More harmful nuclear attacks?

A

AlextheGr8

Warlord
Joined
Jan 2, 2012
Messages
180
I wish nuclear attacks were more harmful, instead of being able to repair the damage by a worker. It should make the land uninhabitable for a while, and make all the other civs hate you for using those weapons.
 
Its harmful enough as it is - a single well-placed nuclear strike can wipe out your air support, rendering your entire front in jeopardy of collapse.
 
A few well placed nuclear subs can destroy key non-capital cities in the heart of an enemy empire.
 
While I agree nuclear weapons are quite powerful there should be a severe diplomatic penalty from all nations for using them. Especially from those nations who do not yet possess them.
 
Previous civilization games had these effects, global warming of pollution destroying your well devolped land. Other nations hating you for having them and even more so when they are used. Diplomacy in 5, by the time I get gunpowder if not before almost all the civs hate me regardless if I got to the nukes anyways.
 
I'm still hoping for some sort of expansion interception method rather than just being nuked to hell. I miss the global warming aspect of it though I must admit. I guess by them adding bomb shelters (I think that's a building for the expansion IIRC) helps a little bit. But they're too powerful now. I only use them as a complete last resort. Too bad the AIs don't see it that way.
 
Given that nukes currently are pretty much overpowered tactical nukes I'd say there's probably room for development of a proper ICBM with expanded damage, range and cost if they nerf the existing nuclear missile a little bit.

There are, I'm pretty sure, going to be Bomb Shelters introduced as a building in G&K that are meant to mitigate the impact of nuclear weapons on cities. I don't seem to be able to find any information on what precisely they do beyond that though.
 
i agree i would like to see global warming or even climate change. for example if nuclear war occured maybe global ice caps melt raising see levels which cause continents to shrink.? could a mod change nuclear weapons or add to them in some way?
 
In Civ 4 the combination of SDI (75% chance of intercepting nukes) and diplo penalties for having/using nukes resulted in late game nuke fests being a rare occurrence. IMHO Civ 5 fell on its face by not carrying these aspects forward from Civ 4 because, as smallfish noted above, one lucky hit with a nuke can undo the most careful strategy. For me, this aspect tends to spoil the late game and it is almost as dumb as some of the potentially catastrophic Random Events in Civ 4.
 
Well, they have a much more important role than in Civ4 for sure. Previously with SDI, the whole concept of nuclear warfare was thrown out of the window. Now they are crucial in making or breaking an entire front, and given their rarity, it balances things out even more.

The AI unfortunately does not understand tactical nuclear usage.:(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Tigranes
Oppenheimer and DoC
Replies
9
Views
822
brett0007
brett0007
S
  • Locked
  • Poll
[Vote] (6-15) Nuclear Non-Proliferation WC Changes
Replies
4
Views
805
azum4roll
A
F
  • Locked
[Complex] (6-20b) Nuclear Non-Proliferation Triggers Special Session Sanction Vote
Replies
9
Views
849
Recursive
Recursive
Recursive
  • Locked
(6-20d) Nuclear Non-Proliferation Triggers 15 Turns of Locked War, No Sanctions
Replies
3
Views
494
Stalker0
S
N.Core
  • Locked
[Complex] (6-20) Nuclear Non-Proliferation Forces Everyone To Declare War When Nukes Are Used
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
ma_kuh
M
Top Bottom