carriers

flash9286 · July 20, 2002, 17:05

anybody thank carriers should be able to carry more like 10 air units instead of 4.

notyoueither · July 20, 2002, 17:16

No. 10 is too many. Maybe 6 or 8 for a second generation 'super' carrier.

miccofl · July 20, 2002, 17:17

Mine do. Regular carriers carry eight aircraft, nuclear powered carriers (CVN) carry 16 but are very expensive.

Aeson · July 20, 2002, 17:32

Remember, units aren't necessarily single aircraft. It's all very abstract, and the numbers are based on gameplay balance.

When I first used Carriers I thought they needed more capacity, but they are pretty well balanced. It's the actual Bombers which aren't too efficient compared to ground based bombardment. They get shot down and have less power. Their greater range doesn't compensate for that, especially since a range of 2 is all you really need (with proper Settler support) for ground based bombardment.

Jon Shafer · July 20, 2002, 17:38

Aeson is right. Carriers are pretty much fine as they are, it's just bombers that need to be improved.

My basic view of things is that each unit is a division (or about 2,000 men until more modern times, then it would be more like a regiment), and each air unit is about 20 or 25 aircraft.

notyoueither · July 20, 2002, 17:44

There is a reason that artillery is/was called the God of War. Until recently air power was generally not as effective in the field as were the good old guns.

HazieDaVampire · July 20, 2002, 17:52

i'm not sure if its an air mission (Jet fighters would be in groups of 4 max i think!), or if its a load of air missions of a squad going along taking turns at getting the targets!

Personaly i regard carriers as somthing i won't attack on large scale if i'm without it! I give them sub and battleship/aegas escorts and they pritty much support invasions. If i'm planning an inland offensive i'll sail a carrier round to the other side of the enemy with the usual escort and let it start bombing the hell out of the home front!

Carver · July 20, 2002, 21:29

My carriers carry 8. Bombers "fail" far too often. I find 8 is barely adequate, especially if you want fighters aboard for air superiority.

NeoStar · July 20, 2002, 21:47

I consider aircraft carriers a bit of a extravagance. If you want to invade, bombarding can be a waste of time due to the failure rate. By that stage tanks and then MA are more than suitable.

I only use them to cover my invasion navy against an AI with a fair amount of bombers.

Jaybe · July 20, 2002, 22:25

Look, if you want more bombardment capability, one that the AI will also use, then give Battleships 'blitz' capability. It DOES permit multiple bombardments.

The Pioneer · July 21, 2002, 08:26

Quote:

Originally posted by miccofl
Mine do. Regular carriers carry eight aircraft, nuclear powered carriers (CVN) carry 16 but are very expensive.

What are those?

I pretty much agree with Aeson on this on although I have moded mine to carry 6. It's the AI lack of ability to use carriers that throws the whole thing of balance.

miccofl · July 21, 2002, 08:59

Custom unit

HazieDaVampire · July 21, 2002, 12:20

Quote:

Originally posted by Jaybe
Look, if you want more bombardment capability, one that the AI will also use, then give Battleships 'blitz' capability. It DOES permit multiple bombardments.

Thats a good idea

Thrawn05 · July 21, 2002, 20:20

I gave carriers carry 5 planes, and an extra movement. The draw back was that they don't have any attack/defense number (it's kinda stupid having carriers shooting machine guns), and made them possible to build with the discovery of Adv. Flight for two reasons, 1: It's dumb being able to make carriers, and never have discovered flight, 2: It gives Adv. Flight more tempting.

alva · July 21, 2002, 20:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Carver
My carriers carry 8. Bombers "fail" far too often. I find 8 is barely adequate, especially if you want fighters aboard for air superiority.

This is way too much.
Whenever you mod, it should be in favor of the ai , why else mod??? Beat it on standard rules!!!!Then start changing things.

HazieDaVampire · July 22, 2002, 07:35

i changed things almost strait away, i just got id of the annoying bits that were making the game less fun!

planetfall · July 22, 2002, 17:13

Firaxis has a problem with navies except for
settler transports. Offense is by ironclads and battleships. I have not seen the AI use destroyers or carriers.

