Nukes - Page 2

manofthehour · May 28, 2001, 17:20

Well I can almost garentue that the Nukes will be in the game. I hope they include something where if you have a lot of Nukes, like the United States, people are very scared of you.

Dauphin · May 28, 2001, 17:40

Quote:

Also, you would need to build a nuclear silo to hold the nuclear warhead in. Maybe you could be a nuclear silo outside your cities, but in your borders!!! (Kinda of like an Area 51)

I actually visited one of the silo sites near Tucson, Arizona. It looked so much like a Star Trek set from the 60s it was uncanny!.

Silos shouldn't be requisite, after all there are bombers and submarines that can launch them (as you yourself said).

Kevin Ar18 · May 28, 2001, 17:52

Check out this thread:
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...&threadid=4842

I've outlined there all the details on ideas for a true Cold War feel to using nuclear weapons.

meriadoc · May 28, 2001, 17:58

Nukes have definitely got to be in the game. Not only is it a Civ tradition, but nuclear weapons are a really big factor in world affairs today.
I agree that in order to build a nuke you need access to a special resource like plutonium or uranium, and some kind of wonder like the Manhattan Project should have been built. But, like Big Crunch said, silos shouldn't be required. After all, subs and bombers can carry nukes and I myself would keep the missiles on a sub - they're much harder to find there.
However, what I really want to see is some kind of auto-launch feature like in CTP2. I should be able to set a target for each of my weapons so that if someone nukes me then all of my weapons fire. After all, the MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) that was present between the USA and the USSR for the last fifty years or so was very important. Finally. I don't think that there should be any kind of wonder like the "Nanite Defuser" from CTP. What's the point of a well implemented MAD feature if you don't ever have a chance of using it? So, please Firaxis, don't leave this feature out (and try and do a better job on it than Activision).

java4me · May 28, 2001, 18:32

I agree with meriadic!!!

There shouldn't be a nanite defuser wonder, just because it is more fun to have nukes in the game, and if you have nukes than you are a world power!!!

java4me · May 28, 2001, 18:33

I agree with meriadoc!!

There shouldn't be a nanite defuser wonder, just because it is more fun to have nukes in the game, and if you have nukes than you are a world power!!!

java4me · May 28, 2001, 18:34

Wow!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry, double POST!!!!!!!!!!!11

manofthehour · May 28, 2001, 19:04

I hope they make Nukes a much more than just the ultimate weapon in CIV3 because in real life they effect people much more than just when the are used.

manofthehour · May 28, 2001, 19:09

Instead of a wonder you could have the option to try and stop there Nukes another way. If you thought someone had just too many nukes you could have all the civs refuse to trade uraimum with them. Also there could be a speacal unit that finds out where nukes are and can destroy them without attacking them.

korn469 · May 29, 2001, 02:20

there is not any known device that can stop a nuclear missle once launched from hitting it's target, not SDI, not a nanite defuser, nothing at all

the only thing that has prevented a nuclear war so far has been careful calculation of the outcome of a nuclear war, which would mean both sides would suffer tremendously and gain nothing!

the reason they signed the ABM treaty to begin with is not because it would be a true deterrant to nuclear destruction but because it be like an imaginary secruity blanket...this false sence of safety would finally lead to a miscalculation that could result in the deaths of millions of people

if SDI is even in the game it should be very expsensive and should work only somewhere between 25% to 40% of the time...meaning nuclear deterrance would be the primary method of staying alive

the reason Iraq, Iran, North Korea, and other states want nuclear tipped ICBMs is not because they think they could actually completely destroy the USA in an overwhelming nuclear strike, but because they can deter the US from using force inside their sphere of influence...really who in their right mind would risk the millions of people (and billions of dollars) in New York city on defending breakaway kurdish rebels in Iraq just because the the pentagon promises that the US national missle defense system is 90% effective in stopping simulated ballistic missles

the answer is NOBODY!

Iraq would have a free hand to do whatever they wanted because the US couldn't intervene

the AI needs to understand this in Civ3 and diplomatic options need to reflect some of these realities

Alex 14 · May 29, 2001, 02:25

Quote:

Originally posted by manofthehour
Also there could be a speacal unit that finds out where nukes are and can destroy them without attacking them.

That should be a bonus fuction for spies, they should be able to investigate a city, and sabatage nukes, however it whould be bad if you could find out who is holding nukes too easily. Also how about a spy investigating a city and setting off a nuke.

Ghost:Rosenkrantz · May 30, 2001, 14:17

Quote:

Originally posted by manofthehour
Also there could be a special unit that finds out where nukes are and can destroy them without attacking them.

Like UN-inpectors, a new spe_CIA_l unit ? -GOOD!

Which reminds me about the U.S. Cruisers who docked in my home town Bergen, during the cold war.
The NATO-member Norway got laws against nukes on norwegian soil, but on the water its unclear, and nobody were allowed onboard.

- The gangplank guard was nice to me though, a little kid back then, and when I asked him about nukes he then responded "They don't tell us!"

So the American captain of the ship wouldn't let anyone know if they had nukes or not...
The patriotic Bergenese civilians then started to worry, at the same time the USSR-targeting satellite probably started to seek for my defensless little town!
Well the US govt. probably knew, the Norwegian govt. knew nothing at all, and also did nothing at all, but to nod and fear their mighty ally! Then the hippocratic politicians say we are a proud and free nation, when they are nothing but cowardous marionettes!

Whats this gotta do with CIV3 ?
Well it happens in CIV2 as well when the weaker civs starts to fear the nuclear powers . And start to seek alliances, or submits to their foes, etc.
But what would be cool in CIV3, is when the UN could yield rules for all civs, i.e. production of a weapon-inspector unit . Not only for the one civ who builds the UN-wonder! cause UN is not like a Great Wall or something, protecting that particular Empire .
I really hope they realize that in Firaxis, and make UN a blessing to mankind!

-G:R-

java4me · May 31, 2001, 00:09

Nukes are a dynamic part of the game!!!

Just because i like blowing things up!!!

Lung · May 31, 2001, 00:25

Quote:

Originally posted by UberKruX
gah.

mutual destruction again.

i just saw Pearl Harbor, great movie for those who haven't.

in it a Japanese officer is talking to a general (shogun) and says:

"The American fleet has been utterly crippled, congratulations general, you are truly a brilliant man"

to which the general replies:

"A brilliant man would have found a way not to fight a war"

VOMIT!!

Who the hell wrote that script??! I wonder how many Japanese generals uttered those words in WWII? Then again, what WWII general would??

Well, i guess it's nice to see the Yanks rewriting history to make someone else look good for a change