Some suggestions on nukes in Civ4

1. Remove the "global warming" effect. Instead, make it spontaneous after the start of the modern times.
2. There must be an A-Bomb Unit that can bring total destruction to a tile. For cities with more than 5 population, 1 population must remain; if lower than 5, it is automatically destroyed.
3. After completing the Fusion Tech, you get a Hydrogen Bomb. It can destroy a 3x3 tile, just like an ICBM.
4. Once a civ completes rocketry, it will get three units: ICBM, tactical nuke, and SLBM. SLBM can only be lauched on a submarine and has a fixed range of 6x6 tiles(diamond-shaped).
5. When a unit crosses a fallout, a percentage of its health is reduced each turn. The longewr
6. Add a "Nuclear Test:nuke:" command to a bomb, and adds +20 beakers to a tech that is being researched.

Nuclear Test:nuke:

1. In order to start a series of nuclear test, you must first select a 4x4 or 6x6 part of land that can be either on land or on sea. :nuke:
2. By conducting a nuclear test, 20 beakers are automatically added.:nuke:
3. In each improvement built on the ground zero, it adds 1 beaker to the tech being researched.:nuke:
4. But for every nuclear test, the fallout on the ground zero becomes more powerful, and it is carried bu the wind on unpredictable ways.:nuke:
5. Last, but not the least, the site can be closed if there is too much radioactivity, or can be cleaned by workers.:nuke:

Please reply to this post if you can suggest more.

i completely agree that the "global warming" effect should be gotten rid of, cause global warming had been going on even before nukes.

i completely agree that the "global warming" effect should be gotten rid of, cause global warming had been going on even before nukes.

Yep, but put in a nuclear winter effect instead.

instead of the Manhattan Project being a world wonder, it should be national. and when you do nuclear testing it adds to production of the project.

instead of the Manhattan Project being a world wonder, it should be national.

Yet another thing Civ III got right.

I thought it was a world wonder in civ III too. I really don't understand the Manhattan Project in Civ, I mean why does it give EVERYONE access to the Nuke, the whole point is that its a race, was it too overpowering?

I thought it was a world wonder in civ III too. I really don't understand the Manhattan Project in Civ, I mean why does it give EVERYONE access to the Nuke, the whole point is that its a race, was it too overpowering?

but we must refer to history. when the united states completed the manhattan project, only the U.S. had a nuclear weapon. The Soviet Union had to develop its own nuclear weapon.

Yes yes that is what I am saying, exactly, the Germans were working on a design too during the Second World war, nearly developed a successful weapon I believe, imagine if they had.

...

Wait were you being sarcastic?

Yes yes that is what I am saying, exactly, the Germans were working on a design too during the Second World war, nearly developed a successful weapon I believe, imagine if they had.

...

Wait were you being sarcastic?

OK, here's a notion; you can build the Manhattan Project, or you can steal the ability to build nukes from someone who has via espionage, or trade for it, or pass it through alliances if some of the more sophisticated alliance options mentioned in other threads recently are implemented; but you can't get it by research alone.

What about national wonders? Or even a resource style tech, so you could either develop your own or get it off someone else, either by stealing it or trading, or sharing. Perhaps a team project, requiring test detonations that can either be done in a specially constructed bunker, this is a requirement once some kind of ban is imposed. So you build a missile, an enrichment facility and then a warhead, then test the weapon either on a remote island (Bikini) or in a Nuclear test facility.

OK, here's a notion; you can build the Manhattan Project, or you can steal the ability to build nukes from someone who has via espionage, or trade for it, or pass it through alliances if some of the more sophisticated alliance options mentioned in other threads recently are implemented; but you can't get it by research alone.

i dont think anyone would trade how to make a nuke, no matter wat kind of friendship they had. and nukes should also be used in negotiation. such as this simulated conversation.

Leader 1 "Give me your coal."

Leader 2 "Never"

Leader 1 "Give me your coal or else"

Leader 2 "Never"

Leader 1 Give me your coal or I will launch a nuclear bomb on to your soil"

Leader 2 "Ok, you can have my coal"

Aye but I think Nukes should have dire diplomatic consequences so using one for that situation would probably end up with everyone hating the aggressor, "-10 You nuked someone over COAL!"

