17-04-2005 21:47									#1
	Bombardment Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

So, will the bombardment be the same in Civ4 as in Civ3? Because that sucked ass... Catapults and Trebuchets are utterly useless. What´s the point of dragging big ass machines over half a continent just set them up and then miss more than half the time? Huge waste of time and money IMO. And the bombing runs? How the hell can they miss? If you drop a shitload of bombs they´re bound to hit something, right? Same goes with naval bombarment.

	17-04-2005 21:49									#2
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

The autocensor doesn´t seem to be working in the Civ4 forum...

	17-04-2005 22:01									#3
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Well, I think that bombardment really miss to much. And what is the utility for it? If you bombard a city, or you destroy improvments, kill the population (these both are terrible when you want the city) or you damages a unit, but unless you destroy it in the same turn, it recovers in the next turn (if there are many defenders, you fight many but not the one you damaged) ! And you can't send artillery alone, because any unit can capture it. Yes, this needs to be changed, but how?

	17-04-2005 22:19									#4
	Increase Your PM Length

Bombardment is fine when you´re fighting an equally strong opponent and just want to trash his infrastructure. You know you can´t really invade ´cause it´ll take an insane amount of troops, so you try to bomb him back to the stone age. In earlier eras catapults and trebuchets are formidable siege weapons, but besieging isn´t something you really want to do in Civ3 because it ties up the momentum of your advance and gives the opponent a chance to consolidate his position by bringing in more troops from other parts of his territory. Thus bombardment in ancient and medieval times is useless. This should either be changed or taken away. Changing it could mean giving catapults a defence value of 1, so it´s not utterly helpless but still needs protection and backup.

	18-04-2005 01:11									#5
	Increase Your PM Length

You two have GOT to be kidding!!!

Catapults and trebuchets are one the most important and useful weapons available to a human (more so on higher levels). If your opponet is technologicly advanced to you, how do you think you are ever going to beat them? Imagine you have Swords and your opponnet has Muskets. You send in a stack of Swords/Spears/and a crap load of Cats. You bomd the crap out of the Muskets defending a city until each defending unit only has one HP, then attack with your vet swords. You only need to knock one HP of the unit to win the fight. Rinse, repeat. The AI doesn't stand a chance!

Back on-topic, I think the bombardment from civ III was excellent. Leave it the same. The only change I would make to bombardment would be to try to improve the AI's use of it.

	18-04-2005 01:56									#6
	Put an end to popups!

It would be neat if you could have a choice for the bombardment as in do I bomb a barracks (building) or a group of soldiers?

In real life an F.O (Forward Observer paints targets be the buildings or troop movement

Just a thought is all

Gramps

	18-04-2005 02:01									#7
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

My point is that you have to wheel up such an insane amount of catapults to your opponents city walls to make up for the fact that they keep missing more then they actually hit. Other than that the strategy is good

	18-04-2005 02:06									#8
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Dr Zoidberg My point is that you have to wheel up such an insane amount of catapults to your opponents city walls to make up for the fact that they keep missing more then they actually hit. Other than that the strategy is good

I agree with you as well Dr Zoidberg

Kinda frustrating to bombarb to soften and then next turn they are healed

	18-04-2005 02:07									#9
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Grandpa Troll It would be neat if you could have a choice for the bombardment as in do I bomb a barracks (building) or a group of soldiers? In real life an F.O (Forward Observer paints targets be the buildings or troop movement Just a thought is all Gramps

This is hard to do with catapults, those things are hard to aim as it is But for bomber command and naval it would be a neat feature. First and secondary targets, and missed targets that cause damage. You can imagine bombing the crap out of a city to conquer a wonder or something, and you miss the barracks and troops and accidently hit the Statue of Zeus or something. Oops...

	18-04-2005 02:11									#10
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Grandpa Troll I agree with you as well Dr Zoidberg Kinda frustrating to bombarb to soften and then next turn they are healed

I´ve never actually conquered a city or metropolis with just bombardment and then mopped it up with the infantry and cavalry. I usually suffer a bit of casualties even with quite heavy bombardments.

	18-04-2005 02:12									#11
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Dr Zoidberg This is hard to do with catapults, those things are hard to aim as it is But for bomber command and naval it would be a neat feature. First and secondary targets, and missed targets that cause damage. You can imagine bombing the crap out of a city to conquer a wonder or something, and you miss the barracks and troops and accidently hit the Statue of Zeus or something. Oops...

exactly

like you have early units with certain abilities and later advanced technolgy would allow this

maybe even like we have an army with a general we could have a unit called an F.O. and he "loads" artillery and then they allow the artillery better target acquisition. maybe make the F.O. vulnerable and needs a strong Military unit to defend?

Just thoughts is all

Gramps

	18-04-2005 02:14									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Dr Zoidberg I´ve never actually conquered a city or metropolis with just bombardment and then mopped it up with the infantry and cavalry. I usually suffer a bit of casualties even with quite heavy bombardments.

I also agree which kinda in y books diminishes the actual theory behind bombardment..

