Mutually Assured Destruction

[Cu Chulainn]

Sorry if this has been mentioned. One feature that should be added to ICBM's is the ability to point them at any square and set an autolaunch if that civ fires a nuke at you. This would possibly create a nifty, spooky cold war feel to the end of the game in which a mistake could destroy most of civilization.

 

[Mewtarthio]

There was a really good topic on this a while back: it was called Missile Silos. Don't bother posting there; just giving credit where it's due. After the main topic had been exhausted, it went on to discuss this very idea.

In essence, the people came up with a "Nuclear Advisor." The Nuke Advisor would be used to pre-target your ICBMs. Once an enemy dropped a nuke on you, you would have the option to retaliate immediately. Of course, the nuclear interchange would be shown to all players on the earth, who would in turn have options to fire off their own nukes. All this would occur within the turn (it might cause some trouble for hotseat, but I'm certain a reasonable solution could be found).

I suggest that this idea be implemented, along with an additional "priority" setting. Say, if Ghandi blows up your city, you respond with a sort of "warning shot" that incinerates his capital. If Ghandi persists in his insolence, you could push a second button that blasts his military centers. If he still continues, the third button ablates his entire continent. (Obviously, you wouldn't have to escalate in precisely that order; that's just an example).

 

[Colonel]

I remember that thread, really good ideas, lots of ideas enhanceing nuclear devolpement in the latter eras.. should really read threw it.

 

[Corvex]

I don't think there should be any choice at all, actually: Once you target a nuke on a city, it should automatically fire as soon as that nation nukes you, whether you want it to or not. And it should take a turn to reset targetting locations. And every civ should know how many nukes are aimed at them at any given time.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I think that this idea (unit 'auto-reactions') extended to conventional units is something that if ever done well, will make TBS games much better (in the sense of moving combat to one part of the game rather than the whole game.)

 

[brrrrrett]

I have found in all versions of Civ over the years that the AI has always been far too quick to fire off nuclear devices often without warning, especially on the higher levels. Not realistic enough, perhaps the consequences of starting a nuclear conflict should be more severe and the effects longer lasting.

 

[Corvex]

Like, for example, leaving vast tracts of land permanently uninhabitable? Or even the possibility of some kind of a 'nuclear winter' resulting from too many blasts?

 

[Bluemofia]

All we need to add to this idea is make all civs be able to see which city has been nuked or something, and make the ones already at war with that civ not care if that civ got nuked by someone else. Then when you choose to fire off your nukes then they won't hit an already nuked city.

As A Side Note, make cities be able to be incinerated by nukes. I tried to mod this into a game by makeing desert de-grade into coast, but it didn't work.

 

[yoshi]

Once you target a nuke on a city, it should automatically fire as soon as that nation nukes you, whether you want it to or not. And it should take a turn to reset targetting locations. And every civ should know how many nukes are aimed at them at any given time.

Yes, yes and yes but w/espionage cost. CtP2 has MAD. It works with nukes on subs as well. It's the only real alternative for a turn-based game. Civ3's nuclear age doesn't work very well becuase of this: you have to wait until your turn to counter-attack (never understood why Civ3 didn't include some kind of automated feature for this--seems like an obvious necessity).

 

[Mewtarthio]

I don't think there should be any choice at all, actually: Once you target a nuke on a city, it should automatically fire as soon as that nation nukes you, whether you want it to or not. And it should take a turn to reset targetting locations. And every civ should know how many nukes are aimed at them at any given time.

No, that's a bad idea, both for realism and strategy. For realism because if somebody nuked America today I doubt Bush would annihilate the offender because of the international outcry. For strategy because you might think it's better at the current time to overrun the country, or at least capture a few key cities, before you turn the land into a carcinogenic mire.

 

[Colonel]

Just my personel thought but I say they should go way over board on the nuclear age. Have Nuclear advisior sperate from military advisior catloging all nukes. Increase the number of nukes subs can hold, make Nuclear Bomber with two nukes a piece With these ideas you get more building possibilities, Fallout shelter to protect more of the populus in a city, have defensive and offensive nukes(defensive being much cheaper. Needing a building to build offensive nukes. Createing missile silos as a worker improvement and they would be one time use. Create Bomber patrol with a minor chance to crash causeing acciendental explosion. Increase need for spy planes\sateilites to discover where Silos are, automatic pretermined targeting.

---Note most of these ideas are just repeats from another thread mentioned at the top of this thread but I thought worth repeating if you are all talking about the nucelar age and need for improvement to make nukes a more deadly thing instead of just heavy artilery.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Actually that would depend, if the offending nation was one that we are currently may have some nukes targeted at (I'm guessing Russia, China) then we would pretty much automatically fire off ours.
On the other hand, if the nuke came from a nation that was unable to send that many of them to us (N. Korea) then they might merely invade conventionally.

What is really needed is reaction ability for all units, and then one can have a MAD strategy set towards various players.

 

[Corvex]

No, that's a bad idea, both for realism and strategy. For realism because if somebody nuked America today I doubt Bush would annihilate the offender because of the international outcry. For strategy because you might think it's better at the current time to overrun the country, or at least capture a few key cities, before you turn the land into a carcinogenic mire.

I don't know about that; wasn't the threat of instant nuclaer retaliation the whole basis of the cold war? What kept it cold, in fact?
I bet that if China lobbed a bunch of ICBMs at the United States (unlikely but not impossible), Bush would retaliate as soon as they entered American airspace , much less hit their targets.

 

[BomberEscort]

I'd like to see a MIRV option. I tried to do this with Civ III by setting the rate of fire to 4 (simulating 4 warheads), but was disappointed when I didn't see 4 explosions in a row and population reduced to 1/16 its previous value. Enable something like this for Civ IV...

• ICBMs take one full turn to toggle targeting on/off/change and setting of auto fire/manual fire.
• Tactical Nukes are exempt from this requirement.
• Proportional damage: Troops moving across grassland take more damage than MI in mountains dug in a barricade. All of this being customizable. May require a 'Nuke' tab in the editor
• New Nuke types: Fusion Warhead, Radiological (Dirty Bomb), Neutron (Kills only units, leaves buildings intact)
• MIRVs
• Bring back spy mission 'Plant Nuke'
• Option for customizable radius of explosion and damage
• Option for destroying city below a certain population (ruins)
• Nuclear outrage penalty very large for attacking non-military targets and population centers, but very small for attacking military units outside of pop. centers. This allows for strategic nuclear war. Tac-Nukes could primarily be used this.

 

[ledfan]

" got this idea from the "Enhanced modern air and navy" thread.

How about specialised artillery and bombers being able to carry tactical nukes? The smaller nukes being able to blow up a certain amount of units in a stack, but release less radiation. If used against a city it still has some effect but kills less civilians, and only takes out a couple of units...

EM bombs for use against cities would be cool. Leave units and civilians alive but wipe out that city's gold, science and production for few turns, as no electronic equipment would work. could even wipe out SAM sites for a couple of turns, allowing you to bomb the hell out of the defending units and take it, without wiping out half the population with a full stategic nuke.

yours

Ledfan"

i put this under a new thread today, but colonel pointed this thread out so I decided to add it here as well. This would add a lot more options in the nuclear age.