Bombers can't upgrade to stealth?
Have aluminum, unlocked stealth tech, don't see upgrade button for my bombers... Am I missing something?
Bombers and stealth are seperate units. Bombers never go obsolete, so you don't upgrade them because they are always buildable in their own right.
The reason is that bombers can load onto carriers, so they are effectively different unit lines.
hmm, don't really buy that. As you can upgrade your fighter from a WW2 prop type it feels lazy that you're stuck with the same era bomber in the modern age. If they are not going to do a modern bomber stratofortress type then the stealth upgrade should be there.
So, just delete the bomber and buy or purchase a stealth bomber.
I think you can put a stealth bomber on the carrier now actually.
Yes, stealth bombers can go onto carriers now. The problem is, there's a bug preventing stealth bombers from promoting, so after a few promotions the old-school bomber is better than the stealth bomber. But the developers have so many other glitches to fix, I don't think the stealth bomber one is even on their radar...
Ohh that would be cool. Upgrade to a B52 would be neat.
Originally Posted by isotone
Bombers never upgraded to Steath bombers in Civ IV either. They're a whole new unit. Be nice if they did though...
Yeah, it's not a deal breaker, but would be nice to upgrade to stealth bomber. Especially when were able to upgrade from warrior/archer to mech infantry.
So the stealth bomber has a experience bug? Or is it that it is not getting experience off lower tech?
The game designers had creative ideas about upgrades. A bomber cannot upgrade to a stealth bomber; however, an anti-tank gun can upgrade to a helicopter gunship.
It's all about game balance, not about reality or even realism.
I got the same issue with Cavalry -- suddenly you cant upgrade them any further. Why can't they become tanks? They're similar units game-mechanics wise. I don't think its such a stretch of the imagination to go from man shooting gun whilst riding horse to man shooting canon whilst riding armored car.
I've always thought there should be some sort of a Hum-V squad that cavalry can upgrade to.
Originally Posted by zephyrtr
Either that or choppers again.
Tbh this is understandable. Apache's and other such choppers are primarily there to destroy armoured targets in a precise fashion. They do the same job, so why not upgrade to a chopper?
Originally Posted by Wavemanmav
The game mechanics aren't strictly the same for cavalry and tanks. Cavalry have no penalty for attacking cities, but there's a penalty for attacking other mounted units. Tanks get a penalty when attacking a city (crowded streets?), but no penalty against mounted units, who should be easy prey for a tank.
Maybe the game is just trying to emphasize how horses stopped being militarily useful at a certain point in time. It does shake things up a little, for factions like Russia that might be building cav-heavy armies. It's like the end-point for crossbows becoming melee-range rifles. You have to plan ahead for it, and start investing in cannon if you want to preserve a 2-hex attack unit. With the end of the line for horses, you have to start thinking about where the oil reserves are for tanks. As a minor "shake up the game" mechanic, I like the way it works.
P.S. I also agree with Simkill about helicopters being a reasonable upgrade from anti-tank artillery. They may be used as anti-personnel in current asymmetrical warfare, but the original design was primarily anti-armor.
Last edited by Zenicetus; 10-13-2010 at 05:29 AM.
It would be nice if the Cavalry unit could be updated to a light tank(US M3/M5 "Stuart" or German PzKpfw II) and later to say a Soviet BRDM/BMD, US M-3 "Bradley", or a revised "Stryker".
The helicopter gunship was originally a close air support unit for the infantry. Only later, after great strides were made with ATGMs, did it see use as an anti-tank platform.
Tanks have a penalty, and rightly so, for attacking cities, because of the tank's know deficiences.
1. A tank, with all hatches closed, has very limited ability to see the immediate area surrounding it. Enemy troops can be right next to you and you cannot see them. It is very easy to sneak up on a tank in the city.
2. The tank has a very limited elevation for its main gun. Thus enemy troops on the higher roofs can attack the tank's lightly armored top with impunity.
3. The tank's main gun and armor is best suited for ranged combat and not the "point-blank" combat of built up urban areas.
4. Narrow streets, especially in older European cities, limit the traverse of the longer, more powerful tank guns. If you watched th movie "Kelly's Heroes", you will know what I am talking about.
I could go on, but I'm sure you the drift.
As for why Cavalry, is penalized against other mounted unit, well, I have no idea, other than a Dev imposed "balance."
As to helicopter gunships originally being designed primarily as anti-armor, they were not. See my reply to Simkill, their anti-armor capability only came about once great strides were made in ATGMs. The early SS-10s and SS-11s performed very poorly when fitted to helicopters. Only when the BGM-71 TOW arrived did the helicopter gunship finally have true Anti-tank capability.
I thought helicopter's were referred to as part of the modern day Calvary in the military. Like in the movie "we were soldiers".
Yes, helicopters make up part of the modern day "cavalry" However, rotary-wing aviation forms only one brigade of 5 in the current 1st Cavalry Division.
Last edited by Takao; 10-13-2010 at 11:07 AM.
From the Wiki page on Air Assault: "One specific type of air assault unit is the US Army air cavalry. It differs from regular air assault units only in fulfilling a traditional cavalry reconnaissance and short raids role."
Originally Posted by Davetopia
So yeah, that role fits what horse cavalry used to do, but air assault also includes other missions on the modern battlefield like taking out tanks.
@Takao: I think the main argument for the gunship as tank killer, is that you get them by completing the rocketry tech in the game, which also unlocks modern (M270) rocket artillery. So we're clearly talking about a modern gunship like an Apache with Hellfires and a .30 chaingun, capable of taking out tanks and other mechanized units.
Not really, Hellfire A's are laser guided, thus the gunship would fall under "lasers", not "rockets". The later Hellfires are millimeter-band radar guided, most likely would fall under the "Computers" tech. One of the primary weapon systems of the early gunships was the unguided 2.75inch FFAR(Folding Fin Aerial Rocket), not a very capable AT weapon.
Also, given the very flexible weapons loadout for the Cobra, Apache, Hind, etc. they all are very potent against any target, not just tanks.
P.S. It would be nice if the Hind could actually carry troops as in RL.
Still the Devs are Gods, and what the say goes.