Answers on Radar Towers

Catt · January 19, 2003, 21:09

In a recent thread I posed a series of questions regarding radar towers and how they worked, looking for answers base on objective test results or Firaxis comment -- gameplay observation was welcome, but only as a point of interest, not as an answer to the questions. It quickly became clear that no real answers were forthcoming. So, with a bit of spare time this morning, I created and then ran several tests -- I didn't answer all my (and others') questions, but I answered enough to satisfy the nagging questions

So, the Q's and A's:

Question 1. Does the bonus apply to a unit attacking from "RT+2 tiles" into an adjacent tile that is "RT+3 tiles?"

No. It appears that the game treats combat as occurring in the defender's tile exclusively. Since a unit attacking from RT+2 into RT+3 is engaging in combat in RT+3, the bonus does not apply.

2. Does the bonus apply to bombardment attacks and defenses?

Yes and No. A poor question. The bonus applies to attacks and defenses with respect to units (the bonus does apply to arty bombarding enemy units, for example), but does not seem to apply to non-units (see question 6 below).

3. If yes to question 2, does the bonus apply to a bombardment from "RT+1" where the target is "RT+3?"

No. Same principle as described in answer 1 seems to apply.

4. Does the bonus apply to naval units?

Yes.

5. Does the bonus apply to air units? And if so, where does the air combat "take place" -- is it the city square in which a fighter on AS is stationed or is it the attacker's target tile or even elsewhere?

No. Air battles seem to be unaffected by RTs (though my results were a bit quirky).

6. Does the bonus apply to non-units (i.e., city improvement, city population and terrain enhancement defense values)?

Cautious No WRT Terrain Improvements - Unknown otherwise. I tested only terrain improvements (not city improvements or population). And I abandoned my tests with a much smaller sample size than other tests -- earlier tests included 1000+ independent trials while the terrain bombardment tests included only approx 200 independent trials for both a control and a experimental group. The results seemed to indicate a clear "no" but the sample size was small enough that I won't bang my fist down with certainty.

7. Do the benefits "stack" if you have more than one Radar Tower in an area? (e.g. 2 "in range" gives a 50% bonus)?

No. Not tested, but the manual / civilopedia makes it clear they shouldn't, and, based on some of my tests, I think I would have noticed an anomaly that would have encouraged experimentation (since a test or two did have overlapping RTs).

8. Do the benefits work outside of your cultural boundary or are they limited by culture?

Yes. The benefits extend two tiles, regardless of cultural ownership of such tiles.

9. What is the defensive value of a radar tower, as a terrain improvement? (obviously only applicable for defense vs. bombardment)

Not laboriously tested. But strongly believed to be 16.

10. What is the interaction of the answer to questions 6 and 9?

N/A. Since answer 6 seems to confirm that terrain improvements (such as an RT) are not affected by RTs, the defense should remain at the assumed 16.

Catt

FrantzX · January 19, 2003, 22:10

Thank you.

Alex · January 20, 2003, 07:41

Nice thread, Catt. Now we know a bit more about these structures.

WarpStorm · January 20, 2003, 10:22

Excellent work Catt.

CerberusIV · January 20, 2003, 11:09

Nice work. Thanks.

The implication seems to be that the best use of RT's is what the AI appears to do, that is build them next to cities so that units in the city benefit defensively when attacked and also benefit when attacking out of the city against besiegers. That also makes it more important to protect your own RT's if you build them and take out enemy RT's near cities you plan to attack.

Emma · January 20, 2003, 13:22

that post certainly helped me! thank you. i'm in big mess fighting the "mighty" russians

and they have radar tower tec, but i don't. i was wondering if i should destroy the towers or leave them so that i can benifit from them after capturing the city. but i'm not all that mighty eighther and i think i will destroy them now.

Wittlich · January 20, 2003, 13:59

Actually, you should destroy them prior to your ground attacks against the Russians. The Russian's radar towers are of no use to you, since you cannot use them. Once you take a city, and the radar towers fall into your cultural border, the towers are automatically destroyed. Also, if you move a ground unit onto the same tile as the enemy tower, the tower is automatically destroyed. So destroy the towers by bombardment (artillery and/or air) so that the Russian units will not get the bonus against your ground troops.