Yep, but put in a nuclear winter effect instead.

This would only happen after a large nuclear exchange, wherein fallout from all nukes will hit ALL civilizations and famine and high mortality rate and if your civ did not survive, game over.

What about national wonders? Or even a resource style tech, so you could either develop your own or get it off someone else, either by stealing it or trading, or sharing. Perhaps a team project, requiring test detonations that can either be done in a specially constructed bunker, this is a requirement once some kind of ban is imposed. So you build a missile, an enrichment facility and then a warhead, then test the weapon either on a remote island (Bikini) or in a Nuclear test facility.

Additional points:

When a test is conducted, it will add survial potential to a bomb shelter, improvement, or to the military units being produced. Please read the first post.

This would only happen after a large nuclear exchange, wherein fallout from all nukes will hit ALL civilizations and famine and high mortality rate and if your civ did not survive, game over.


I was thinking more, each nuclear explosion contributes to a build-up towards a nuclear winter, in the same way as each regular pollution event contributes to build-up toward a global warming event.

I agree that it must be a national wonder. Either that you build it to deter enemy civs, or receive the attack. Noit only that, spies can also be sent to steal data; the rival does not lose it, but it is added to your effort.

When a test is conducted, it will add survial potential to a bomb shelter, improvement, or to the military units being produced

I think that there should be a promotion defending one self against a nuclear bomb. Such as the anti bio warfare promotion avaliable in the Next War mod.

Maybe a city smaller than with a pop of 5 or lower is insta destroyed. Hydrogen bombs would have a wider area of effect.
Maybe the UN should be changed as well. More resolutions for nukes would be appreciated. You can
Ban nuclear research
Ban nuclear weapon production for nuclear capable nations*
No nuclear proliferation**
Limit nuclear production***
Ban nuclear testing****
etc

Besides, nukes cause winter, not warming. Warming should start after coal and oil is discovered or something. Nukes should also be a diplomatic tool as well. Declare Peace with Civ A or risk being nuke. Nukes should be deterrents.

*Any nation that can build nukes AFTER the resoulution is passed isn't included
**I wish I could sell nukes and stuff, lol. Selling it to the weak Pacal to aid him against Isabella.
***Not ban nukes, but limit the number a nation can have.
****Of course, like *, nations that gain nukes AFTER this is pass aren't included.

Ban nuclear research
Ban nuclear weapon production for nuclear capable nations*
No nuclear proliferation**
Limit nuclear production***
Ban nuclear testing****

However; any civ must be capable of violating it; hence, will recieve negative diplomacy. And yes, any civ who have the nuke after it was signed is still part of the treaty.

Nice idea, but negative diplomacy to who? If everyone, then there would be no real incentive to do anything.

Maybe there could be Civic options too, pro nuke or anti nuke.

The person who breaks the treaty receives diplomatic "damage" from the civs that support the treaty, ie those that voted for it.

I think maybe it shouldn't be possible to ban nukes, bioweapons and general weapons of mass destruction until after one has been used, or at least tested, think of it that the world doesn't know how deadly they are until they are used.

Chem, bio, and radio weapons could balance things out. Until they're used as an attack (like Hiroshima and Nagasaki) should nations began to think about banning them.

It would be even better if nukes and company worked as deterrents in game, that way, banning them would become a problem.

Deterrent. Yes, I agree to that.

Thanks, I just get so annoyed when I have 50 or so nukes and the 3rd world AI nation declares on me and the best weapon he has is a single prized ICBM at best (which he uses in a couple of turns.)

Chem, bio, and radio weapons could balance things out

Also EMP bombs would balance the game out.

Also EMP bombs would balance the game out.

The last thing the game balance of Civ needs is more military options.

The last thing the game balance of Civ needs is more military options.

but more military options means more ways of killings your enemies and CONQUERING THE WORLD!!!!!! HAHAHAHA!!!! :lol: :lol:

Unless of course the military options could be used diplomatically.

Don't attack me or else I'll EMP your cities, rendering it without electric objects=pwned

What is EMP bombs, anyway

Basically, it's a bomb with some wires around it that when it blows up (say in the sky) it perma disables electronic devices. I think it fries batteries too. Not a huge explosion, but it sends out an electromagnetic wave (EMP Wave) which does the real damage.

