[Vote] (1-03) Proposal: Make Nuclear Missiles Better

Approval Vote for Proposal #3 (instructions below)


  • Total voters
    132
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hmm, imho bombers are OP. Much better than rest of units from the era in attacking both units and cities.
 
I've played a ton of lategame with air combat and bombers are really good if they don't have interception, like insanely good per slot cause they can get logistics promo. But if they have a lot of interception you have to have a good portion of fighters with sweep, but still good value mixing in a few bombers per base
 
I hate nuclear missiles. IMO they just create micro-management (I hate cleaning up fallout and rebuilding nuked cities).

Nuclear missiles are meaningful IRL because we have diplomacy - you let people know you have them and that is an incentive for peace.

In CIV the AI just launches missiles at you, or you launch missiles at them. There's no option for a MAD agreement.
 
This proposal may be easier to digest as individual suggestions. I like the idea of increase in range, but am against making them easier to build.
I agree with this sentiment and I think individual pieces might have a better chance of passing. I like all of the mentioned changes except neutering the anti nuke building.
 
I hate nuclear missiles. IMO they just create micro-management (I hate cleaning up fallout and rebuilding nuked cities).

Nuclear missiles are meaningful IRL because we have diplomacy - you let people know you have them and that is an incentive for peace.

In CIV the AI just launches missiles at you, or you launch missiles at them. There's no option for a MAD agreement.
I suggest a giant diplomatic penalty with ALL civs for using a nuke then
 
If nukes are going to be that strong we'll need an automatic sanction if a nuke is used.
 
Proposal passed on November 1, 2022.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom