A question on the effect of nukes (and a subquestion on interception promotion)

Evening gonad

Chieftain
Joined
Feb 13, 2015
Messages
36
I was playing the Babylon OCC DCL, and a nuclear exchange happened, a first for me so it was quite entertaining.

Picture
Spoiler :

My people are happier than I would have expected under the circumstances.



I had a few questions about nuclear weapons as a result.
Spoiler :

(1) So I was embroiled in a long war with Bismark, which was making victory a less likely outcome by the turn. I wanted to make peace, but he wouldn't deal. I built nuclear weapons, hoping that might change his mind. It did not. If you are already embroiled in a war, do having nuclear weapons make it more likely for peace to occur?

(2) I then started building and launching weapons, hoping that this might bring him to the table. It did not. I got off two or three shots, before he hit me with a nuke, and my chances died along with my range\logistics bazookas and upgraded interceptors. I was reduced to buying and hurling landschnekts one at a time to weaken units. (They died doing this, of course, and a misclick rendered their sacrifices meaningless anyway.) Does using nuclear weapons in a war make peace more likely?

(3) Will fighters that intercept kill themselves intercepting? I hesitated taking the extra intercept promotion, wondering if it would make them more likely to die if fighter sweeps occurred, or even while intercepting bombers. Does the extra interception promotion make fighters dying more likely in any way?


Thanks for any replies!
 
As far as I know about 1 and 2, no it doesn't make the peace any more probable. In the DCL16 I already had around 4-5 nukes by the endgame and while that made instantly everyone Afraid, India went along and attacked me anyway. Naturally I retaliated in full swing (see screenshot in thread) but the point is, even though he was well aware of my nuclear capabilities, he proceeded to attack me anyway and while that didn't end well for them, I have to wonder what was the reasoning behind it.

When I played that map, I had nukes early because I was sitting on massive amounts of gold and the last SS part was well away, and nobody dared attack me. I do remember Germany being pissed off for the good part of the game because I stole his wonders, he suddenly coveted my lands yadda yadda and even though I was under a denouncement at that point, once he saw the shiny warheads of death, he reconsidered his foreign policy and offered a DoF very soon afterwards. I turned Germany to dust anyway :D
 
High military strength means the AI is more willing to negotiate, and the AI overvalues nukes in this regard, so yes they should help. But they are not a guarantee.

There is a red modifier for nuking, but I don't think new hate matters during a war.

Despite the help text, there is no intercepting nukes.
 
That's too bad the game doesn't implement any ability to intercept nukes. I miss that ability from earlier games. Nuclear weapons probably come too late for that to matter too much anyway.
 
That's too bad the game doesn't implement any ability to intercept nukes. I miss that ability from earlier games. Nuclear weapons probably come too late for that to matter too much anyway.

Yeah, sdi from civilization 4 is gone. Only way to intercept nukes now is by using bomb shelters. Did you miss civilization 4 because of this?
 
Sadly, I've never played Civ 4. And I've only played a little of Civ III. So I guess I was primarily referring to SDI in Civ 2 :) and whatever Civ III had. And no, I don't really miss those games, though I liked the animated advisors and Wonder building videos in Civ II. Really prefer the happiness mechanic in Civ 5, as opposed to all corruption issues in Civ II, for example, and I love ideologies, religions, etc. But all that is probably on a different topic.
 
Top Bottom