More WMD

[collin_stp]

I have seen many threads on nukes (and I think I may have seen bioweapons), but what about other WMD's?

You could have chemical artillery, and chemical bombs, along with carpet/cluster (I know these aren't classified as WMD, but are still powerful) bombs that could hurt multiple units. Also, bioweapons that could be transferred from unit to unit (and city to city by these units) would make for more devatating warfare, and chemical and bioweapons are actually quite old, much older than nukes.

 

[The Last Conformist]

I think chemical weapons are generally too weak, and to similar in effect to conventional artillery/bombers, to warrant separate inclusion. Same for bioweapons as have actually been used, but I guess a case could be made for including some slightly futuristic version.

 

[collin_stp]

I think chemical weapons are generally too weak, and to similar in effect to conventional artillery/bombers, to warrant separate inclusion. Same for bioweapons as have actually been used, but I guess a case could be made for including some slightly futuristic version.

You may be correct, I am no weapons expert, maybe they were used more to put fear into enemies, but weren't they quite effective in the iraq/iran war at least?

 

[Phoenix]

Bioweapons were used by the English settlers of America against the native population - they were presented with "gifts" of handkerchiefs which contained Smallpox (the settlers being immunised to it via Cowpox). This killed off hundereds of the native population.

It was again used by the Italians against the Ethiopeans at the start of WW2.

They should therefore be included.

 

[one_man_assault]

Im glad you pointed thoose facts out Phoenix i was about to add some myself. Not only that but it saw wide spread use in WW1 witch killed many many thousands of people before soldiers began covering themselves with gas masks and the like. It wasn't used in WW2 beacuse the Nazis were afraid if they broke the treaty of not using Bio weapons in war Britan (which had a very large stockpile built up from WW1 of bio weapons) would use them in Europe which would have put a serious dent in the Nazi War Machine.

Biological weapons should be sort of like SMAC were one nation could develop it and sort of load it to an artillery unit for one time use. It would cause the tile to be contaminated for one turn and would have something like the effects of artillery except the unit would continue to deteriorate in health unless sent to a city with a hospital or something like that.

As for diplomatic opinion. Nations would see your attack as a gate way to using there own Bio weapons.

 

[Commander Bello]

@One_man_assault: Actually, it have been chemical weapons since gas counts for chemical warfare. About biological weapons, the British tested some at the Shetland Islands, and learned that they became too dangerous, then. (The island in question was off-limits for everyone at least up to the 90ies).

The "problem" with weapons like that is that they work best against unprotected beings, as it would be civilians. Furthermore, the spreading of the agents is very much unpredictable due to wheather influence and will cause quiet some losses on your own personnel (by changing wind direction, having to move your personnel into the contaminated area and so on).
After all, I don't think it would add to the fun of the game. Except for the destruction of buildings, the nukes are doing almost the same already.

 

[Verowin]

Agree!!
PS : I do not won't to be fooled into a war by same dip**** from texas, let's not put them in the game.

 

[Phyr_Negator]

Damn who cares about civilian or others? I want to cripple enemy by launching some anthrax bombings on his cities to wipe his population and his crops! I want to barrage enemy with Sarin and make opponent's military burn it's skin! That should be REALLY fun!

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Bioweapons would be good, but they should be a spy weapon... Similar to 'Poison Water supply in Civ 2, but with more negative economy effects... lots of sick people, unhappiness for say 5 turns... AND the possibility of spreading to other cities, including your own.

 

[apatheist]

Bioweapons don't make sense in the game if the game has no support for contagious diseases. Chemical weapons don't need to be in because they're just not that useful on the battlefield.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Well they did have the plague in Conquests, so I'm guessing they Could have bioweapons.

 

[Inspector Javert]

Damn who cares about civilian or others? I want to cripple enemy by launching some anthrax bombings on his cities to wipe his population and his crops! I want to barrage enemy with Sarin and make opponent's military burn it's skin! That should be REALLY fun!

AMEN you're my kind of dude!

I think WMDs would be good and there could be added features where when the UN convenes they may try and make you disarm. Maybe you could learn to make them after reasearching terrorism (laywers be damned) and have a nasty stigma associated with them.

 

[moose7603]

I think chemical weapons are generally too weak, and to similar in effect to conventional artillery/bombers, to warrant separate inclusion. Same for bioweapons as have actually been used, but I guess a case could be made for including some slightly futuristic version.

I dont see how chemical weapons are generally weak, if you want to look at their damage since their inception(not including what some historians call chemical warfare by the colonialist on the indians) they've had more impact then nuclear weapons and rank second only to gunfire by cause of death. If you look at WWI, more then 200,000 soldiers lost their lives due to something they couldnt see nor smell. You add the close to 30 thousand that died in the Iran/Iraq war, also you have to include the British in Ethiopia and Africa right before WW2, their impact has been huge, and look at now, we are more afraid of bio-weapons then any other kind of attack, add the close to 300 that died in Japan also. I would say that Bio-weapons would be a great addition to the arsenal

 

[Phyr_Negator]

Bio-weapons have two major ways of development:
-Enemy human resources. Here can be used anthrax, plagues, ebola, cholera etc. wich can be spreaded fast among human concentrations. Not very effective due to awful problems with delivery. But if delivered can cause unimaginable damage and casualties.
-Crops and animals. The most neat one). Make enemy starve to death!!! Easy of delivery - just use aerosol/cluster bombs over fields or flocks of cattle. Fast spreading rate, awesome effect, buy our Rice blast spores(Magnaporthe grisea) only 99.99$ per canister. Simply imagine what can happen if china will be bombarded by Rice Blast=D.
It'll be great to bombard enemy's food supplies and make his cities starve and then take 'em almost bare-handed.
Chemical warfare is a true kawaii!!! Tabun, Sarin, implemented into shells they can be deadly. Not everyone got gas masks and mostly if used suddenly(and artillery barrages MUST be sudden) then by the time soldiers will pull their gas masks from backpacks they will be twisting in spasms on the ground.

 

[Mewtarthio]

The "problem" with weapons like that is that they work best against unprotected beings, as it would be civilians. Furthermore, the spreading of the agents is very much unpredictable due to wheather influence and will cause quiet some losses on your own personnel (by changing wind direction, having to move your personnel into the contaminated area and so on).
After all, I don't think it would add to the fun of the game. Except for the destruction of buildings, the nukes are doing almost the same already.

Now how could it not be fun to unleash a pandemic that wipes out half the world's population? Particularly if you could manufacture the antibiotics/vaccines for your own people...

 

[Inspector Javert]

Bioweapons were used by the English settlers of America against the native population - they were presented with "gifts" of handkerchiefs which contained Smallpox (the settlers being immunised to it via Cowpox). This killed off hundereds of the native population.

It was again used by the Italians against the Ethiopeans at the start of WW2.

They should therefore be included.

Back in those days knolage of comunicable diesases was minimal at best so it was unlikely that giving such gifts was intentinal