24-12-2003 11:46									#1
	Aircraft Carriers Tired of ads?

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.

	24-12-2003 12:47									#2
	Full PM-box? Change here!

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.

	24-12-2003 14:37									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

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.

	24-12-2003 15:01									#4
	Tired of ads?

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?

	24-12-2003 15:18									#5
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

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...

	24-12-2003 15:30									#6
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

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?

	24-12-2003 15:42									#7
	Got spare money?

Rebasing distance affects helicopters also.

	24-12-2003 15:49									#8
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

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.

	24-12-2003 15:51									#9
	Suffering from ads?

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.

	24-12-2003 19:29									#10
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

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

	24-12-2003 20:00									#11
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

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.

	24-12-2003 20:17									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

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.

	24-12-2003 20:17									#13
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

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.

	24-12-2003 21:16									#14
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

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

	24-12-2003 22:02									#15
	Get a bigger avatar today!

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.

	25-12-2003 06:22									#16
	Put an end to popups!

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.

	25-12-2003 06:44									#17
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

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.

	25-12-2003 07:27									#18
	Got spare money?

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.

	25-12-2003 11:39									#19
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

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.

	26-12-2003 02:08									#20
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Heck yeah, I've yet to make ANY
Perhaps a performance bonus for the airccraft using it?

	26-12-2003 02:44									#21
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

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!

	26-12-2003 22:20									#22
	Inflate your Upload Space

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.

	27-12-2003 01:18									#23
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

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.