[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Bombers/Fighters no longer obsolete (PR#1628)

[Gregory Berkolaiko <Gregory.Berkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

First of all, I think that adding defence and attack per shield ratios 
together is misleading.  You use bomber to attack and only to attack, do 
you really care about its precise defence value?

Also, why do you think that the attack per shield ratio has to increase?  
Modern warfare certainly isn't becoming cheaper...

Now, specific units:

I think the planes are quite powerful against land units as they 
are.  A Bomber has very good chances of killing a mech inf in a 
SAM-defended city, not terribly realistic IMO.  But stealth bomber is too 
poor when compared to just bomber.  Increaing firepower 2->3 is the same 
as increasing attack 14->21, too much.  I think we should make them 
cheaper instead.  160->140 they'd become same value for money as bombers 
(wrt attack) plus a bonus of better defence and longer range.

However planes against sea units are no good.  I think a "ShipBuster" flag 
for all bombers increasing attack two-fold is going to be just fine.  And 
AEGIS will still be inpenetrable for air units, which is good.

Subs are too slow, otherwise 2 subs can easily take out Battleship which 
is rather fair, taking into account their costs.  So speed 3->4 should do 
fine.

Their natural enemy is Destroyer which is really pathetic value for money.  
Firpower 1->2 should make it better, although still poorer fighter than 
any other war ship.  That will be compensated by the speed though.

This is the closest to Scissors, Paper, Rock I can think of right now.

G.

On Fri, 28 Jun 2002, Raahul Kumar wrote:

> >             Destroyer:  200 +  200 =  400
> >               Cruiser:  450 +  450 =  900
> >         AEGIS Cruiser:  480 +  480 =  960
> >            Battleship:  600 +  600 = 1200
> >             Submarine: 1000 +  200 = 1200
> > 
> > Battleship and Submarine are equal priced. It may be possible to
> > change the attack of Submarines from 10 to 14 and the cost from 60 to
> > 80.
> 
> They shouldn't be equal. I want submarines to have an advantage destroying
> battleships. This addresses the subs never get built problem. And to stop
> subs from destroying every other naval unit, there should be one naval unit
> that can beat subs easily.
> 
> Basically, an ratio of 1400 would be better. Subs can only attack naval units.
> So make them very powerful against all naval units except their one arch 
> enemy,
> the destroyer.