Okay. I see, nukes are also used to do EMPs.

Yes, except that we don't really use nukes for the EMP effect. Almost eliminates the purpose of the EMP since the fireball and shockwave would have destroyed the city first.

What is EMP bombs, anyway

EMP stands for electromagnetic pulse. An EMP bomb does not blow up, but when set off it disables all electronic objects within range.

Yes, except that we don't really use nukes for the EMP effect. Almost eliminates the purpose of the EMP since the fireball and shockwave would have destroyed the city first.

No, nukes are detonated in the ionosphere to cut communications. The higher, the larger area will be affected. Yes, I know EMP means ElectroMagnetic Pulse.

A pinch or EMP bomb device should only be added as a distant future tech, not something on a par with nuclear weapons, seeing as scientists current think a large scale blackout pinch is impossible, but scientists have been wrong before so I am willing to admit something might be possible. But seeing as Civilisation isn't known for its imaginative distant future techs I don't think it should be included.

I see that we are getting off topic. What "nuke features" do you wanted to add?

I see that we are getting off topic. What "nuke features" do you wanted to add?


Hi ,

:hmm: radiation sickness and events like cancer in this city , cause unhappy people , minus 5 GPT for 25 turns in this city due to increased healthcare , etc , ...

Have a nice day :)

I like the idea of making the Manhattan Project a national wonder. I would like to see the ability to scrub the fallout taken away. Make an ICBM destroy any city it hits and all surrounding tiles (4x4, 6x6 or 8x8 depending on size of nuke) become irradiated and permanently unworkable.

Tactical nukes on cities should reduce the population, destroy all city defenses and damage units as well as adding a permanent amount of sickness to the city. Tactical nukes used on tile improvements or land tiles with military units should cause that tile to become irradiated and permanently unworkable.

This will make having nukes a tactical deterrent, more like the way it is in real life since using a nuke will have permanent side effects. You wouldn't be able to nuke your enemy and move in to claim the territory anymore since it would be useless. You would also be less likely to use a nuke on another civ with nukes knowing they will probably retaliate.

The way it is now, nukes really have no side effects (except global warming). You can nuke your enemy all you want, move in and take over the cities, scrub the fallout and everything is back to normal in a few turns.

I like the idea of making the Manhattan Project a national wonder. I would like to see the ability to scrub the fallout taken away. Make an ICBM destroy any city it hits and all surrounding tiles (4x4, 6x6 or 8x8 depending on size of nuke) become irradiated and permanently unworkable.

Tactical nukes on cities should reduce the population, destroy all city defenses and damage units as well as adding a permanent amount of sickness to the city. Tactical nukes used on tile improvements or land tiles with military units should cause that tile to become irradiated and permanently unworkable.

This will make having nukes a tactical deterrent, more like the way it is in real life since using a nuke will have permanent side effects. You wouldn't be able to nuke your enemy and move in to claim the territory anymore since it would be useless. You would also be less likely to use a nuke on another civ with nukes knowing they will probably retaliate.

The way it is now, nukes really have no side effects (except global warming). You can nuke your enemy all you want, move in and take over the cities, scrub the fallout and everything is back to normal in a few turns.


I'm confused. You call for tiles to be become irradiated and permanently unworkable yet I think that scrubbing would clean up the damage. Also I don't think a nuke would completely destroy a city. If you have watched 24 season 6. You will see how a suitcase nuke was set off in the city. If a city is to be destroyed then if should depend on the size.

Spies need suitcase nukes. They are a real life thing so they should be carried by spies.

And I don't think that nukes can cause different sizes of damage. If they can then then they need to kinds. Hydrogen and Atomic. There would be four kinds. Hydrogen ICBMs and Hydrogen Tacticals. Atomic ICBMs and Atomic Tacticals. The Hydrogens would require more :hammers: but would cause more destruction.


:nuke: Have a Nuclear Day :nuke:
Buffalo6542

I'm confused. You call for tiles to be become irradiated and permanently unworkable yet I think that scrubbing would clean up the damage.

That's why I said remove the ability to scrub the fallout. The fallout would be permanent and the tiles unworkable.


Also I don't think a nuke would completely destroy a city. If you have watched 24 season 6. You will see how a suitcase nuke was set off in the city. If a city is to be destroyed then if should depend on the size.

