Let me customize bombardment

Solver · July 6, 2002, 11:33

Something I really want to see in PtW is customizing artillery bombings. Artillery is not useless as it is, but I'd like to customize the percent chance of misses and hits. Like, I don't want Cannons to miss about 75% of the time, making them slightly less useful.

Also, it would be good if the chance of hitting various stuff was customizable. Look, artillery bombing can hit: civilians (reduce city size by 1), improvements (improvement destroyed), units (unit weakened). IMHO, the chance of having a unit hit should be like 50% for conventional bombing, and this is usually the reason why I'd like to bombard - to weaken the city, making it easier to do a conventional assault. Eh?

I could imagine the first idea as parameter for each bombing unit (like hit chance), and the second one as a separate tab, like Bombing Chances, where you specify global settings, for what can be hit.

So, this is here because I'm sometimes annoyed by ridicilous miss rates of artillery. Anyone else?

zulu9812 · July 6, 2002, 11:51

I'd like to see a 'precision bombard', like the air mission. I can imagine near-future units having that capability

Solver · July 6, 2002, 11:58

Precision bombing for ground units? Maybe, but none of the current real world units do it.

I have this, though, on for the Cruise Missile. In my mod, it's a nice powerful unit, and the Cruise Missile can Precision Strike with a range of 4... they're used that way.

zulu9812 · July 6, 2002, 12:01

It's just that it'd be noce for bombardment to prioritise on destroying units, then military improvements, then other improvements and finally population.

Solver · July 6, 2002, 12:13

Hmm, improvement should be random, IMO, but yeah, units are the priority (should be).

zulu9812 · July 6, 2002, 12:21

Don't see why improvements should be random - the Americans are always getting in trouble for bombing civilian targets even though they have the capability to avoid them.

HazieDaVampire · July 6, 2002, 12:44

lol, i want to see a 'Precision blow up wedding party' option!

EDIT: This is in protest of how big the American Friendly fire list is getting, not only local civilians, but Allies like in the gulf war when the A-10s were going around blowing away British Tanks.

Solver · July 6, 2002, 13:15

Random improvements is right, you don't know what you hit... Americans sometimes want to hit armories, yet hospitals are hit.

I would though like Precision Bombing to be like a list from which you can select what to bomb. Just have the Military Advisor pop-up, and ask what improvement to target, but have a 5 or 10 percent chance of it going wrong and missing, hitting another target.

Pevonian · July 6, 2002, 16:09

Exellent ideas. I'd like to see more accuracy in Bombing, also Atom bombs would be a nice addition... oh and good nukes, like the Alpha Centuari kind. 50% chance of a kill is pathetic, it should wipe the city of the face of the planet, flattening all buildings.

I think Precision Bombing would be easier with Veteran Crews, with less chance of mishap, and conscripting Naval and Air units would be nice too, lots of chance of mishap then..

:0

Panag · July 6, 2002, 17:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Solver
Precision bombing for ground units? Maybe, but none of the current real world units do it.

I have this, though, on for the Cruise Missile. In my mod, it's a nice powerful unit, and the Cruise Missile can Precision Strike with a range of 4... they're used that way.

hi ,

, antitank weapons are very good the last five years , .....snipers also , ....

a cruise missile should have a range of at least ten or twelve , .....

have a nice day

GeneralTacticus · July 6, 2002, 22:07

Quote:

Exellent ideas. I'd like to see more accuracy in Bombing, also Atom bombs would be a nice addition... oh and good nukes, like the Alpha Centuari kind. 50% chance of a kill is pathetic, it should wipe the city of the face of the planet, flattening all buildings.

Do you really want to see your entire continent blasted off the face of the earth the turn after an AI declares war?

Verto · July 6, 2002, 23:11

What about neutron bombs...

Jon Shafer · July 6, 2002, 23:12

Quote:

Originally posted by HazieDaVampire
lol, i want to see a 'Precision blow up wedding party' option!

EDIT: This is in protest of how big the American Friendly fire list is getting, not only local civilians, but Allies like in the gulf war when the A-10s were going around blowing away British Tanks.

You, of course, realize that instances of friendly fire in conflicts pre-1990 are much, much higher, correct? The media just wasn't swarming around the Battle of the Bulge, or the Marne to show it.

Andrew_Jay · July 6, 2002, 23:33

yes, friendly-fire occured just as much if not more then, but the United States wasn't bragging about how much they care about protecting civilians and how great their technology is. At least then there was also cause for concern as they were fighting an enemy who actually could pose a threat. Fifty years or so ago it wasn't the arrogant assumption that:
A. those few guns firing must be the enemy and they must be be aimed at Americans and;
B. the completely insignificant threat that a few AK's firing, a few thousand feet below, (that may or may not even be aimed at Americans) pose to American lives is great enough to throw all caution aside and just drop bombs anywhere.
Anyway, I'm sorry, I don't want to make this into some big (and possibly ugly) argument. Just still bitter that that pilot was stupid enough and arrogant enough to assume a few muzzle flashes on the ground warrented dropping a bomb that killed 4 Canadians, and now there is this incident with dozens more Afghanis dead

Jon Shafer · July 7, 2002, 00:00

I'm not defending their attitude, I'm only explaining the circumstances: the fact is that there was much more friendly fire in previous wars than there is now, only that's it more publicized now.