Firaxis navy and air units can be very confusing. "ironclad" shows a graphic from the civil war, but movement is about 4x civil war period. They simply made a poor graphic choice and name for a non wooden ship before destroyers. Ignore their lack of knowledge.

Now, if they don't use carriers should I not use carriers? Yeah, like the Japanese did not use carriers at Pearl. Here is where I had trouble relating history to games carrier units. Japan had almost a hundred planes on each carrier and I am supposed to be happy with a few. Right!? The real problem with the default number of units is the micromanagement tedium in moving so many carriers. The other problem is a "bomber" is not a "bomber". A "bomber" is really a squadron of bombers. Each sortie is the squadron's sortie. Before I understood this, I upped carrier load to 25. But if do that then A) carrier is too powerful, and B) waste too many bombers on carrier.

I like using carriers. Presently I play with carrier load of 6. 5 for bomber squads and 1 for fighter. The fighters are one of the most ineffective units, even jet fighters. Air Supremacy, how do you know it is working. The one adjustment you need to make in preferences is to add recon ability to bombers. This is historical, US used bombers for sub recon during WWII off both coasts because it was cheaper and allowed more range than fighters.

The game is so shewed to land only warfare, what are you really going to do with your super carriers? Once you have landed, airports can be used for unit transport. (most anyway). It is too tedious to run 50 bomber squadron sorties each turn. Just use them as the Japanese, knock out enemy BS. Once you have landed, it is ok to let them die on the vine. What will the AI do with all the fighters against land- nada. Wasted production. Cool huh. Let them think they need fighters, just move your carriers around a bit and hit a few tiles, and their fighter production increases. Never seen an AI fighter attempt any ground sorties. Odds in this game are too poor.

Jaybe · July 22, 2002, 17:23

planetfall, if you want to see if Air Superiority is working, then adjust the chance to intercept in Editor:General Settings to 100%. Then, if an interceptor is available, someone will likely lose a bomber. (Remember, intercept range is 1/2 of bombardment range).

HazieDaVampire · July 22, 2002, 17:26

we did in the Battle of Britain too, we had Manchesters or some kind of bomber, i cant remember, with air-to-air radar.

Jaybe · July 22, 2002, 17:53

In the game, an intercept does more than it did in real life WWII. It not only makes the bombing run a failure, but most likely destroys the bomber unit also.

In WWII, an intercept might have meant very little to the mission's success or failure.

Jon Shafer · July 22, 2002, 17:55

There should be a way to 'escort' bombers to their missions. That would add a lot more to the air war, and give much more importance to fighter units.

HazieDaVampire · July 22, 2002, 17:57

and an AI that knows how to do it, and all the other things that it doesn't know how to use!

Jaybe · July 22, 2002, 18:16

Is it true that Recon missions are never intercepted?? Do I have to use fighter types to bombard to provoke a fighter-to-fighter combat?

My personal mods include increasing chance to intercept to 67%, fighter defense strengths are almost as high as attack (except for the F-15, where it's an 8/8).

N. Machiavelli · July 22, 2002, 20:12

I've pretty much left stats as they are (except rate of fire, which I doubled to match HP doubling). But with 'lethal bombardment' turned on for bombers, Carriers become infinately more potent without any additional modding.

HazieDaVampire · July 23, 2002, 06:56

Can aircraft spot subs?
Cuz you should be able to recon around an area when your trying to hunt out an enemy sub thats been hounding your shipping (it does happen!), just stick a carrier with some escort and you can recon away till you find it!

NeoStar · July 23, 2002, 07:25

I wouldn't think so because they just sweep over - they're not physically in the area but you never know...hard to test

If they're really bothering your carrier just give it radar and detect.

HazieDaVampire · July 23, 2002, 09:47

if you gave bombers radar and recon would they be able to fly over a target and detect it?

Jaybe · July 23, 2002, 10:57

I think it's called "Spot Invisible" in the editor. Check out the charactaristics of the AEGIS Cruise to confirm (since it can spot subs).

I also think it is inappropriate. Build your own subs to spot subs. The AI does not do recon because it knows where you are, but has been programmed to ignore your submarine presence, except for collision occurences.