Aircraft Carriers

PrinceBimz · December 24, 2003, 02:46

Powerful before, but now with lethal bombardment... this is a vessel to be reckoned with. I remember playing a vanilla CIV3 game where I loaded up 4 carriers. Then I just bombed the hell out of this small country until there was nothing left. Doing something like this now with the lethal bombardment would be downright devastating. I never modified CIV3 bombers with lethal so I never had a chance to use it. With C3C, I will certainly try an attack like this again and I am sure the results would be even more effective. Now I say carriers are definitely the most powerful and dangerous naval units in the game. That is provided they have a full load of aircraft. I think they were extremely powerful before but now I say definitely.

notyoueither · December 24, 2003, 03:47

Yes. Too bad they allow air units to destroy infantry on the ground. Italy should have been wrapped up by early '44 by that model.

sprudl · December 24, 2003, 05:37

I always found carriers quite useless because of their limited transport capacity.

With the lethal bombardment in C3C I think they're a little more useful. Also the fact the rebasing across the map (huge) doesn't work anymore makes them worth building.

smellymummy · December 24, 2003, 06:01

rebase across a huge map won't work ?? i didn't know rebasing was affected by map size, was this another change presented in C3C?

sprudl · December 24, 2003, 06:18

I think it's a Conquests thing. Rebasing from my homeland in the southern hemisphere to a small island way up north didn't work.

Don't know if it depends on the unit as well. I only tried with jet fighters and bombers.

Not a bad change actually. I makes things more interesting

But I'm still trying to figure out how far I can rebase...

dexters · December 24, 2003, 06:30

rebasing = double the operaitonal range.

I actually still feel this is a bit too big a range making carriers and airbases usesless in smaller maps.

a 1 to 1 or 1 to 1.5 ratio might be better.

BTW, anyone see the AI build an airbase... ever?

CerberusIV · December 24, 2003, 06:42

Rebasing distance affects helicopters also.

sprudl · December 24, 2003, 06:49

Quote:

Originally posted by dexters
rebasing = double the operaitonal range.

I actually still feel this is a bit too big a range making carriers and airbases usesless in smaller maps.

a 1 to 1 or 1 to 1.5 ratio might be better.

Maybe it should also depend on the map size. But that might be a problem as unit movement is the same on all maps.

Quote:

BTW, anyone see the AI build an airbase... ever?

Now that you mention it. No, I can't recall seeing any.
I also can't remember the time I saw an enemy carrier.

sprudl · December 24, 2003, 06:51

Quote:

Originally posted by CerberusIV
Rebasing distance affects helicopters also.

Makes sense. But I thought I rebased a helicopter further than 12 squares. I'll have to check when I load the game again.

dexters · December 24, 2003, 10:29

Quote:

Originally posted by sprudl

Now that you mention it. No, I can't recall seeing any.
I also can't remember the time I saw an enemy carrier.

Don't worry about carriers. The AI builds plenty of them

Kuciwalker · December 24, 2003, 11:00

Quote:

I actually still feel this is a bit too big a range making carriers and airbases usesless in smaller maps.

You may not need them as "stepping stones" to rebase, but you sure need them to get in bombardment range.

Shogun Gunner · December 24, 2003, 11:17

Quote:

Originally posted by dexters

BTW, anyone see the AI build an airbase... ever?

Never.

And that wouldn't be the end of the deficiencies in the AI's use of air power.

I agree also with the reduction of the rebasing range. I don't care if it is "real life" as it would enhance strategy and playability.

The thing about carriers, you really need to protect those suckers. If you don't have a battleship with a few destroyers, you are asking for the AI to target the flattop.

Oh...I love civ.

dexters · December 24, 2003, 11:17

Quote:

Originally posted by skywalker

Quote:

I actually still feel this is a bit too big a range making carriers and airbases usesless in smaller maps.

You may not need them as "stepping stones" to rebase, but you sure need them to get in bombardment range.

Well to be fair that's not at issue. We could as easily rebase to another city before bombarding and this has always been a constraint.

The point is whether aircraft carriers are even that useful in smaller maps even after their rebase range was lowered.

Kuciwalker · December 24, 2003, 12:16

Huh? You don't always (in fact, not very often) have cities in range of the target. Thus, staging platforms are useful.

Cookie Monster · December 24, 2003, 13:02

Quote:

Originally posted by dexters
BTW, anyone see the AI build an airbase... ever?

I've built an airbase only once but never used it. I guess some say it is usefull to have an airbase near the border of an enemy to use as a jump off platform for paratroops. Never got a chance to try it out though.

dexters · December 24, 2003, 21:22

Quote:

Originally posted by skywalker
Huh? You don't always (in fact, not very often) have cities in range of the target. Thus, staging platforms are useful.

You've misunderstood the conversation. It's not about staging platforms. Operational range hasn't been touched and it is not unsual for the player to rebase to an intermediate point before launching the attac.

I think that's why the rebase was fixed because people usually did have a city within range of their targets and all that was needed was to rebase aircraft to the city and launch from there.

