Advertisement
Civilization Fanatics' Center  

Go Back   Civilization Fanatics' Forums > CIVILIZATION IV > Civ4 - General Discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old Sep 11, 2005, 03:57 PM   #1
civmod19
Chieftain
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 30
Nukes effect

If someone already put this thread in the forum, let me known. My question is about the nukes. I found unrealistic to Civ3 when a nuke dont destroy a entire city, but just reduces it's population and improvements to half. I tried to change this in the editor but with no sucess because it's hard coded. Will be possible in Civ4 to use nukes to raze entirely cities at one blow? This can create a good atmosphere for a cold war game.
civmod19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2005, 04:35 PM   #2
warpstorm
Yumbo? Yumbo!
 
warpstorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Snack Food Capital of the World
Posts: 7,688
...only if the AI understands how powerful they are...
__________________
"Perfection is attained, not when no more can be added, but when no more can be removed."
The opinions expressed herein are my own personal opinions and do not represent my employer's view in any way
warpstorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2005, 05:19 PM   #3
Ranbir
Civ junkie
 
Ranbir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Herts
Posts: 564
Considering that you can get the SDK to code AI...

I guess a lot of things that weren't possible in the past moddings is very possible in this one.

I think with nuclear weaponry, the idea was to bring forth the global effects as well as just the effect it had on it's target.
__________________
Do you like India? I like India. If you wish to offer assistance to my India mod project, give me a buzz.
Ranbir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2005, 12:24 AM   #4
taillesskangaru
Just a passenger
 
taillesskangaru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 20,742
Actually nukes don't destroy entire cities (look at Hiroshima for example. It's now about the same size as pre-hurricane New Orleans).
taillesskangaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2005, 12:52 AM   #5
Chibiabos
Prince
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 424
Well, it would depend. The Hiroshima and Nagasaki nukes were, compared with today's nukes, tiny.

A fusion bomb in the 1+ megaton range would have many tens the times of the effect and could completely annhilate sizeable cities.
Chibiabos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2005, 01:50 AM   #6
Karaman
Chieftain
 
Karaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Bulgaria!
Posts: 80
And depending on the blast (aerial or ground) it can kill a lot more :P
Blessed be those who never press the button!
Karaman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2005, 05:03 AM   #7
Yusaku Jon III
Chieftain
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 96
Considering what you are suggesting and recalling how in Civ3, we got the radius of pollution along with a reduction in population around a targeted city, it'd make sense that Civ4 would have a similar effect on population. Instead of the pollution, we'd probably see a serious reduction in food/hammer production and perhaps increased maintenance costs for that city that'd but a strain on overall growth for a number of turns.
Yusaku Jon III is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2005, 05:23 AM   #8
TerraHero
Terranigma Guru
 
TerraHero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 718
I always found nukes to weak myself aswell...

they are supose to be the ultimate weapon of mass destruction.

Pro: Half a city population and all adjecent tiles mass poluted is a rewal killing blow to a central city.

Con's: Almsot all civs immediatly delcare war on you.

So the price of 1 city reduced to half pop and polution is that you know have to wage war on every other remaining civilization.

Quite a heavy price for such a minimal effect.

As for the nuclear bombs, u had Tactical Nuke and ICBM. the Tactical Nuke is made on conventional nuclear weaponry and the ICBM with hydrogen. Hydrogen bombs are a exponent of a conventional nuke stronger.

So it would make sense if a tactical nuke would reduce the pop to half and such, but an ICBM can easily take out a mayor city and erase its very excistance of the face of the earth.
TerraHero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2005, 06:32 AM   #9
Roland Johansen
Deity
 
Roland Johansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: the Netherlands
Posts: 4,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by TerraHero
So it would make sense if a tactical nuke would reduce the pop to half and such, but an ICBM can easily take out a mayor city and erase its very excistance of the face of the earth.
You're right that hydrogen bombs are much more powerfull than nuclear bombs. The nuclear bombs used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki had an explosive power in the tens of kilotons while the heaviest hydrogen bombs in existence nowadays are between 1 and 10 megatons (the heaviest to ever exist is about 50 megatons, but only one was ever manufactured). So the heaviest hydrogen bombs that exist today are about 500 times as strong as the nuclear weapons used in WWII. That does not mean that the destructive area of effect is 500 times as large. A nuclear weapon that is 1000 times as strong will have a distructive radius 10 times as large. Most nuclear weapons are in the 100-500 kiloton range.

To get some insight in the effects of nuclear weapons, one could take a look at this Nuclear Weapon Effects Calculator. They are really terrible weapons.