Oh, and yes, nice write-up Catt!

Theseus · January 22, 2003, 10:16

Excellent Catt, thanks.

Two points, learned while battling Persia in AU 203:

1) Place RTs on the FAR side of where battle will occur.

2) RTs are the last improvement to be destroyed via bombardment. If possible, do NOT place them along a coast.

Traelin · January 22, 2003, 13:38

Wow Catt, really good work! I have been dying to know the answer to number 8 for a long time, but was too lazy to test it.

Stuie · January 22, 2003, 14:31

Excellent material, Catt.

Too bad it's left to us to figure out some of the basic game mechanics. Isn't that what a manual is supposed to be for?

Brizey · January 22, 2003, 18:30

Too bad you can't build radar towers IN cities. If they can work THROUGH a city, they should work FROM WITHIN a city.

Actually, that is what the civdef improvement should do. Hmmm. Can this be done via the editor (I'm at work now).

Jaybe · January 22, 2003, 18:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Brizey
Too bad you can't build radar towers IN cities. If they can work THROUGH a city, they should work FROM WITHIN a city.

That's what the civil defense improvement is for.

sabrewolf · February 18, 2003, 14:04

thanks for the stats, catt!

now i didn't get one part: is the effect of the RT within the range 2 including the central tile (where RT is built) or excluded (which would mean a "diameter" of 5 tiles).

my question isn't so stupid, because outposts have a radius where the base tile is included (--> range 2 = see the own tile plus one extra tile in each direction)

WarpStorm · February 18, 2003, 17:36

The radar towers give visibility 2 tiles out (not including the center square). I assume (you know what they say about that) that the combat bonus extends to these same squares

XXXXX
XXXXX
XXRXX
XXXXX
XXXXX

Catt · February 18, 2003, 22:57

Sorry I missed the question for awhile.

Warpstorm provided the answer, though it is probably worth some clarification since my own terminology seems less than clear now that I look back on it.

Using Warpstorm's schematic, but substituting "A" for the attacking unit and "D" for the defender, the radar tower works in this case:

xxxxx
xxxxx
xxRAD
xxxxx
xxxxx

But it does not provide the bonus in this case (which was my unclearly described concept of RT+2 into RT+3):

xxxxx
xxxxx
xxRxAD
xxxxx
xxxxx

The same applies to an artillery unit with range of 2 -- it did not work in this circumstance:

xxxxx
xxxxx
xxRAxD
xxxxx
xxxxx

I presumed, based on a belief that the "battle" takes place in the defender's tile (in turn based on all these tests) that it would work for the defender in the following case -- but I did not test it!

xxxxx
xxxxx
xxRxDA
xxxxx
xxxxx

Hope that clears it up!

Catt

Drachen · February 19, 2003, 00:00

Kudos, applause, and...

Cheers

Panag · February 19, 2003, 13:44

hi ,

the radar twoers should have a bigger range , there should also be a small wonder radar , something huge that will let you look at the map ones a turn within a range of 50 tiles an area of lets say 10 by 10 or so , ....

we also need a mobile radar unit , ... we should only be able to build a couple and it should cost a lot , .....

have a nice day [IMG]http://www.mommiesplayground.com/~wackoburns/contrib/blackeye/double0smile.gif[/IMG

sabrewolf · February 19, 2003, 17:26

mobile radar unit --> worker

instead of a radar wonder, they could bring back that civ2-wonder coming with satellites which uncoveres all cities and the whole world map. maybe this time a small wonder...

bongo · February 20, 2003, 10:09

There is a spy-plane in CTP(1 or 2?) with long range(10*10) and vision (7?)

I never found much use for it...

sabrewolf · February 20, 2003, 10:30

if fact, i think the current helicopter unit (recon mission) more realistic. with one unit you usually only can look at a small area. a 10 by 10 tile field is a big exadurated...