The rationale for the fix was to force people to not rebase from their military producing core to a city within range of their target, but require a mobile platform that can be moved into range to strike at the enemy. So yes, you are correct in assessing that staging platforms are need, the question really was, what kind of platform. The fix was suppose to make people use carriers more. But has it really?

The idea being thrown around now is, was the change sufficient to have its intended effects in smaller maps where even the reduced rebase range can often times still be more than enough for players to play like they always have, which is never use any carriers and rebase burely on cities. My answer is that the change probably didn't have as big an impact, if any, on the smaller maps.

All my 4 epic games are played on standard maps, only 1 saw really intense air action (from what I could see) and all of it took place on city based air platforms and not on carriers.

Long story short. The discussion = rebase distance not operational range.

PrinceBimz · December 24, 2003, 21:44

I find many of times I need to extend my aircraft range which is another use for carriers. For example, say I am invading across the ocean on another continent, I want air support. I do not have any cities on that enemy continent, also the distance is too far from my closest city on my continent to launch aircraft from there. Another thing, even if I had a coastal city that my planes can fly from, a carrier will still greatly increase my range. This gives my planes the ability to launch strikes far inland from a carrier just of the enemy coast. The ability of a carrier to increase aircraft range by parking just off an enemy coast is invaluable. So if you don't have a nearby city (or airbase) to rebase, you will definitely need carriers if you want air support. The AI certainly does use carriers, even in vanilla CIV3. I once seen 3 of them attacking me with planes.

Kuciwalker · December 24, 2003, 22:27

Quote:

Originally posted by dexters

You've misunderstood the conversation. It's not about staging platforms. Operational range hasn't been touched and it is not unsual for the player to rebase to an intermediate point before launching the attac.

I think that's why the rebase was fixed because people usually did have a city within range of their targets and all that was needed was to rebase aircraft to the city and launch from there.

The rationale for the fix was to force people to not rebase from their military producing core to a city within range of their target, but require a mobile platform that can be moved into range to strike at the enemy. So yes, you are correct in assessing that staging platforms are need, the question really was, what kind of platform. The fix was suppose to make people use carriers more. But has it really?

The idea being thrown around now is, was the change sufficient to have its intended effects in smaller maps where even the reduced rebase range can often times still be more than enough for players to play like they always have, which is never use any carriers and rebase burely on cities. My answer is that the change probably didn't have as big an impact, if any, on the smaller maps.

All my 4 epic games are played on standard maps, only 1 saw really intense air action (from what I could see) and all of it took place on city based air platforms and not on carriers.

Long story short. The discussion = rebase distance not operational range.

Oh, ok. What you mean is it didn't change anything.

dexters · December 25, 2003, 02:39

No biggie. by the number of typos in my post, you can tell im all alcoholed up.

I really like your avatar.

Quote:

Originally posted by PrinceBimz
I find many of times I need to extend my aircraft range which is another use for carriers. For example, say I am invading across the ocean on another continent, I want air support. I do not have any cities on that enemy continent, also the distance is too far from my closest city on my continent to launch aircraft from there. Another thing, even if I had a coastal city that my planes can fly from, a carrier will still greatly increase my range. This gives my planes the ability to launch strikes far inland from a carrier just of the enemy coast. The ability of a carrier to increase aircraft range by parking just off an enemy coast is invaluable. So if you don't have a nearby city (or airbase) to rebase, you will definitely need carriers if you want air support. The AI certainly does use carriers, even in vanilla CIV3. I once seen 3 of them attacking me with planes.

Aye. Carriers have always been of use in continents game when you've got a big ocean where there's no way for you to move aircraft.

But usually, if you could get a foothold on the continent (in maps smaller than large) you can rebase directly from the home continent.

I think the air power area can still use some work. Airbases need something extra to make them useful.

Cerbykins · December 25, 2003, 17:08

Heck yeah, I've yet to make ANY

Perhaps a performance bonus for the airccraft using it?

Shogun Gunner · December 25, 2003, 17:44

Quote:

Originally posted by Cerbykins
Heck yeah, I've yet to make ANY

Perhaps a performance bonus for the airccraft using it?

Not a half bad idea! It could be cities have the default civilian airport and you could build a military airbase for the performance bonus. GOOD IDEA!

CerberusIV · December 26, 2003, 13:20

Quote:

Originally posted by dexters
I think the air power area can still use some work. Airbases need something extra to make them useful.

I use them for 2 reasons.

Somewhere on my home continent to park aircraft so I can find them rather than have to go through several cities.

On smaller islands after capturing cities when it is easier and cheaper to slap down an airbase than rush an airport.

dexters · December 26, 2003, 16:18

I do pretty much the same. I have a central repository of planes on my home continent where I rebase planes to for distribution. Kind of like a large warehouse.

But it's really more of a management issue for us humans. The fact the the AI never builds them tends to underscore how it lacks any real value.

But thinking about it, there really isn't much that can be done to modify the airfields since airpower is a fairly straighforward part of the game.

I've thought about increase rebase for airfield based planes.

I've thought about auto air superiority (kind of like a free sam over several tiles) but this may lead to abuse with people building too many of these.

So i guess airbases will remain an artifact of human play. it's too bad really since they've historically meant much more militarility. But then again, Civ isn't a military simulation.