The largest nuclear weapons in existence today would destroy a medium sized town, but large cities will survive the effects of the nuclear weapon. Although the destruction will be terrible and the remainder of the city will not be a healthy place to live for a while. Multiple nuclear weapons or MIRV nuclear weapons would of course obliterate even the largest cities.
Roland Johansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2005, 09:04 AM   #10
Ranbir
Civ junkie
 
Ranbir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Herts
Posts: 564
That isn't the only con though, it attributes to global warming, which results in changing terrain. Your lush grassland is now desert, or your now temperate region is nothing but swampville. I honestly don't know how much effect they had it do in Civ 3, but in Civ 2, you suffered big.
__________________
Do you like India? I like India. If you wish to offer assistance to my India mod project, give me a buzz.
Ranbir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2005, 09:23 AM   #11
JavalTigar
Overlord of the West
 
JavalTigar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Local # to the end of the universe
Posts: 607
They should be like SMAC. They leave a hole where the city once was. I remember once nuking an island city and removing it from the map.

But that should be for the ICBM. The tactical should be like normal (half population, mess up health rating..etc.)
__________________
If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsel or arms. Kneel down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you are our countrymen.
JavalTigar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2005, 09:51 AM   #12
Leprechaune
Warlord
 
Leprechaune's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Thunder Bay, Canada
Posts: 177
I agree... ICBM should be stronger, while tactical nuke should remain the same.

A nuke of any sort should remove all units of any type from the city and imediately surrounding tiles. Not to say that they were all killed, but they would be decimated in morale and in too desperate a state to actually perform their intended tasks.
Leprechaune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2005, 12:27 PM   #13
I_batman
Emperor
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: markham, ontario
Posts: 1,259
What I am hoping for is somewhere within the editor (either SDK, Python, or XML) is the ability to create nuclear weapons of various types and firepower.
Nuclear tipped torpedos have been around for decades and I would think would be a real addition to the modern game.
Of course, considering how Civ IV will be built around pretty pictures instead of an actual game engine, the point may be moot.
__________________
Of course, the whole point of a Doomsday Machine is lost, if you KEEP IT A SECRET! Why didn't you tell the world, EH?
I_batman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2005, 12:28 PM   #14
civmod19
Chieftain
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 30
We have a problem about the pollution here.
In Civ3 the pollution in the tiles was representing normal pollution and radioactive pollution. Now in Civ4 normal pollution go direct to the city with a reduction of production. I think that they will do the same with nuclear meltdowns (caused by nuclear plants) but with a higher effect on production than normal pollution.
But and if the ICBM are thrown against a tile that dont have a city? I will recall of a tatic that I used in Pentagenesis.
In Pentagenesis, cities have a laser defense that destroy the nukes. Then I was throwing nukes in the tiles surrounding the cities, thus killing some population inside the city (not half population) and the pollution affected their production. In Civ4 this will not be possible, as we will not have pollution, and the ICBMs will not have any effect in the enviroment. The birds, the chocobbos, the rabbits will still be there. We can have a crate, like artillery do, but the radiation is gone.
My suggestion is to mod it, putting a new terrain, with a green color to represent radioactivity, and damaging units that pass through it. More realistic than in Civ3, where radiation was treated like normal pollution.
Also, a system for testing nukes can be created, to thrown bombs in the sea or in telletubbies island, as the telletubbies will be lagging the game in later turns. The tests can have a effect in politics, with less powered nations in the borders being more benevolent, and equal powered nations making pressure to stop the tests, or a effect in technology research for better nukes.
More types of nukes will be better too. We can have some fusion technology to allow more destructive effect in the enviroment (like dozens of tiles with radiation). A unit called radioactive worker, with proper clothes, can erase it. The radiation will disappear naturally after some turns, but this type of worker can turn this more fast. We have new possibilities here, if is true that we can mod everything in this game.

Last edited by civmod19; Sep 12, 2005 at 12:35 PM.
civmod19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2005, 01:06 PM   #15
Padma
the InBond
 
Padma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Omaha, Nebraska USA
Posts: 14,325
:sigh: Here we go again, people claiming nukes should destroy entire cities ... :shakehead

As those who have been here for the last few years are aware, my RL job involves working with nuclear weapons, and understanding their destructive power. The Civ3 version of nuclear weapons is much more spot on than total city destruction.
__________________

1st Lieutenant, USAF (Retired)
Registered Linux User #233241
My View Ramblings of a Professional Computer Geek-- My Blogs.
Padma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2005, 01:19 PM   #16
Leprechaune
Warlord
 
Leprechaune's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Thunder Bay, Canada
Posts: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Padma
:sigh: Here we go again, people claiming nukes should destroy entire cities ... :shakehead

As those who have been here for the last few years are aware, my RL job involves working with nuclear weapons, and understanding their destructive power. The Civ3 version of nuclear weapons is much more spot on than total city destruction.
Understood... Do you also have experience with the productivity of a post nuke city or nation?
Leprechaune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2005, 01:33 PM   #17
Nexushyper
Warlord
 
Nexushyper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Colorado
Posts: 245
I agree with Padma.


