Air Power in Civ3

[fikrii]

Just a few thoughts, I agree that air power alone can't win a war (I agree to Firaxis' decision to not let air units destroy ground forces).

However, how about:

- Air power destroying invasion fleets/ships (e.g Battle of Britain,
Germany cancelled planned invasion of Britain b/c it lost the air
power battle). Also remember the WW2 Pacific air battles with
ships destroyed, carrier battles and nations (well, only Japan)
defeated?

- Air Superiority: I've had multiple jet fighters on air superiority
mission, just sit on their bases as enemy bombers came blasting
its city's terrain improvements (I took count, some 5 bomber
strikes, and the fighters never took off!). They should raise
intercept to 100% (for regular bombers, and some small amount
for stealth bombers - remember that 2 years ago a US F117 was
shot down over Yugoslavia)

- Bomber Escort Mission. To counter the high probability of
intercept, enable fighters to escort bomber missions, this way
the bombers will not be defenseless, and an air battle between
the escorting and defending fighters will ensue before the
bombers can come in, ala WW2.

- Also, I think the AEGIS Cruisers should be more powerful than
the antiquated battleships

Just a few wishes for the patch (I want my $50)

[UnforgiveMe2000]

Air Superiority: I've had multiple jet fighters on air superiority
mission, just sit on their bases as enemy bombers came blasting
its city's terrain improvements (I took count, some 5 bomber
strikes, and the fighters never took off!). They should raise
intercept to 100% (for regular bombers, and some small amount
for stealth bombers - remember that 2 years ago a US F117 was
shot down over Yugoslavia)

Air superiority will be fixed in the patch it is a known bug for the human player works for the cpu............i don't agree with the raising of intercept one cuz it will be fixed and 2 about the f117 being shot down in yugoslavia that was only 1 f117 out of a few hundred missions flown in that war alone...including the gulf war probably well over a thousand sorties flown by the f117 and only 1 has ever been shot down no other stealth plane of any type of stealth aircraft but that one has been shot down so 5% to me is actually a little too much........there has been more stealth aircraft crashes then that was shot down........2 in the states that i know of crashed(wings just fell off) so anyways i think intercept is fine for both types of air craft is fine when the bug gets fixed

[codemast01]

I agree that air power alone can't win a war (I agree to Firaxis' decision to not let air units destroy ground forces)

I don't understand how people can agree with Firaxis's decision to not let air units destory ground forces. I think it makes no sense. Lets ignore the fact that it is not realistic because some people argue that realism does not equal fun.
Here are some common arguements in support of Firaxis's decision :
Air units cannot win wars -
True. In order to win a war, someone must take territory. However, Civ II already had a good solution to this. Naval and air units could not take a city. If allowing air units to destory units is too unbalanced then add ground units that can attack air units
(a mobile Surface to Air missile would be nice)

Air units allows a civ to not have a navy -
After WWII, air power began to dominate over sea power. The navy is now used to extend the reach of a civ's air power. This is why carriers have gained in importance.

Air units are wiping out my navy-
Hopefully with the possible addition of stacking in a future patch for Civ III this problem can be solved. Stacking units weak in air defense with units stronger in air defense (AGEIS Cruiser or Carriers with planes flying AS missions) will stop planes from wiping out your navy. Besides this is how the realworld navy defends against air attacks. They form carrier battlegroups. Aside from being more realistic (which I consider fun) it also adds addition strategy to the game.

If Firaxis felt that that air unit in Civ II was too unbalanced, then they should have actually created a solution instead of choosing the easy way out. (creating a new unit takes many lines of code, limiting an already existent one only require deleting code. You tell me which is harder? Typing or holding the [DEL] button.

Just my thoughts.

[Raleigh]

I totally agree with the escort option for fighters to fly with bombers. Otherwise, what do you do when the enemy has control of the skies near a city?

[Libertarian]

I have a buddy who things like that: removing a feature is just deleting a few lines of code. Suffice it to say that he spends most of his development time putting out fires and responding to surprise gotchas.