use out of them. At last, I still prefer how the aircraft work here in CIV3 over how it was in CIV1/2, CTP1/2 and SMAC. I still think it is a very good improvement. I do agree however that aircraft should be able to completely destroy units. Other then that I love it.
                    -PrinceBimz-

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X