Panag · February 20, 2003, 11:39

Quote:

Originally posted by sabrewolf
mobile radar unit --> worker

instead of a radar wonder, they could bring back that civ2-wonder coming with satellites which uncoveres all cities and the whole world map. maybe this time a small wonder...

hi ,

nope a unit that moves , a bit like the modern radar artillery , ...... for overseas use , ....

there should be a limit on how many we can build , ... they should have a range of three , .... regular towers should have a range of five , .... and there should be a max on howmany we can build also , ......

Firaxis , ......

have a nice day

sabrewolf · February 20, 2003, 11:43

i am strongly opposed to any kind of limit. remove all hardcoded limits

Panag · February 20, 2003, 12:32

Quote:

Originally posted by sabrewolf
i am strongly opposed to any kind of limit. remove all hardcoded limits

hi ,

, not a limit that is a limit for ones and for all , ....

an option in the editor that would give the number of certain units ,.... okay lets take this mobile antenna unit , each civ can build max five , .... true the editor we should be able to edit this , ....

this way everyone is happy and we can build great scenarios and mods , ....

have a nice day

Geoff the Medio · February 23, 2003, 05:00

Quote:

Originally posted by panag
nope a unit that moves , a bit like the modern radar artillery , ...... for overseas use , ....

there should be a limit on how many we can build , ... they should have a range of three

Sounds like an AWACS plane...

It could be an air unit that acts like a radar tower when set to some appropriately named mission and located in a carrier, airbase or city. Perhaps the range could be increased to make it somewhat more useful (rendering radar towers obsolete?). It could affect attack and/or defense for air/all friendly units in range (maybe pick one or the other?). A large area recon mission could also be available.

(... I really want them now! )

Panag · February 24, 2003, 08:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Geoff the Medio

Sounds like an AWACS plane...

It could be an air unit that acts like a radar tower when set to some appropriately named mission and located in a carrier, airbase or city. Perhaps the range could be increased to make it somewhat more useful (rendering radar towers obsolete?). It could affect attack and/or defense for air/all friendly units in range (maybe pick one or the other?). A large area recon mission could also be available.

(... I really want them now! )

hi ,

, that seems also very intresting , .... maybe we could have a plane that stays in the air like in civ II , ....

have a nice day

WarpStorm · February 24, 2003, 16:14

You want that, it's easy to do. Just give a plane some movement points and remove the Immobile flag. You probably ought to remove the rebase flag also. The biggest gotcha is that they won't run out of fuel like in Civ2.

Geoff the Medio · February 24, 2003, 17:05

Quote:

Originally posted by WarpStorm
Just give a plane some movement points and remove the Immobile flag. [...]

The point was for it to act like a radar tower, not just to move around and stay airborn between turns ala Civ2.

Quote:

Originally posted by panag
maybe we could have a plane that stays in the air like in civ II , ....

I like the current aircraft system better than the Civ2 one, but I suppose "we" could compromise and have ground and air versions...

Panag · February 26, 2003, 05:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Geoff the Medio

The point was for it to act like a radar tower, not just to move around and stay airborn between turns ala Civ2.

I like the current aircraft system better than the Civ2 one, but I suppose "we" could compromise and have ground and air versions...

hi ,

for the awacs plane it might be intresting to move a bit like in CIV II , ..... so that a larger "sector" could be checked , ..... maybe planes could "stay" in the air thanks to a refuel on the way , ....

we definatly need a mobile radar unit , ....

have a nice day

PLATO · February 27, 2003, 16:20

I like both proposed units. Lets give the AWACS a feature like the "air superiority" of fighters. This feature would enhance the likelyhood of fighters to shoot down enemy interceptors, the likelyhood of bombing runs to be sucessful, and the likelyhood of SAM strikes being sucessful. An AWACS "on station" would be vulnerable to fighter attack when no fighters are in "air superiority" mode for its base city. This unit should require Miniturization to build.

The mobile radar unit should be just as Panag describes, except with a slower movement.

To counter the effect of mobile radar, their should be a cruise missle type weapon that could knock them out under certain cicumstances (ARM missle). The circumstances of its use I still need to work on, but I feel for every advantage you must have a counter.

Panag · February 27, 2003, 17:37

hi ,

something like this is what we need , ......

have a nice day