Missile Silo, Naval Shipyard and Air Base

Dida · July 19, 2001, 17:08

It's very unrealist that a nuclear missile can be stored in any city, and even fly from city to city on their own. Also, it's stupid that tiny size-1 coastal city is capable of building nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. What's even more ridiculous is that a city without even a air field is able to build jet fighter, and refuel B-2 bombers.
Missile Silo should be required to build missiles, and those missile, when built, will appear in the silo, instead of the city where it was built. The player must build his large warship is a naval shipyard. Shipyards are required to repair a damaged ship.
There should be an engineer type unit, which can build these structures. So you can build naval shipyard and air base around the world. This is what a blue-water navy needs.

Recurve · July 19, 2001, 17:31

Quote:

Originally posted by Dida
Shipyards are required to repair a damaged ship.

Then what would be the function of the exisiting Port Facility?

I totally agree with you about nukes being launched from cities (how daft is that)?!?

I'm not so sure about silos actually producing the weapons though, it would be better if you just stored and launched them from there.

Dida · July 19, 2001, 17:37

no, you do not produce missile in a silo. you build them in city, and then put them in the silo. (better have the game do it automatically). (you can name the nuclear silo, let say "JFK Missile Silo", and when choose to build the Nuke, the game will ask you which silo the missile should be sent to)

What port facility are included in the game?

Dida · July 19, 2001, 17:39

a mobile missile launching vehicle is nice too.

death_head · July 19, 2001, 17:48

That would be cool, especially if the silos were virtually indestructible, like they are right now...

Grumbold · July 19, 2001, 17:52

Planes are not built at airfields. They are built in factories. Ditto ship parts (all but the final assembly) and missiles. I'm sure they could insist you deploy the completed units only at the relevant bases but it is a layer of complexity they have not chosen to add up to this point. Armies should also live in barracks out of town, not in the centre of modern cities.

We have been talking a lot lately about how to implement nuclear MAD scenarios. Having all these military bases would certainly encourage them to be targetted instead of cities. I'm not sure we really gain a lot by having specialist bases for non-nuclear units. Certainly in pre-modern eras it was possible for ships to anchor in any sheltered cove and units to live within the city walls, so these restrictions would have to phase in over time.

KrazyHorse · July 19, 2001, 17:53

Drop a nuclear missile on a silo and then tell me how indestructible it is. They're only hardened against near misses; a 1-Megaton bomb detonating within 300 meters will still ruin your day.

Dida · July 19, 2001, 17:55

best way to destroy a missile silo is by using nuclear missile itself.

death_head · July 19, 2001, 18:09

Most countries are big enough that there is no way that all the silos could suffer near hits without infiltration, in which case it is too late...

KrazyHorse · July 19, 2001, 18:19

Really? What about satellites? You said they were "virtually indestructible", not that they would be hard to find.

July 19, 2001, 22:42

Quote:

Originally posted by KrazyHorse

Drop a nuclear missile on a silo and then tell me how indestructible it is. They're only hardened against near misses; a 1-Megaton bomb detonating within 300 meters will still ruin your day.

This kind of what happen in a nuclear blast. What we have is control of uncontrolled mass chain reaction (It's like pulling all of the Control Rods out of a Reactor at once, a masses chain reaction).
All of the oxygen in the area is suck it to the center of the mass, and then is release with this intense heat, (It is hotter then the Sun) and start to move outward at around 600 to 700 hundred miles per hour. So everything in a radius of two to three miles (size of Bomb will expand area) of ground center/zero is melted and blow away. There is no big hole in the ground. After the heat reaches it limit (distance) the moving air will start to cool but is still there and will continual to blow anything down until it reaches it limits. So yes, you have hit a silo very close to destroy or put it out of commission. They can build a fake silo.
A one megaton bomb will destroy and area between 5 to 7 miles radius from ground zero. Outside of that area will be left up the Radioactive material to destroy by radiation exposure (People). If you can get to an area that is less than 1 MR P/H you will be OK.
Each and every one who lives on Planet Earth receives about 3 to 5 MR each year. A MR is millionth of a Rancon/Rad.
Now if you want to see a big hole in the ground than use a regular bomb. A cell of B-52 (3 Planes) will destroy everything in a area 1/2 miles wide and 3 miles long. There will a hole every few feet, 15 ft deep and 30 ft across with 750 lbs bombs. That is why the Iraqis were willing to surrender to the NBC camera crew.

Alex 14 · July 20, 2001, 04:03

Quote:

It's very unrealist that a nuclear missile can be stored in any city, and even fly from city to city on their own. Also, it's stupid that tiny size-1 coastal city is capable of building nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. What's even more ridiculous is that a city without even a air field is able to build jet fighter, and refuel B-2 bombers.

This would be good, but i think its too late to be put into Civ 3, maybee in Civ 4.

Adm.Naismith · July 20, 2001, 04:17

Putting simple, it's not difficult to require that an airfield (early airport) will be built inside a city before it can build airplane.

Note: inside a city in game sense; as in real life the airfield was probably built quite near the houses, but in plain open area.

As for barracks, an airfield should be quite easy to build for first generation fighters/bombers.
Advanced fighters/bombers should require an advanced airport.

As in another post about city walls, I suggest you don't have early barracks/airfields suddenly disappear, because they can still work well with old units. You simply replace them building a new barrack/airport. New buildings will be "backward compatible"

Grumbold · July 20, 2001, 07:08

You build mechanical unit components in your industrial heartland, not in the town situated closest to the airbase/silo/port that it will be stationed at after assembly. If Civ was to have MOO style unit redirection then it would be possible to achieve this but it still seems to be more nit-picking than injecting anything useful into the game. Now if we started saying a jet fighter could not fly offensive missions from a city with no airfield or a nuke launch then it makes more sense. Ports are already needed for fast ship repair.