Air-Bases...anyone miss these?

[Echo]

No option to build airbases with workers puts a real dampner on bombing the nearest city that is just one square too far.

Anyone having their style cramped from this one?

[mtgillespie]

It also might have made the paratroopers range slightly more sensible, if they could leave from an airbase at the edge of your borders.

[Dominator_Jones]

I agree. I used to have islands with nothing but an airbase on them to extend my range globally.

[Frito]

I wouldn't mind being allowed to build airbases again. I usually play on standard maps so If my cities wouldn't reach my carriers would.

[PR_Flack]

I really miss airbases, they were a critical part of my Civ II strategy. Airbases -- and the ability to base paratroopers and/or helicopters off of aircraft carriers -- would make the game much more realistic. The power of airborne units has already been downgraded in Civ III, additional basing options would partially alleviate that problem.

Jack

[sachmo71]

Yes, I wish they still had airbases. Especially if they made them hold a limited capacity of air units, and made them BOMBABLE. Kewl stuff.

[smellymummy]

airbases where ok, and I was dissapointed that I couldn't build them, but carriers are able to do the job well enough. Also, airbases where easily lost, and judging by the way the AI wages wars, if I built and used airbases, I'd be loosing many bombers - unless I'd build the bases deeper within my borders, which at this points defeats the purposes asides from having a centralized location to store aircrafts.

[codemast01]

Another idea that might extend range is the ablility to base in a allied city. Also being able to takeoff, attack and then land in a different city would also extend the range of aircrafts (besides it is more realistic). I'd also like to see the F117 steath fighter replaced with something that can actually do air superiority missions (F-22 Raptor perhaps)

[Shiva]

Yep, I miss the airbase also.

[Andy91]

Airbases are a real key that is missing in this game. Paratroopers and helicopters are much less usefulwithout airbases to give them a forward position to deploy from.

[TrailerParkJawa]

I miss the airbases. I did not use them often in Civ2 but when I did they were handy.

I really liked putting one onto an island that was only a single terrain square in size. Especially one that was a few squares of the coast of your enemy. Feels sorta like B-29's at Okinawa, or
B-52's at Diego Garcia.

[Jeannette]

I totally miss airbases. So did the U.S. airforce before they took Kabul recently. And remember Malta in WWII? Realism, anyone?

[Pyrodrew]

The same reason air units cannot sink ships might be the same reason air bases were left out... they feared it would make the air units too powerful. But why couldn't they just make the airbases more expensive or take longer to build? Why couldn't they simply increase the attack/defense or life of naval units to make it harder for air units to sink ships? Or perhaps make air units more expensive if they felt they were too powerful? Removing features is not a good advancement for Civ3. They could have definitely made the non-wind naval units faster to make naval units more attractive as well... is Miss Daisy on all those naval ships?

[Kolyana]

Look at the current war in Afghanistan ... we're fighting for and gaining key cities and ... AIRBASES.

Yes, I'd like to see them in the game .. they bring another strategic element.

Can you imagine a game with fortresses with a proper zone of control, outposts that are proper outposts and airfields?

Geez, talk about lots of strategic possibilities.

[Raleigh]

yes, i miss them esp. since cities are such a pain to hold on to with all that corruption/unhappiness.