Missle Defense: a replacment for SDI that may actually work

Kevin Ar18 · July 15, 2001, 13:31

First off, you may want to check out this article on the Missile Defense System:
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/US/Mis...efense_System/

Civ 2 used SDI as a defense against nuclear missiles. However, it seems that SDI hasn't gone very well in real life. In addition it seems that Civ3 will be adding the MAD system to nuclear warheads to simulate real life even more.

So how about we go with a defense system that may just really work?
How about having a Missile Defense system in Civ3?

Now that we know Civ3 will have MAD, I think a defense system would be nice after a bit of research. And this missle defense could be an option.

Dugrik · July 15, 2001, 14:03

MAD, Mutual Assured Destruction, was/is not a technological component of nuclear missiles, but rather a political philosophy that stated if one side launched a nuclear attack, the other side would respond in kind or greater. Thus, political security was maintained by each side having lots and lots of missiles. One aspect of this philosophy was the Anti-ballistic missile treaty, which forbade ABM systems because these would upset the premise of MAD.

tniem · July 15, 2001, 15:36

Kevin,

Another nuke thread that is active is discussing much of what you are hinting at including units that would act as a defense to a nuke. Give it a look.

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=21989

Col Bigspear · July 15, 2001, 15:50

Did you all see the news about the test of SDI or anti-missle missle? and how Russia 'n' China are getting B-I-T-C-H-Y (sorry but it won't allow it together). I wonder if Bush is Nostradamus's(?) 3rd Anarchist.

The end of the world is upon us

OneFootInTheGrave · July 15, 2001, 16:05

Maybe you could ahve a small woncer which each civ should build to protect itself and it's allies. It could be called Star Wars

Once you built it it would protect you from nuclear attack, but if your enemy is behind, he is doomed (if you want to risk all the pollution and eventual consequences).

It could be a significant factor in the end game.

Sabre2th · July 15, 2001, 16:45

Quote:

Originally posted by OneFootInTheGrave
Maybe you could ahve a small woncer which each civ should build to protect itself and it's allies. It could be called Star Wars

Why Star Wars???

Col Bigspear · July 15, 2001, 17:45

Star Wars is the nick-name given to SDI, it uses satellites hence Star Wars !

JellyDonut · July 15, 2001, 17:46

Quote:

Originally posted by Sabre2th

Why Star Wars???

Don't you watch the news? That's Bush's missile defence system's nickname.

ancient · July 15, 2001, 19:28

"Thanks to bush (yes our idiot president) there should be a missile defence being a wonder, it should have a 20% chance of stopping all missile attacks in your civilizations territory and a 10% chance of stopping all missile attacks in your ally's territory. "-me

the problem with a missile sheild is that the military has stated that it doesnt work... so make it very minor chance and should be able to be combined (in a city area with a sdi defense that has about 50-70% chance of working..

so combined a missile shield with a sdi would give you a 70-90% chance of blocking..

Grumbold · July 15, 2001, 19:36

Errm, since the previous attempt at SDI was a total failure (unless you were a major defence contractor or shareholder) shouldn't that make the combined chance 20% ?

ancient · July 15, 2001, 19:39

ermm sdi defense is in the game because it balances not because its realistic..

Grumbold · July 15, 2001, 20:27

SDI was in the last game and it was 100% effective. I thought we were now talking about possible alternatives for Civ 3? I like the idea of anti-missiles (see the big thread on nukes) but would be against the proposal of combining them with city-SDI since the Star Wars idea has now been discredited and it would be adding complexity to have two separate systems.

My last post was also intended to be humerous but perhaps I should have used more smilies to be sure of making that clear

smellymummy · July 15, 2001, 20:48

Quote:

Originally posted by ancient
"Thanks to bush (yes our idiot president) there should be a missile defence being a wonder, it should have a 20% chance of stopping all missile attacks in your civilizations territory and a 10% chance of stopping all missile attacks in your ally's territory. "-me

i guess you would prefer to have good ol albert and his cabinet of crooks?

geez this is about sdi not bashing or name calling our president.

BTW, where is it confirmed by Firaxis that there is going to be a MAD thing going on?...

ancient · July 15, 2001, 22:29

sure, i would have voted for al anyways, (if i wasnt 15) which is kind of odd because i origionally supported bush, then changed my mind to support nader, then finally stayed on gore..

and i was just confirming that it was current bush, not old bush...

the point of the way i had them configured, is because it would just work to balance nuclear warfare

SDI's would have to be built in each city you want to protect and would cost about the same amount as a small wonder, they would 50%-70% affective and protect a 5 square radius...

When the wonder missile sheild would be only 20% affective but protect all of your land and 10% to you allys..

this way, it would be impossible to totally stop nukes, but it wouldnt be impossible to use them either, when combined with much stronger, more expensive nukes it would gtreatly add to nuclear warfare

also there are tactical nukes which wouldnt be effected by the sdi's..

Nemo · July 16, 2001, 00:20

Quote:

Now that we know Civ3 will have MAD

we do? where is this...i have been wanting, yearning, for MAD confirmation from firaxis.
please say what article this was found in.

Quote:

Don't you watch the news? That's Bush's missile defence system's nickname.

actually the term&concept "star war's" has been around for decades due to the cold war. It goes back AT LEAST to the early Regan era.

Kevin Ar18 · July 16, 2001, 00:46

Quote:

Originally posted by Nemo

we do? where is this...i have been wanting, yearning, for MAD confirmation from firaxis.
please say what article this was found in.

actually the term&concept "star war's" has been around for decades due to the cold war. It goes back AT LEAST to the early Regan era.

Yeah, they didn't flat out say it but they sure hinted at it so that it's either MAD or something that'll be improved over the current nuclear model. Whatever it is, they said nuclear missiles will play a greater role in the game or whatnot (there was a bit more to it, but I don't remember exactly). I can only assume it's MAD, what else could it be?

Some ideas
Anyways, I was thinking, you could build a certain number of missiles (for this defense system) in your cities and then for each of these missles you have, they have a pretty good chance of hitting an ICBM in route.

In order to have an effective system you would of course have to put large numbers in your Civ cities (or silos?). Missiles in one city would not just defend that city. Since the missles go into space to intercept, then they could protect a wide area of your Civ. In addition there would have to be some kind of detection system (radar or in space). For complexity reasons I suspect the detection system can be left out. But then again the idea of radar does sound kind of interesting for Civ3, but that's another thread and another discussion.

P.S. Some of the earlier missile defenses blew up infront of the path of the ICBM - this method didn't work too well. The missile defense that I'm speaking of as listed in this article uses a different method where the rocket just flies smack into the ICBM causing it to blow up.

Urban Ranger · July 16, 2001, 06:23

Since both SDI and MD are fictitious, why change from one to another and get embroiled in needless debates at the same time?

I say nay.