I am a former military and if you ever saw what exactly bombardment does then you would understand the frustration I see with the CIV concept applied here

I understand it is a game and yes a very interesting one at that

Just saying bombardment could be tweaked

Gramps

	18-04-2005 02:28									#13
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Grandpa Troll exactly like you have early units with certain abilities and later advanced technolgy would allow this maybe even like we have an army with a general we could have a unit called an F.O. and he "loads" artillery and then they allow the artillery better target acquisition. maybe make the F.O. vulnerable and needs a strong Military unit to defend? Just thoughts is all Gramps

You mean like a leader you get when your elite troops win a battle? I´d like that

	18-04-2005 02:33									#14
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Grandpa Troll I also agree which kinda in y books diminishes the actual theory behind bombardment.. I am a former military and if you ever saw what exactly bombardment does then you would understand the frustration I see with the CIV concept applied here

Yes, I´ve seen pictures of Dresden and Tokyo circa 1945. No infantry needed there

	18-04-2005 02:37									#15
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Dr Zoidberg You mean like a leader you get when your elite troops win a battle? I´d like that

yes thanks

The "Leader" unit concept but with it being a Forward Observer and he has say something along the lines of a Spy vision whereas he could see into the city area and "select" a target or area

I mean in real life a SEAL unit or Ranger goes in, hides out "Paints" a target for an aircraft or calls in artillery strikes say the bombardment is landing in a canal they simple adjust to take out a bridge and then the city is for all intents and purposes slowed down in regards to resupply or even initial response.

Gramps

	18-04-2005 03:20									#16
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

I like it The sad part is that it´s too good of a concept to be introduced into Civ4

	18-04-2005 05:52									#17
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Dr Zoidberg I like it The sad part is that it´s too good of a concept to be introduced into Civ4

I know in Call To Power one has SLIC capabilities I just wonder if maybe we could in CIV4 but that would be like way beyond my meager computing capabilities

	20-04-2005 08:41									#18
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

I like artillery in Civ 3 over Civs 1 & 2. Sure they do miss a lot, and you need to take half a dozen or more of them with you on attacks, but the big benefit of them is you suffer zero casualties while bombarding. (Except for air missions where you might get shot down by enemy AA.)

In addition to offense, I like artillery for defense as well. When the enemy approaches your cities, artillery can be used to take hps off of offensive units. Since the AI doesn't like to have damaged units within your territory, they'll often try to retreat those units. This can really slow down an AI offensive. And you get more time to muster a counter-attack.

	21-04-2005 01:02									#19
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Dr Zoidberg The autocensor doesn´t seem to be working in the Civ4 forum...

Unfortuantely, you probably missed the autocensor when Al Gazzera had a forum. Any word with itch in it was automatically censored, words were censored that were legitimate parts of the sentence and not something a human censor would stop were routinely censored, so you couldn't understand the sentence. It was hilarious!

	21-04-2005 01:19									#20
	Tired of ads?

Like Dick van ****?

	03-05-2005 14:30									#21
	Remove this text

I have to try the catapults-against-muskets trick the next time. Too sad there are no real-world examples for that. (Or are there?)

	09-05-2005 17:30									#22
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Bombardment is improved in civ 4

-fact (?) A catapult will now damage (or try to damage) ALL units in the square. Ie, helps a lot.

Last edited by Grand Stone on 09-05-2005 at 17:40

	09-05-2005 19:04									#23
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Grand Stone Bombardment is improved in civ 4 -fact (?) A catapult will now damage (or try to damage) ALL units in the square. Ie, helps a lot.

You have proof of this?

	10-05-2005 17:39									#24
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Gen. Atkinson You have proof of this?

I thought I have read it under the facts thread or somewhere else? I was just hoping someone could tell me right or wrong

I hope it's done that way.

So you have an army of 10 horsemen coming my way in one big group. Then you have to pass my fotress before coming to my little town. You choose: either ignore my fort and be hit by my two catapult, reducing ALL horsemen hit-points by 2 , or attack my fortress defended with 2 spearmen Either way, my defence concisting of spearman AND catapults will be far supperior to the 'only spearman' defence. And maybe forts become more important

	10-05-2005 17:48									#25
	Tired of ads?

ALL bombardment should always do some kind of damage.

Even if minor.

It needs to be restructured.

	15-05-2005 09:16									#26
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Bombardment units should be tied to military formations.

	15-05-2005 15:02									#27
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

This is OLD Civ3 thinking - Civ4 combat looks to be be very different in the previews.

So what was a problem in the past won't be a problem in the future - there will just be different problems

	15-05-2005 15:21									#28
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by curtsibling ALL bombardment should always do some kind of damage. Even if minor. It needs to be restructured.

Well, you can miss with bombardment. But if you have a fully built infrastructure and sprawling metropolises, the chance that bombardment fails should be non-existent.

	15-05-2005 15:22									#29
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Oncle Boris Bombardment units should be tied to military formations.

Like in "no separate bombardment units"?

	15-05-2005 20:33									#30
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Dr Zoidberg Yes, I´ve seen pictures of Dresden and Tokyo circa 1945. No infantry needed there

We get your point, but infantry entrenched in ruins can be quite lethal.