Increasing bombard range

[Sarxis]

This is terrible! I was hoping to be able to increase the bombard range of some units, but when I do, they still move directly next to their target. What good is increasing a unit's bombard range if they are going to just move to an adjoining square to their target anyway? Is there a way around this?

[skorpion59]

Nope, units can only fight if they are next to each other. I misunderstood that also when I first saw the range settings.

[Sarxis]

Disappointing.

[Savant]

If the bombard range were actually modifiable, then CTP could also emulate tactical combat and not just strategic combat. Someone could then develop an Agincourt scenario where the longbows would have telling effect!

The closest CTP comes to this is with the cruise missile unit, but once used, it's gone. It's more like an "arrow" than a longbowman.

------------------
'Blood will run'

[Diodorus Sicilus]

Not only would multiple-tile ranges allow for some interesting 'tactical' scenarios, but in the strategic setting of regular CtPII it would allow us to simulate the most modern artillery weapons - the 'battlefield missiles' like MLRS, TACAMS, SCUD, PLUTON, etc with ranges up to 20 times greater than conventional artillery. More to the point, by having a game mechanism that allowed a unit to attack a tile/target some distance across the map, we could simulate aircraft attacks within a single turn instead of having bombers spend years flying to their target.
Double sigh...

[TheBirdMan]

Hey Savant.

I'm not sure you knew what you actually wrote but if we take the "matter" of your post about cruise missile and "pulled it back in time"... even arrows did cost a little then to make.

A new unit called "arrow" more-or-less same abilities as an modern cruise missile, very cheap, no support costs, shortrange (the same as the archer can see (2 tiles?)), no defend, same attack as an archer or a little less - make horsearchers, arches, mongolians.... others - able to "carry" 2-3-4 arrows each, then we would have an ancient "cruise missile and bombard unit".

How about that???????
[This message has been edited by TheBirdMan (edited December 07, 2000).]

[Matte979]

This is a great idea. And its possible. I messed around with small air.
For example.
You could make a unit that is small air called long range bombard round. And make the artillery carry them. The problem is that you already have some small air so the artillery can carry all of the small air can't just make it carry the artillery round.

I love this system. At last my bombers can carry cruise missiles so can battleships and submarines.

/Mathias

[Savant]

Matte and Birdman, good points. You're right that can be done by editing the units and making appropriate movement and terrain modifications to reflect a tactical scenario.

I can imagine an "arrow" or "stone" unit crashing into a series of fortifications assembled like a castle while knights come rushing out of the "castle" to disable the seige engines!

You could also have a "baggage train" that carries large supplies of stone and arrows.

Gee... there is hope. Lot of work though to generate the unit images but otherwise the unit data seems straightforward and driven by the map size and desired capability.

------------------
'Blood will run'

[Slax]

How would you stop someone from changing the direction of the "arrow" in midflight?

[LandBuilder]

Another thing- modern battleships also have the ability to bombard from great distances with conventional weapons. At least 2 tiles away in CTP2.

[wheathin]

Well, not really. I mean, the scale in any random map is never that small. The squares in the largest maps are still over a 100 miles across, longer than the range on battleship guns.

"Modern" battleships don't even exist. The US is the only country to still keep these old battlewagongs afloat, and even the US hasn't built any new ones since WW2. The retrofitted Iowa class ships have guns that can hit targets 20+ miles away, but the real distance striking power is the cruise missiles, which are already in the game/mods.

Even the MLRS systems discussed earlier can only hit targets out to about 60 miles, still well within the size of *two* adjacent squares. If we want to mimic the light infantry missile weapons, how about allowing a mechanized infantry unit to carry one missile unit?

[Diodorus Sicilus]

Wheatthin The MLRS actually has a max range of less than 40 miles, but the same launcher can carry pods of TACAMS (or ATACMS) missiles, which have ranges out to 200+ miles. The developments in 'battlefield rockets' since the 1980s are such that the conventional rocket/missile systems can hit unit-size targets hundreds of miles away and decimate unarmored or armored targets (self-guided seeking shaped charge terminal munitions: ugly effects on targets). Unlike the cruise missiles, the actual missile/rocket is fairly cheap and treated simply as ammunition. Thus, these represent the real modern artillery systems with extended range and ferocious effects.

[wheathin]

DS,
Interesting about the TACAMS. That does sound less like a cruise missile...

But on all but the largest world maps and scenarios, that is still about the distance from one square to an adjacent square. Certainly from one square diagonally to another square.

[TheBirdMan]

One problem - is the AI able to handle this?

If not, a mod with these "features" could still be useful in online and PBEM games!

These "air" units should have "fuel". Once it's launced there should only be 3 possibities. Either to be "collected" by a unit of same civ and carried on, to crash (be grounded) or to hit an enemy.


The point of view, that a tile is 100 miles - yes and no.

On a map, it would be about this. But if you should take this serious, the game itslef has too many "absurdies".

One year to travel 100 miles?
A unit able to see 200 miles?

No - we have to disregrad this. Close our eyes. Else we would be more crazy than we need to.

[wheathin]

Agreed that there are other scale-related issues that don't seem to fix. Cities exerting control over surrounding territory out to 500 miles, for example.

However, the stated justification for the extra ability was that there *are* units that in the real world have certain abilities that are not mimiced in the game, and my point was that, in fact, those abilities do not exist.

Certainly you could add the feature anyway - but I think the better question is "why?" What advantage in game play does it bring? At most it gives the human player a bigger advantage because the human will be better able to utilize long-range bombarding than the AI ever could, and by all indications the last thing this game needs is to get any easier.