Verto · July 7, 2002, 00:04

I'd be careful about making judgements, as you were not there, so your information is coming from biased, liberal news networks.

Democrats...bah

Jon Shafer · July 7, 2002, 02:07

Even with bias, for the most part the American media represents actual events (with their own twist). In World War I, a German gas attack on a Russian line resulted in 3,000 deaths of German soldiers... you don't see things like that happening now do you? War has become more precise... which can be deadly, but it also reduces the amount of times it happens, even if when it does happen there's usually tragedy.

Nakar Gabab · July 7, 2002, 03:11

Back on topic...

Radar artillery seems lacking. Extra sight? Bah. It doesn't move any faster despite being wheeled (easily moddable, I know)? Feh. I like the idea of precision-striking with advanced artillery - but only with advanced units (cruise missiles, stealth bombers, radar artillery). Given that what we have today isn't 100% reliable anyway, it's kind of silly to assume anything pre-modern could selectively target with any sort of accuracy.

Zanzin · July 7, 2002, 03:49

Most people aren't still playing by the time radar artillery comes around...but, if you do, I seriously recommend making their movement at least 2...there just useless otherwise...well, no more useful than normal artillery, anyway

Solver · July 7, 2002, 07:32

Editor is so nice, Nakar

. I've made Radar Artillery nice by giving movement of 2 (1 this late is ridicilous) and also giving it Lethal bombing - other than that, no land based artillery is lethal for me.

player1 · July 7, 2002, 10:58

Movement of 2 AND lethal.

That just too much.

It resambles to Civ2 Hovitzer rush.

Move 20 R.A.
Bomb to hell.
(lose nothing, kill everything)

A little bit too powerfull.

P.S.
They still should have movement of 2.
But that together with lethal is...

P.P.S.
Personaly, Cruise Missiles are much better in bombing cities.
They target only units, so they don't target buildings or pop. 50% of times.

But you lose a missle.
And they have low range.

So I upped range to 6 tiles (like tactical nuke).
And gave them firepower of 4.

Now, that's a fine unit.
Good for bombing cities or sinking battleships.

P.P.P.S.
The only lethal units in my MOD are fighters, jets, f-15 and stl. fighter. Fighters sea only, others all lethal.

This give much more stratgeic depth.
You need to choose between strong bombars and lethal fighters.

(Just a note: I have Jets and Fighter with ROF increased to 2)

HazieDaVampire · July 7, 2002, 11:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Trip

You, of course, realize that instances of friendly fire in conflicts pre-1990 are much, much higher, correct? The media just wasn't swarming around the Battle of the Bulge, or the Marne to show it.

You mean in Nam, cuz i know about that, they used to run into groups of friendlys and blow them away, and both the squads would call in Naplam (you guys love anything that involves burning, pain, or mass destruction. OR ALL THREE!).

HazieDaVampire · July 7, 2002, 11:16

i'm gunna give it 3, so it can keep up with the Modern armor! And give normal artillary 2, cuz its pulled by trucks anyway!

Solver · July 7, 2002, 11:57

Hmm I saw that Radar Arty with just movement of 2 has no appeal - still gets lost behind Modern Armor, not too worth it. While giving it Lethal makes me want to build the unit, somehow.

Cruise Missiles... yeah... I gave them huge bombardment power, so that they can kill a unit with one shot sometimes.

HazieDaVampire · July 7, 2002, 13:00

lol.

I once had a totaly massive invasion of another continent, i'd say a landing zone of 200miles (20 squares), The Marines secured some of the minor citys and then my modern armor got off the transporters, they secured a few more citys and my transporters with radar artillary droped off into the citys.
Next turn the AI and pored units into its citys, and it's allies moved them to the boarder (must not of had a RPA). Their were to meny for my modern armor to take on, and i wanted this to keep on going like a Blitz (always on offense, never stailmate or defense). So i need my radar artillary to come up and help, they took the railroads up to the boarder, then moved in. They only had 1 move point so i ended up having a stailmate/silent turn. Next turn the AI started to pour units into my little offensive partys who were waiting for the artillary to fire at their intended targets. Because of the 1mp i ended up having to strike at the stacks of units who would take my artillary if i moved into the citys.

So theirs a tacticle problem!

player1 · July 7, 2002, 13:37

Quote:

Originally posted by HazieDaVampire
i'm gunna give it 3, so it can keep up with the Modern armor! And give normal artillary 2, cuz its pulled by trucks anyway!

If you wanna be fair then "move 2 Arty" should need Oil and Rubber.

Since you already said that it's pulled with trucks.

player1 · July 7, 2002, 13:41

Solver, move 2 Radar Arty can be used pretty good.

Usualy, enemy has just border radius of 2 tiles.
So you get in, bombard in same turn and later roll over with Tanks.

Pretty effective.

Of course, with lethal R.A. you could acualy don't need a lot of tanks.

Solver · July 7, 2002, 13:47

As I say, I just didn't have enough chance to use Radar Artillery to say... if it turns out to be very powerful, I'll put it back to 1 move and non-lethal.

Solver · July 7, 2002, 13:51

As I say, I didn't get much of a chance to use them. If it happens so that movement of 2 + lethal is very powerful, I'll change it back to movement 1, lethal.

Verto · July 7, 2002, 14:39

Maybe they should have a Big Bertha with a farther range...a railroad-only unit.