However I must say:

Quote:
The largest nuclear weapons in existence today would destroy a medium sized town, but large cities will survive the effects of the nuclear weapon. Although the destruction will be terrible and the remainder of the city will not be a healthy place to live for a while. Multiple nuclear weapons or MIRV nuclear weapons would of course obliterate even the largest cities.
Is a true statement. A 1Megaton Nuke, say hitting Denver, would leave a large crater with an area of destruction for many miles, however teh city would still be there. Yet multi warheads spread out over the area of Denver, MIRVs, would level the city.


In fact the day Cheyenne Mt. Air Station opened was the same day nukes became powerful enough to make it Cheyenne valley if it tooka direct nuke hit.


EDIT: Oh, and where the nuke goes off is important too. On ground impact, above ground, in the air and in space all have different effects. A ground/near ground explosion (nuke explosion) will produce fireball and compressed air waves. A space (little to zero atmosphere) nuke explosion would cause massive x-ray, EMP, radiation waves not fireballs. In fact a well placed nuke detonating in space could take out a large percent of satellites.

Anyways, in Civ 4 you should be able to edit the nukes, how they are used, add event triggers if need be, and even change how the AI uses/reacts to nukes. So that alone should make everyone happy.
__________________
Military: TSgt, AFSPC, USAFR

Old Stuff
Civ3
Old PowerBar | Latest Version of POWERBAR for C3C NOTE: No new versions of these will be made.

Last edited by Nexushyper; Sep 12, 2005 at 01:41 PM.
Nexushyper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 14, 2005, 09:24 AM   #18
parkell
Chieftain
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1
How about this , what if we could change the yield of nuke to make the effect more or less powerfull
parkell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 14, 2005, 11:14 AM   #19
Superkrest
Hero of the Soviet Union
 
Superkrest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: michigan, united states.
Posts: 763
i think i have to agree with a few people who said icbms..should be more powerfull..still not town "destroyers" but population destroyers...why cant a large nuke...kill most of the city..its very feasable...and limit population growth...

tactical nuke=same as present system

icbm=3/4 kill rate in city. 1/2 immidiate surrounding squares, 1/4 or damaged units out to the next surrounding squares...if the city is small the effects on squares are the same..but they city is reduced to one...not abandoned at all...but growth should be slowed for "X" amount of turns. the variables for damage should also change with terrain bonus...
ie.. mountain immidiately oustide hit square..damage now reduced to 1/4 and so on.

but padmas right...they dont eliminate cities..but they do eliminate live.
Superkrest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 14, 2005, 11:45 AM   #20
doronron
King
 
doronron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Home or Work...
Posts: 906
OK. Nukes knock cities down to half Pop, regardless of the size of the city prior to the strike. Depending on yield, the city loses one Pop per turn to radiation poisoning for x number of turns, where x increases proportionally to the strength of the weapon used. Nukes "pillage" the surrounding countryside removing access to resources (since pollution no longer exists) and depending on the yield, the "pillage" effect grows in size.

In a tactical strike, it wipes out the targeted units and causes the same "pillage" effect as mentioned above.

Would this work?
doronron is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Go Back Civilization Fanatics' Forums > CIVILIZATION IV > Civ4 - General Discussions > Nukes effect

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
No Nukes, I can't get no NUKES man! Red Comyn Civ3 - General Discussions 6 Oct 10, 2007 05:54 PM
Nukes' effect on the Environment Soryn Arkayn Civ4 - General Discussions 22 May 30, 2007 08:55 PM
TAC nukes are better nukes seanos08 Civ3 - Strategy & Tips 14 Nov 21, 2006 06:09 AM
It doesn't effect you... North King Off-Topic 9 Dec 22, 2005 06:41 PM
Do ICBMs have the same negitive effect on the world like nukes do? Admiral_Tarton Civ3 - General Discussions 3 Jan 27, 2004 06:56 AM


Advertisement

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:33 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
This site is copyright Civilization Fanatics' Center.
Support CFC: Amazon.com | Amazon UK | Amazon DE | Amazon CA | Amazon FR