22-11-2002 09:54									#31
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Oh, and load it in 5 minutes, which is actually damn fast.

ACK!

	22-11-2002 10:20									#32
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Baggio Interesting concept Jaybe....didn't think if it this way but its logical. Still they should have some sort of anti-aircraft ability especially carriers, due to its value and cost they wouldnt want to neglect anti-aircraft abilities. At present all ships are defenseless against air attacks. If not, at least leave it to another specialised ship or escort unit......that would make gameplay more varied and interesting.

Anti-air defenses (especially gun defenses) main effect is to deter hits, not destroy the bombing unit. That is reflected in the defense strength of the naval unit. A carrier's defenses are also mitigated by its fragility, where a single hit can disable it from being a mobile airbase. Also, keep in mind that bombardment cannot SINK a naval unit (unless you have given them Lethal Sea Bombardment).

Something I have done is increase the defense strength of AEGIS Cruisers to a 12, reflecting increased anti-air/sub/missile capabilities.

	22-11-2002 10:55									#33
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by CorpusScorpius B-2 is too big & more than likely too heavy. I am not sure but the B-2 would also be too tall to fit in the hangar deck inside of the carrier.

yes, this is obvious. the statement was sarcastic, hence the head being pounded into the wall. i was merely making a comment on the absurdity of it. no matter, the moment has passed.

	22-11-2002 11:21									#34
	Got spare money?

Another point regarding naval units close to enemy coasts is to beware of enemy cruise missiles, which CAN sink ships. Rarely a problem with the AI, but in an MP game, watch out!

	22-11-2002 11:32									#35
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

it is clear that firaxis didnt spend as much time in naval and air units as much as they did with land units. I personally think some of the land units dont even make any sense either. Why would you wanna build musketmen? its a total piece of crap if you evaluate its cost VS performance... its twice the cost for a +1 def of a pikemen. Yuck.

BTW Not trying to bash firaxis, but there are many things that are kinda quirky with the game...

PS, someone asked why you should even bother building airplanes in civ3. It works wonder for pillaging from distance. You CAN use land artilleries, but airplane just seems to do the job better with their wider range.

	22-11-2002 12:01									#36
	Tired of ads?

ahh yes FC's. I forgot about them. I forget stuff now I've been out 3 years. Fire controllmen I think they are called.

	22-11-2002 12:04									#37
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Aircraft are useful. I just build them just so I'm not left out. Because the ai will use bombers I have to at least build fighters.

And I agree about musketmen. In real history it seems they were around a long time. They served a very important role for many, many years. Rifleman on the other hand had a much short time span.

	22-11-2002 20:56									#38
	Full PM-box? Change here!

re stopping planes.

I used to use 1 jet for AS and the rest as bombers. But when the AI sends 5 bombers at my stack, the jet only seems to defend vs the 1st sortie. The others get a free ride.

Now I reverse and put on 1 bomber and the rest jets on AS. I have also increased the movement of carriers +1 so stacks of carriers and BS are easier to move. I usually have 2..3 carriers with my battle group for DDay landings.

Rarely do I have the AI attack this stack. Occassionally the Iroquois do a kamikazee bomb mission. But this is the only AI I have seen even attempt attacking ships.

Yes it is a pain to create your own battle group of BS/transports/carriers/DS/AEGIS but it is effective once the crazy thing gets built.

I have not tested the range of AS and tried to move the group as 3 tiles. If they are all together the BS will take the first hits. I would much rather lose some BS than a single loaded transport of armor or carrier full of planes.

== PF

	23-11-2002 01:22									#39
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

hi ,

there goes nothing in world above a carrier with two F-15's in it , they should almost anything down , .....

but , its more intresting to move your carrier in ( to bomb ) and then out to stay out of enemy range

have a nice day

	23-11-2002 04:31									#40
	Get a bigger avatar today!

I agree that naval combat was a disappointment in this game.

	23-11-2002 05:31									#41
	Inflate your Upload Space

Not to mention a lack of mordern era ships except for the AEGIS cruiser and nuclear submarine, which is quite useless except for launching nukes.....which makes all the civs turn against you.

I would like to see cruise missiles being able to be used instead of nukes by the subs......how about 16 of them in a sub man! Then we will truely haf to emply AEGIS cruisers to spot these damn machines before they sneak up on one of our cities.

	23-11-2002 10:05									#42
	Increase the size of your Attachments

I use a carrier with a full load of fighters on AS missions to help shoot the AI planes down and keep them from attacking my ships. If I am able to down enough of the AI aircraft I will start putting the fighters on bombing runs. Then I can use them against the AI ships or to help clear the beaches if I am doing a landing invasion.

	23-11-2002 18:20									#43
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

I put 2 AC's in the stack, one loaded with fighters on AS, one with bombers.

	23-11-2002 20:40									#44
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Let's try to remember, when debating the realism of Civ3's naval unit capabilities, that, in the real world, there has not been a large-scale naval battle in nearly 60 years. At that time there were no AEGIS Cruisers, F-14's, and nuclear-powered carriers or subs. Probably a very realistic depiction of what large-scale naval warfare would be like with modern military hardware is that which appears in Tom Clancy's "Red Storm Rising." Using this model, yep, if we send a bunch of transports across the ocean escorted by a few destroyers, they are going to be bombed into oblivion. To counter air attacks one would need to send carriers and AEGIS cruisers as escorts for the convoys. The AEGIS are indeed used to defend against incoming missles while the carrier-based aircraft are used to try to prevent enemy bombers from getting/staying in range to hit the convoys. It requires a coordinated effort using multiple naval resources. This being the case, the modern naval model in Civ' is fairly reasonable. The moral is, if you have a limited number of carriers available you can either project power or defend convoys but not both. If you want to be a true modern superpower and go around the world kicking butt, you gotta build more carriers.

	23-11-2002 23:31									#45
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

hi ,

a small that helps , carrier holds 8-12 costs a bit more , the defense is a bit more , aegis holds a couple missiles , you can give them a bigger range let them cost a bit more , nuke sub can hold both cruise and nuke missiles , holds 8-16 , costs a lot , not every country can build it , .....

have a nice day

	24-11-2002 02:21									#46
	Support Apolyton

hi panag,

That sounds good. Though they should be new units and not modifications to the existing units. Some countries (i.e., India) have carriers and such but they are significantly underpowered compared to, say, the USS Nimitz. Your suggestions would, as new units, make a more realistic naval arsenal in that, as you suggest, some countries would have the resources to build the bigger, badder ones, some whould be able to build the regular ones, and some would be unable to build any.

have a nice day yourself

P.S. - MING! Oh, Ming! Could we make it required that, in order to be more civilized, we all have to start and end our posts as panag does? We could call it "The Panag Protocol."

	24-11-2002 12:47									#47
	Increase Your PM Length

I say we have a unit workshop like that other game

	24-11-2002 17:01									#48
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Billster2k3 hi panag, That sounds good. Though they should be new units and not modifications to the existing units. Some countries (i.e., India) have carriers and such but they are significantly underpowered compared to, say, the USS Nimitz. Your suggestions would, as new units, make a more realistic naval arsenal in that, as you suggest, some countries would have the resources to build the bigger, badder ones, some whould be able to build the regular ones, and some would be unable to build any. have a nice day yourself P.S. - MING! Oh, Ming! Could we make it required that, in order to be more civilized, we all have to start and end our posts as panag does? We could call it "The Panag Protocol."

hi ,

, well huh , it can be done , but then you have to look very carefully at what the unit is when playing , ..... just make them unique to that civ and it goes

have a nice day