You're referencing a TV show to how a nuke would effect a city? :rolleyes: Nobody knows what a modern nuclear ICBM would do to a city, it may not level it, but it would be uninhabitable afterwards. A tactical nuke or suitcase bomb wouldn't do as much physical damage, but the radioactive contamination would probably cause the city to be evacuated permanently.

There are no real world examples of a nuclear attack on a city, thankfully, and hopefully there never will. The closest thing to compare would be the Chernobyl nuclear disaster. It wasn't an ICBM, tactical nuke or suitcase bomb and there was no explosion to level buildings (except for the steam explosion that blew the reactor building's roof off), but the radioactive contamination (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Chernobyl_radiation_map_1996.svg) caused the evacuation of around 2,000 cities, towns and villages in the Ukraine and Belarus. The cities are still deserted and the land can not be farmed. There are still restrictions on the production, transportation and consumption of food contaminated by Chernobyl fallout, even in places as far away as the UK, Germany, Austria, Italy, Sweden and Finland.

My point is that I think nukes in the game should have permanent side effects, like they would in reality, to make them a last resort weapon. Perhaps when you use an ICBM on a city, some of the population is killed and the rest is distributed to nearby cities as permanent :yuck: (i.e. surviving evacuees), and permanent :yuck: spreads to all cities on the same continent the nuke was used on, in addition to the surrounding tiles being permanently radioactive and unusable. You definitely wouldn't nuke your neighbor knowing some of the fallout might spread throughout your cities.

Perhaps when you deploy a tactical/suitcase nuke in a city, you can choose to target military units, city defenses or buildings, but the side effects would be permanent :yuck: in the city for the radioactive fallout within the city and permanent :yuck: would also spread to nearby cities.


And I don't think that nukes can cause different sizes of damage. If they can then then they need to kinds. Hydrogen and Atomic. There would be four kinds. Hydrogen ICBMs and Hydrogen Tacticals. Atomic ICBMs and Atomic Tacticals. The Hydrogens would require more :hammers: but would cause more destruction.

I was just referring to the different size nukes such as the tactical nuke and ICBM, and since you brought it up a suitcase nuke. I do like your idea of a suitcase nuke as an espionage weapon. It could do the same damage as a tactical nuke, but if the origin of the civ who deployed it is revealed, then there would be huge diplomatic penalties (maybe every civ declaring war on you).

That's why I said remove the ability to scrub the fallout. The fallout would be permanent and the tiles unworkable.

"The way it is now, nukes really have no side effects (except global warming). You can nuke your enemy all you want, move in and take over the cities, scrub the fallout and everything is back to normal in a few turns."

You say that that the ability to scrub should be removed but in this quote from your other post you call for scrubbing fall out. So what is it, Scrub or not Scrub?

You're reading my statement wrong. Read the first five words again. I'm not calling for scrubbing fallout, I'm just saying that the way things are in the game now, you can nuke all you want and scrub the fallout and everything is fine.

Maybe when You build the Manhatten Project it gives you a special Tech that can only be unlocked in this way. That way it can be passed along just like any other tech through stealing/trading.

And their should be a "Do this or War" option in diplomacy. As current it's kinda abstract whether giving in to a demand will mean war or not.

I think there should be some sort of treaty you could sign with different countries that limit or ban the use of nukes, and I guess if you break the treaty everyone gets really mad and probably declares war on you. Also you should gradually be able to build more and more powerful nukes as research continues that would destory cities with higher populations, a standard nuke would destroy all cities under 6 pop., while a more powerful nuke would destroy a city with under 8 pop, that sort of thing. A larger damage radius and increased fallout would also result.

And I guess maybe whoever has the currently most powerful nuke or nuclear stockpile would definitely be on the minds of other civs, unless a treaty has been signed delcaring you won't use them.

Just my ideas.

I think there should be some sort of treaty you could sign with different countries that limit or ban the use of nukes, and I guess if you break the treaty everyone gets really mad and probably declares war on you.


Salt I (Strategic Arms Limit Talks) Salt II

Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF),

Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT)

Partial Test Ban Treaty (PTBT)

Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT or NNPT)

Strategic Offensive Reductions (SORT)

Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM Treaty or ABMT)

START (for Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty), START II, (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty)