Air superiority

Jezz · February 24, 2002, 23:18

Is it just me or is this thing a piece of s***?

And yes, i have the 1.17f patch. I've got a carrier fully loaded with jet fighters, all on air superiorty missions, stacked with 4 battleship parked off the coast of an american city. Yet turn after turn, their bombers perform a textbook exercise in kicking the crap out of my ships. Its been almost 20 turns, and still not one bomber shot down. Did they break it again?

Dida · February 25, 2002, 00:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Jezz
Is it just me or is this thing a piece of s***?

And yes, i have the 1.17f patch. I've got a carrier fully loaded with jet fighters, all on air superiorty missions, stacked with 4 battleship parked off the coast of an american city. Yet turn after turn, their bombers perform a textbook exercise in kicking the crap out of my ships. Its been almost 20 turns, and still not one bomber shot down. Did they break it again?

This thing works both ways. The AI has 2 fighters in his city, and I bombed him 10 times with no problem.

Ninot · February 25, 2002, 00:53

I have 1.17, and air superiority is working great for me (unfortunately).

any town i bomb that has fighters in it, it seem to be 50/50 if my bomber gets shot down or not.

Unfortunately, (or fortunately, maybe), the AI hasn't bombed any of my air defended cities, so i cant say if it works both ways for me. But ive lost many bombers over Russian cities to know that air superiority aint broke, even if my grammar is.

Borels · February 25, 2002, 12:27

I think we should be allowed to sent fighters to challenge enemy fighters in the air superiority state. In reality, bombers are not sent to skies where fighters are waiting to shoot them down. The Americans always eliminate most of the enemy's air forces by fighters first, then elminate missiles and radars by bombers & fighters. Massive bombing is reserved for the end.

What do you guys think?

Jaybe · February 25, 2002, 12:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Borels
I think we should be allowed to sent fighters to challenge enemy fighters in the air superiority state. In reality, bombers are not sent to skies where fighters are waiting to shoot them down. The Americans always eliminate most of the enemy's air forces by fighters first, then elminate missiles and radars by bombers & fighters. Massive bombing is reserved for the end.

What do you guys think?

I think "Go to the Editor, make all Fighter Defense values almost or as high as their Attack values." (I made Jet Fighter Defense one less than its Attack to give F-15 somewhat more powerful).

Then you can use your fighters in offensive Air Superiority Missions. Use your fighters to recon or bombard near enemy airbases and if they have interceptors there, you have a decent chance of survival, even. On the same turn, after you have sent in your fighters, you can send in your bombers and see how it goes.

korn469 · February 25, 2002, 13:21

Jezz

from what i've heard fighters on carriers don't perform air superiority missions, they act like they are asleep instead of on alert

Jaybe

Quote:

Go to the Editor, make all Fighter Defense values almost or as high as their Attack values

also if you can compliment if you increase the chance of fighters to intercept air missions to like 85-95%

Rimpy · February 25, 2002, 15:33

This is only somewhat related to this thread, but as long as we're talking about air units, I've always wanted to ask this question.

What exactly is the benefit of veteran status for air units? How does it affect bombing missions and air superiority missions respectively?

The manual states that regular bombers have a 50% chance of being intercepted (assuming that you're attacking a city with a fighter) and stealth bombers have a 5% chance. It doesn't say anything about veteran status changing those odds on either side.

Also, does it do any good to have more than one fighter on air superiority status in a city? I believe that I've seen a single fighter shoot down more than one bomber.

And, BTW, air superiority works fine for me. I've shoot down plenty of bombers.

I was surprised to see a bomber shoot down my fighter! I didn't even know that was a possibility. Anybody know the odds of that happening?

