Space-based SDI

Kyle · June 9, 2000, 19:14

This would be a huge wonder. Something along the line of 1000-2000 shields to produce. However, the task could be shared between cities (like the spaceship).

By deploying it, you essentially renounce your right to use nuclear weapons, thus keeping a good play balance.

You also have a few options of using it. Use it only to protect yourself, other individual nations, or the entire planet.

Keeping all nuclear attacks from happening would be beneficial to you, to stop global warming.

What would you prefer, something like that or the city based SDI?

June 9, 2000, 22:37

Yah, but I would have a flaw to it. Like only can prevent 3 nukes per turn. B/C a real SDI wouldn't be able to stop all nuclear war, it's not a giant shield. Or a 90% accuracy rating? (1 in 10 fails) Yes...no...?

------------------
~~~I am who I am, who I am - but who am I?~~~
"Oh, they have the Internet on computers now!"

N_A · June 9, 2000, 22:43

More like stop a nuclear winter !

Not to mention the fallout residue. Unless we're talking fusion bombs... but even with fusion bombs, we still need a fission bomb (radioactive) to set it off.

Kyle · June 10, 2000, 00:12

quote:

Originally posted by OrangeSfwr on 06-09-2000 10:37 PM
Yah, but I would have a flaw to it. Like only can prevent 3 nukes per turn. B/C a real SDI wouldn't be able to stop all nuclear war, it's not a giant shield. Or a 90% accuracy rating? (1 in 10 fails) Yes...no...?

Yes, as it would add realism and maintain play balance.

Par4 · June 10, 2000, 00:24

Realism, a real SDI(remember SDI is Space Defense Initiative) like the one Bush would like and Reagan wanted could stop over 1000 missiles, pin point accuracy isn't hard for lasers and NORAD but it is for interceptor missiles. The US airforce is testing a plane based NDS system that uses 747 with lasers, can shoot down 70 ICBMs over 3000 miles away with I think an expected 99% accuracy, it hasn't been tested yet but it will work. But for gameplay I guess 3 is enough.

------------------
I use this email
(stupid cant use hotmail)
gamma_par4@hotmail.com
Don't ask for golf tips
Your game will get worse
HappyLand

UltraSonix · June 10, 2000, 05:45

I reckon that SDI is good, but it should be like in Civ2 - you have to build (an expensive) one in every city. I think having a wonder, even an expensive one, would unbalance the game too much - even with the miss percentage built in.

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards...

June 10, 2000, 16:05

Personally, I think they should both be in. Whoever builds the wonder surrenders their nuclear capability as the price of having such a cool toy (no nuking someone else simply because you know you can't be touched). Everyone else has the option of building normal SDI improvements in their cities (just in case they think the wonder builder might not shoot down missiles aimed at them).

Edit:
Another idea is that you could have the wonder cost so much in yearly maintainence per city that has to be covered. Everytime you empire grows, it costs you a little more a year to protect it from nuclear harm.
[This message has been edited by Spekter@Home (edited June 10, 2000).]

Par4 · June 10, 2000, 22:17

Spekter, I like the maintence. Something I thought up was it should only stop nukes launched at you, or maybe allies(if there cities are covered raising maintence costs). If 2 enemy nations attack each other with nukes you will only stop them if they could cause global warming or something and you should be prompted by a screen or something that the people are worried. This should cost a large amount of money but be worth it to save your coast cities and population from death.

------------------
I use this email
(stupid cant use hotmail)
gamma_par4@hotmail.com
Don't ask for golf tips
Your game will get worse
HappyLand

June 10, 2000, 23:53

Spekter - I don't agree with what you said about not being able to nuke others if you build the SDI WoW. I think the option should definitely be there. It's up to the player (or AI) to decide if they want to be democratic about it or if they want to nuke the s*** out of the world. After all, it's possible that the leader could go insane and decide to nuke everyone. Why take the option away?

------------------
~~~I am who I am, who I am - but who am I?~~~
"Oh, they have the Internet on computers now!"