Idea for a New Building

[CIVPhilzilla]

Bomb Shelter- Able to reduce damage done by artillery and aircraft. Also only 1/3 or 1/4 of your population is lost with a nuclear strike and your military units are more likely to surive.

I say make this available early modern ages, and instead of having 5 SAMs to build the strategic missle defense you need to have this.

Does this sound like a good idea? I know that there is a civil defense, but it can't do things like this. Please post your comments.

 

[Aramazd]

Great idea

 

[Lyonesse]

I like it (I can picture it now...siren's start whaling...everyone to the shelter!.....BOOOOM!)

 

[Sarevok]

its called the civil defense

 

[CIVPhilzilla]

Sarevok, I said in my original post that it would be different than the civil defense that is already in place.

 

[CIVPhilzilla]

Thx for the positive feedback.

 

[theGrimm]

It would be very useful in a Regicide game, if it would protect your king from Nukes. Also, the AI might stand a chance, rather than a player winning the game as soon as he had a nuke for every enemy civ...

 

[zorven]

I don't see the "real life" inspiration. Do you know of any bomb shelters where you live?

 

[Chirotera]

The community college I attend has the lower floor being a bomb shelter for the city. Though, you can tell it's pretty, dated. The outside of the building has an atomic symbol and the words bomb shelter under it. It has room for maybe 1000 people crammed closely together and would probably do more harm than good.. but hey, it's a real life bomb shelter.

 

[Lyonesse]

I'm sure there's still a few around from the 50's...in fact I think the little town my parents are from in Nebraska still has one in the high school

 

[Pirate]

Yep, relics of the cold war in the U.S. My freind's HOUSE even had one - a little room tucked underground off his basement. I guess they came standard in the 1950's.

As for having them in the game, I figured they're already assumed and that's why 100% of your population aren't vaporized when a nuke hits. At that point in the game, would you waste shields on building a bomb shelter just to save a few pop points? I'd build more nukes

 

[anarres]

Hmm, "duck and cover".

Seriously - a bomb shelter will do sweet FA if a megaton nuke lands on your head - or even a mile or two away. Add in the 4 minute warning and you can see why they stopped building nuke shelters in the 50's.

 

[Ivan the Kulak]

Actually, most nukes are fused for airburst and detonate quite a ways up, so if one goes off and ground zero is a couple miles away you have an excellent chance for surviving in a reinforced concrete subbasement shelter. You'll still need good blast doors though, which most home shelters didn't have.

The effect on a city would be negligible, most of the population would still get fried. Even the Soviets' public shelter system probably wouldn't have helped too much.

As far as protecting infrastructure forget it. What are you going to do, pack up all the lathes and mills in your factories and truck them off to the hills on a half hour's notice?

Maybe you could set it up so your workers in the blast radius have a chance of survival.

 

[Reynoulds #]

Ivan the Kulak said it well. If you detonate it above the ground (as were Fat Man & Little Boy), you greatly increase the damage.

Perhaps they could have individual bomb shelters with the small wonder: The Greenbriar Hotel. I don't know what it would do, but it would be a cool sw to accompony such city improvements.