Rimpy

AJ Corp. The FAIR · February 25, 2002, 15:47

"Air superiority
Is it just me or is this thing a piece of s***?
And yes, i have the 1.17f patch. I've got a carrier fully loaded with jet fighters, all on air superiorty missions, stacked with 4 battleship parked off the coast of an american city. Yet turn after turn, their bombers perform a textbook exercise in kicking the crap out of my ships. Its been almost 20 turns, and still not one bomber shot down. Did they break it again?"

Somewhere else on Apolyton I've read that fighters can't intercept from carriers. You can only use them appopriately for bombers. Since the latest patch I've noticed air superiority missions working quite fine when an enemy bomber approached the city that the fighter was defending. After shooting one down, next turn you always have to give the fighter a new command.

AJ

AJ Corp. The FAIR · February 25, 2002, 15:49

Sorry for the above (apparently also mentioned by KORN 469) ...

Cookie Monster · February 25, 2002, 16:31

Gentlemen,

Don't forget that anytime you move a carrier it automatically puts ALL aircraft aboard to sleep. You need to wake your fighters then put them on air superiority. They will stay on air superiority until you move the carrier again. Hope this helps.

reefer addict · February 25, 2002, 16:41

1.17 is working fine for me. i havent seen an intercept from a carrier yet , not sure if you can. i still cant picture a stealth bomber landing on a carrier deck, i always thought they were used more for jets.

Moonsinger · February 25, 2002, 17:25

I have 1.16 patch and air superiority is working great for me too.

Just like any other weapons, once in awhile, my fighters will fail to intercept a couple enemy bombers. Of course, if the enemy use stealth bombers, chances are they will get through, no problem.

Jezz · February 25, 2002, 19:59

Alex and Korn, thanks, i didn't know about the carrier thing. See, the problem is that AEGIS doesn't do what an AEGIS is suppose to do, which is to defend against bombers and cruise missiles. errrr.

WHY THE HELL DID THEY TAKE AWAY THE X2 AGAINST AIR UNITS FLAG!?@!#!

=DrJambo= · February 25, 2002, 19:59

Listen to Haupt Dietrich, he knows what he's talking about.

If you move the carrier the aircraft go to sleep so you have to wake the fighters and put them back onto air superiority. They'll remain on air superiority until you move the aircraft carrier again or they successfully intercept

Dida · February 25, 2002, 23:08

All fighters should be put on air superiority mission by default every turn. That makes the job a lot easier.

Barchan · February 26, 2002, 04:26

Quote:

Originally posted by reefer addict
1.17 is working fine for me. i havent seen an intercept from a carrier yet , not sure if you can. i still cant picture a stealth bomber landing on a carrier deck, i always thought they were used more for jets.

There's a good reason you can't picture a stealth bomber landing on a carrier: it can't really do it. The wingspan of the B-2 is 172 feet, pretty much the size of a 767. A carrier's deck is only 252 feet wide; not much room for error there. The B-2 is also a tad heavy for a carrier deck landing. The notoriously heavy F-14 Tomcat weighs some 72,000 pounds, but the B-2 is nearly five times as heavy at 336,500 pounds. It'd just snap through the arrestor cables like a marathon runner at a finish line and make a very expensive splash off the port bow....

notyoueither · February 26, 2002, 05:49

So you can't have your spanky new Jets escort your aging Bombers against your oppos old Zeros. What's an Air Marshal to do?

What about sending in your Fighters/Jets to bomb the target first? This draws the defending Fighters into combat with units of yours that might actually win the air combat. Then the Bombers fly unopposed (or at least with fewer defending units).

Salve

kmill25 · February 26, 2002, 08:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Barchan

There's a good reason you can't picture a stealth bomber landing on a carrier: it can't really do it. The wingspan of the B-2 is 172 feet, pretty much the size of a 767. A carrier's deck is only 252 feet wide; not much room for error there. The B-2 is also a tad heavy for a carrier deck landing. The notoriously heavy F-14 Tomcat weighs some 72,000 pounds, but the B-2 is nearly five times as heavy at 336,500 pounds. It'd just snap through the arrestor cables like a marathon runner at a finish line and make a very expensive splash off the port bow....

Very funny, and very true.

The B-2 is always based on land. Part of the reason the USA wanted to get flyover permission from other countries during the Afghan campaign. They had to fly those bastards all the way from the US.

Solver · February 26, 2002, 09:24

You can have your Fighters knock down theirs.

I bombed a city with my Jet Fighter, and an enemy Fighter came out. My Jet Fighter shot it down and returned back, getting a morale promotion.

Cookie Monster · February 26, 2002, 09:37

NYE and Solver both suggested a strategy that definately works!

I've done this countless times and it really helps turn the tide in the air war.

Thrawn05 · February 26, 2002, 12:33

Make sure you didn't set the fighters to fort, and that you didn't move the carrier when you set the fighters to air superiority. If you move the carrier, the fighters on AS switch to fort, and you have to reset each of the fighters again. I think that is your problem.

reefer addict · February 26, 2002, 13:37

does anyone know if you can disallow bombers on carriers . i find that i mostly just use bombers on carriers and jets for AS in my cities. id rather have it more realistic but i would have to find a way to base my bombers near the action. so if you can turn off the bomber/carrier flag is it also possible to create an airbase order for workers and the ability to build one in an ai civ if there is a right of passage agreement and/or alliance?

Dida · February 26, 2002, 14:05

The big problem with Stealth fighters in Civ3 is their range is only 8. So, if they cannot fit on a carrier, and w/o air field to give them a forward position, w/o being able to be stationed in ally cities, they are pretty much useless.

korn469 · February 26, 2002, 15:49

Quote:

does anyone know if you can disallow bombers on carriers . i find that i mostly just use bombers on carriers and jets for AS in my cities. id rather have it more realistic but i would have to find a way to base my bombers near the action. so if you can turn off the bomber/carrier flag is it also possible to create an airbase order for workers and the ability to build one in an ai civ if there is a right of passage agreement and/or alliance?

there is a way to disallow bombers on carriers, open the editor and set all fighters to foot soldiers and then set the carrier to carry foot soldiers only

as of now there isn't any easy ways to create airbases, though there is an airbase mod you can download and i think they have gotten this to work to some extent

planetfall · February 26, 2002, 16:07

Are you sure fighter range is still 8?

A major improvement in 1.17 was to increase the range of aircraft. There is not a limit of 8 for bombers. Just for fun I set bomber range to 12 and fighter range to 10. I ran out of time before checking stealth range options. I would think if firaxis fixed normal aircraft they would have also fixed range of steath aircraft. Anyone know for sure?

Dida · February 26, 2002, 16:11

I have not check with the editor. If that is true, I will make Stealth Bomber's range 25+, so they can take off from bases at home, and bomb the crap out of the AIs.

korn469 · February 26, 2002, 17:01

planetfall

i just now checked on my editor and when you enter a number larger than 8 it says please enter an interger between 1-8 or something of that nature, i am not saying you are wrong though

i am not sure if you know this but the first 1.17f patch that firaxis released had a newer version of the editor than what it was supposed to, and they quickly put up the new patch which they continued to call 1.17f (because nothing had changed in the game just the editor) that contained the correct editor (there was compatability problems susposedly)

it sounds like you have the newer editor, the way to be sure is if you open up the editor then go under help and check the about, if it says your bic version is anything besides 2.10 then you have the newer version

if that is the case could you please tell us what the maximum range for air units in the new editor is? try typing in 99 and if that is too big it will tell you the range

thanks!

Dida · February 26, 2002, 18:23

unit range is still limited to 8.

korn469 · February 26, 2002, 18:27

Dida

yes in the correct editor it is, but i have a hunch based on planetfall's comments that in the new editor they have increased aircraft range

Dida · February 26, 2002, 18:59

supposely, I should have the newest editor. If not, someone please post the new editor here.