what did you change for the Lethal bombard thing?

Dida · April 24, 2002, 20:27

Only the following units should have lethal bombard:
Raida Artillery: Lethal vs. Land & Sea
Battleship: Lethal vs. Land & Sea
Bomber: Lethal vs. Sea
Stealth Bomber: Lethal vs. Sea & Land
Ageis Cruiser: Lethal vs. Land & Sea w/ 3 range
Subs: Lethal vs. Sea

The game really needs some kind of anti air units. For exmaple, the Ageis Cruiser is mainly an anti air unit, now, it is for land bombardment and anti sub. this really sux.

Thrawn05 · April 24, 2002, 20:57

I already start a thread on this, see page 2.

Anyway, while I'm at it, I'll post mine again.

Catabult: None
Cannon: Land
Artillary: Land & Sea
Radar: Land & Sea
All Aircraft: Land & Sea
Ironclad: Sea
Destroyer: Sea
Battleship: Land & Sea
AEGIS: Land & Sea
Man-O-War: Sea

Still tinkering with the missiles.

Another version is to change Cannon to None, and Artillary to Sea only. This would make Radar Artillary more appealing in the tech tree.

problem_child · April 25, 2002, 06:31

That other thread got so long it intimidated me away from posting

but I made only Fighters and Jet Fighters able to lethally bombard. I figure fighters sent tio sink a ship would be kitted out as torpedo-bombers, and no way can't a jet-fighter sink a ship. But a Flying-fortress or B52 would not be used in this way becouse they strike from high up, and to get low enough to target a ship would expose em to too much flack in my opinion anyway.

Question: When I select the "Lethal_Bombardment" option, the "Immobile" option is deselected, what does this mean? and do I have to tick the "Air_Bombardment" box to the right of the abilities list when giving air-craft this ability?

MyOlde · April 25, 2002, 20:45

Where exactly do I find this lethal bombardment thing and how exactly do I make it work. Can you give me one specific example: what would I do to make the destroyer lethally bombard?

I'm new to this editing business so be patient with me, please.

Cyclotron · April 25, 2002, 20:48

I selected nothing.

The only "real" lethal bombardment is air to ship. Ship to ship isn't too much of a stretch, but as pointed out before ships already have a way to sink ships: It's called attacking. However, since I can't make air units lethal to ships without making them also lethal to ground, and since making air lethal to ships is probably unbalancing anyways, I'm fine with leaving off the lethal bombardment option.

Jaybe · April 25, 2002, 23:09

Quote:

Originally posted by problem_child
...
Question: When I select the "Lethal_Bombardment" option, the "Immobile" option is deselected, what does this mean? and do I have to tick the "Air_Bombardment" box to the right of the abilities list when giving air-craft this ability?

Clicking on one DESELECTS all others!
Use Control-Click, instead.

bowman · April 26, 2002, 00:44

I think we definitely need to look at the historical aspect of every unit, i.e. how accurate, how powerful and so on. Early artillery units such as the catapult and cannons were primarily used as siege engines until the late 1600 to early 1700s, when they really started to be used on the battlefield. Artillery from the Civil War years until world war II were more accurate and deadly, but nothing to jump up and down about. Not until the past 15-20 years (radar artillery) has things like MLRS and other artillery made it VERY deadly and VERY accurate.

As for ships, I think that frigates should be able to bombard land, and regularly attack ships. Even though they didn't have very good range, they were still used extensively for shore bombardment. Against current defending units, I think it would be harder, but I definitely think ancient and medieval units should be able to be killed by bombardment. Especially with more modern naval units.

Aircraft have been notoriously inaccurate up until the past ten years. While I don't like it very much, I think the way they have regular bombers is pretty accurate. Killing the population and random improvements is about all they could do during WWII. Jets and stealth fighters/bombers should definitely be capable of lethal bombing. Just look at what happened during the gulf war. Leaving only bombers with lethal capability overlooks the emergence of the multirole fighter-bomber.

So... Here's how I see it:

Catapult: nonlethal
cannon: nonlethal
artillery: lethal land
radar artillery: lethal land and sea
fighters: nonlethal
bombers: nonlethal
stealths: lethal land and sea
early naval: nonlethal
modern naval: lethal land (regular sea attack)

bigvic · April 26, 2002, 12:55

Lethal - only vs. sea: fighter, bomber, jet fighter, stealth fighter & bomber, cruise missile

Don't believe in lethal land bombards, unless nukes; always need someone to go in and accept the surrender at the least. As far as shore batteries go, ships can get out of the way, so no lethal sea for land bombard units.

homegrown · April 26, 2002, 15:12

I've given the following lethal abilities and still trying to test it.

Cannon: Sea (for coastal bombardment of enemy boats because the Coastal Fortress sux so bad.

Artillery: Sea

Radar Artillery: Land and Sea

Ships: (still researching this, but I think I can fix the "can't bombard and attack in thesame turn" by adding the Blitz ability. I definately agree that ships already have the ability to sink other ships by attacking them instead of bombard.

Soooo....
Man-o-War: **can't decide WHAT to do to make this UU special**
Destroyer: None
Battleship: Land
AEGIS: Land

Planes:

Bomber: Sea
Stealth Bomber: Land and Sea
Fighter: None
Jet Fighter, Stealth Fighter: Sea
F-15, land and sea (it's a UU, it should get something)

I definately agree we now need a Lethal vs. Air so we can have an anti-aircraft unit. This unit should be immobile, with re-base, and the ability to be re-based to an Aircraft Carrier. Maybe an upgrade would remove the "immobile" tag (put that baby on wheels!).

Just my thoughts.

Thrawn05 · April 26, 2002, 15:39

Quote:

Originally posted by problem_child
and no way can't a jet-fighter sink a ship.

I totaly disagree with that statement. Any jet can fire missiles at certain spots of a ship and down it goes.

Although I like realism, this is one exception. If you're really into realism, go play Close Combat.

Akka · April 26, 2002, 16:39

Thrawn, I think you misinterpreted what Problem_child was saying. He was saying in fact that he could NOT imagine a jet fighter that CAN'T sink a ship.

Thrawn05 · April 26, 2002, 19:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Akka le Vil
Thrawn, I think you misinterpreted what Problem_child was saying. He was saying in fact that he could NOT imagine a jet fighter that CAN'T sink a ship.

I understand now.

I'm so used to seeing Anti-Lethal comments all over these forums that my head is spinning.

problem_child · April 28, 2002, 09:12

Thanks Jaybe, and the rest of you mind out for my negative affirmative statements

PGM · April 28, 2002, 09:46

I'm still testing, right now I've only given LB (sea+land) to Stealth Bombers and Battleships, for game balance purposes.

Jaybe · April 28, 2002, 13:58

A problem I have with Artillery being lethal against naval units is that the heaviest common artillery caliber is only about 6" (150-155mm). That is comparable to the armament on a WWII destroyer. Would just bounce off of a battleship, besides naval manueverability issues and such already mentioned.

That's also why I gave BB (only), lethal sea bombardment. To try to keep those pesky ironclads (relatively cheap and nonupgradable) off the BB's back.