1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Manhatan Project? Why build it?

Discussion in 'Civ4 - General Discussions' started by tony92def, Jun 22, 2012.

  1. tony92def

    tony92def Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2012
    Messages:
    68
    Hi, I'm really confused about this project, if it make nukes available for every1 why would you build it if it doesn't give you any advantage? Would it be better to make it a national wonder type thing that only allow yourself to build nukes?
     
  2. s.bernbaum

    s.bernbaum Mostly lurking

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,703
    Location:
    The wilds of Montana
    It is a World Wonder. Yes, it lets everyone build nukes. If you want to use nukes, someone must build it. I don't like nukes in my games, so I never build it and do my best to get them banned by the UN. I'm sure someone who likes them will give you the other side of the argument shortly.
     
  3. midget_roxx

    midget_roxx Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2012
    Messages:
    65
    You can spam them alot more than the AI and use them more efficiently, I don't think Ive seen the AI use subs to transport nukes which gives the player a massive advantage in intercontinental warfare
     
  4. tony92def

    tony92def Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2012
    Messages:
    68
    Isn't it still better to wait for a dumb AI to build it and save those hammers?
     
  5. traius

    traius His own worst enemy

    Joined:
    May 27, 2012
    Messages:
    938
    You still need rocketry to build ICBM's, so if you have a large tech lead, you can finish the project and the AI be incapable of building nukes. If you let the AI build it, obviously this is never the case. If you are a financial civ burning through the techs, it may be slightly faster to wait for nukes to aid conquest (2nukes will empty a city of garrison, potentially only 1 with air force bombing before nuke), letting even a warrior topple cities. But they still do little that an air force and a couple units a little more powerful than warriors couldn't do, really.
     
  6. happyturtle

    happyturtle Mrs GrumpyOldCivver

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    Messages:
    860
    I build nuke ifs the AI builds the Manhattan Project, but otherwise no. I'd rather capture healthy cities than radioactive ones.
     
  7. Pangaea

    Pangaea Rock N Roller

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2010
    Messages:
    5,107
    Do the AI use a lot of nukes though?
     
  8. i_imperator

    i_imperator Imperator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    943
    Location:
    Ireland
    It depends on the difficulty, I remember my first monarch game which was NC Hayuna. I was going for a space win, when Bismark dowed on the last five turns before i got my victory and nuked several of my cities including my capital. He was a monster that game capping stalin and another civ. I ended up winning of course, because it was far too late.

    The AI do build alot of nukes on the higher levels, emperor+. However they tend to bunch them up in one or two cities, so you can take them out if you inititate the war, on your first strike. Watch TMIT's Justinian let's play and you'll see what i mean when he attacks Sumeria.

    And by the way, nuking people is tons of fun! But its not fun when the ai nukes you :(
     
  9. SamSniped

    SamSniped DJ Goodboye

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2011
    Messages:
    5,413
    Location:
    playing some funky jams
    Sorry, the Grammar Nazi in me made me change that :p
    In all honesty, I've found that the AI has never nuked me (but I play on Noble difficulty, so that doesn't mean much). However, I have seen the AI nuke each other, so it definitely could happen anytime.
     
  10. Jex

    Jex Drafted Rifles Are OP

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Messages:
    128
    Location:
    Cincinatti, OH
    The AI is very bad when it comes to nuclear warfare. They will not spam nukes like a good player will, and will usually never initiate an attack. Furthermore, they tend to concentrate their tactical nukes into one stack, usually the same one as their main stack. This means you can often start a nuclear war by completely nuking away their main army (3-4 nukes on a city will completely clear it of defenders) and then take that city, destroying all the nukes that were in it. Meanwhile, a couple of ICBMs can be launched on their uranium sources, irradiating them and preventing them from building any more. Game, set and match.
     
  11. Pangaea

    Pangaea Rock N Roller

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2010
    Messages:
    5,107
    Couldn't resist.

    Spoiler :
     
  12. TheMeInTeam

    TheMeInTeam Top Logic

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    25,037
    AI is often slow to get fission and won't often build nukes in time as a result.

    If you build manhattan and nuke them before they reach the technology, how do they reach fission? How do they build nukes when you've nuked away their uranium mines?

    Although to be honest, the strategy of "nuke and capture every city they have or close on the turn you declare war" is pretty effective even when the other guy does have nukes.
     
  13. reddishrecue

    reddishrecue Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    5,210
    Gender:
    Male
    Don't build the manhatan project, we don't need it to achieve a victory, afterwards there are global warming and tiles turning into deserts.

    If you do choose to build it SDI becomes available which civs could get and nukes will have no effect.
     
  14. midget_roxx

    midget_roxx Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2012
    Messages:
    65
    Tactical nukes aren't affected by SDI only ICBMs (and they still hit 25% of the time)
     
  15. oldskald

    oldskald Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2010
    Messages:
    228
    This isn't strictly true. IIRC (I never use nukes), SDI will stop 75% of ICBMs and 62.5% of Tactical Nukes. This makes it a very imperfect shield. If a target civ has 10 cities and SDI then the attacker can build 80 ICBMs and pretty much guarantee that the target civ will be reduced to irradiated rubble. Even better, with Tactical Nukes the offensive force can be reduced to 60 weapons carried on subs. What SDI does is to raise the cost of a successful nuclear war. It certainly doesn't prevent a civ from being nuked back to the stone age.
     
  16. Astax

    Astax Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Messages:
    556
    Nukes are great. Quite a while ago I was playing an Earth map, with a few people initially. However, by the late 1900s, only I and one guy remained. I conquered all of North and South America with Aztec, while he was Persia and possessed a healthy empire in the Middle East and parts of Europe. Problem was that despite my massive lead in cities, he was much better off technologically. This was because he had tons of cottages on all those nice flood plains in M.E. And it became quite obvious he was headed for victory when his spaceship took off. But I was prepared.

    I noticed when he completed the Apollo program. So few turns afterwards I sent a small contingent of troops on transports through the southern polar region. It was lying in waiting off the horn of Africa. At the same time I built the Manhattan project, turned all science to 0, and set all 50 of my cities to making ICBMs, using the gold to speed up the process. Turn before he was due to have his victory, I declared war. What followed was 5 minutes of straight nuking. And despite his SDI, I nuked the hell out of every inch of his empire. And of course most importantly of all, his capital. Then my max navigation transports rolled in to raze his cap, which was conveniently on the coast allowing for amphibious assault. This destroyed the spaceship command and control center, causing him to fail spaceship victory.

    I'm not sure how he felt about it, because he left the game, but I assume he was not as amused as I was.
     
  17. reddishrecue

    reddishrecue Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    5,210
    Gender:
    Male
    That's a good reason to build a nuke. You made a comeback it seems. I don't see anything wrong with building a nuke unless its one of the only ways to achieve victory.
     
  18. strijder20

    strijder20 Wallowing in irony

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5,047
    Location:
    In Dystopia
    *Cough cough* It's still spelled wrong *cough cough*
     
  19. zbelg

    zbelg Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2008
    Messages:
    159
    It gives you the advantage in that you control when nukes are available.
     
  20. King Kalmah

    King Kalmah Magyar Madness

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2008
    Messages:
    819
    Location:
    California
    It should be a national wonder.Historically speaking each nation had to invest in a nuclear program before gaining the power of the atom.

    WW2 era you had Japan and Germany chasing atomic power,but got beaten to the punch by the USA.Russia had its atomic bomb in the late 40s.

    Cold War Era saw Pakistan and India heavily fund their own research program for atomic power.China and Israel also come to mind.France and Britain both have nuclear power plants

    2010's you have North Korea and Iran pouring funds into their own nuclear programs.

    I really think that the Manhattan Project should be exactly how the Apollo Program is.Not only did each nation have to understand rockets and space flight,but had to build the infrastructure needed to launch the space ships...just like how each nation had to know about splitting the atom and how to deliver that in a rocket without it blowing up in their face....

    From a gameplay point of view it does make building the Manhattan project more costly if your enemy has the right tech and the uranium to back it up....(fun too if you use spies to wipe out their uranium...lots of cool things to do with spies...lol)
     

Share This Page