Nuclear missles unbalanced?

[Deep_Blue]

I was amazed when I realized for the first time (yesterday) that nukes do destroy cities completely in the game and wipe them out of the surface of the earth , that is IMO is way to unbalanced. Imagine that I was first to get nukes and then started nuking my rival civ to death until they lose all cities except capital (nuke-immune).

Are there any buildings in the game that give defense against Nukes? Where is SDI project from Civ4 and why it is not in civ5?

For balancing nukes:
1-We need SDI in the game
2- Cities cant be totally destroyed but reduced to size 1
3- Allow Nuclear prohibition resolution by UN leader (as in civ4).

 

[Ddude97]

But how would you spam that many nuclear missiles in the game? Each Nuclear missile costs 2 uranium. Indeed, GDR is much more worth the uranium, you can build two for the cost of one nuclear missile. There is no SDI because there is no need for one, you won't be able to have that many nukes, and atomic bombs can be shot down by fighters. Cities should be able to be destroyed, otherwise nuclear missile is just about pointless, building 2 A-bombs or GDRs instead already makes more sense.

 

[Kyroshill]

Besides... nuclear missiles (e.g. ICBMs, et al.) are OP in RL...

hence MAD...

and so far, nobody has had the guts/insanity to use them

 

[Soronery]

But how would you spam that many nuclear missiles in the game? Each Nuclear missile costs 2 uranium.

Gold steal combined with rush buying. nukes cost around 2000g each and it isn't impossible to be getting 700 gold/turn during a GA if you have lots of puppets by then.

 

[Soronery]

But how would you spam that many nuclear missiles in the game? Each Nuclear missile costs 2 uranium.

Gold steal combined with rush buying. nukes cost around 2000g each (quick pace) and it isn't impossible to be getting 700 gold/turn during a GA if you have lots of puppets by then.

 

[TheHarshax]

We don't need SDI. There are already two counter units in the game.

Fighters/Jets should be able to shoot down Atomic Bombs, as atomic bombs are dropped from bombers.
Missiles should be able to shoot down Nuclear Missiles, as that is what SDI was suppose to be.

SDI in Civ4 was imbalanced. You built it once, and it provided 50% nuke protection. Building a missile to counter each nuclear missile, and placing it strategically within your empire is more tactical, more strategic, and more fun.

EDIT: The other thing that bugs me about nukes in Civ5, is that automated workers don't prioritise fallout cleanup.

 

[Deep_Blue]

SDI in Civ4 was imbalanced. You built it once, and it provided 50% nuke protection. Building a missile to counter each nuclear missile, and placing it strategically within your empire is more tactical, more strategic, and more fun.

it was 75% chance in Ci4.

We either need SDI or making limit on Nuclear missiles per civilization (regardless of uranium quantity).

 

[TheHarshax]

it was 75% chance in Ci4.

We either need SDI or making limit on Nuclear missiles per civilization (regardless of uranium quantity).

When I fired nukes against SDI-enabled AI, that chance seemed to go up to 100%

Still, one national wonder vs. individually built nukes is over balanced in favor of SDI. I'd prefer a countering unit that must be strategically placed somewhere within your empire.

 

[Fizpez2]

When I fired nukes against SDI-enabled AI, that chance seemed to go up to 100%

Still, one national wonder vs. individually built nukes is over balanced in favor of SDI. I'd prefer a countering unit that must be strategically placed somewhere within your empire.

Seems to me it should be something like AA units - maybe with an 8 hex range. If you sit in in a city you'd be lucky to cover 3 or 4 cities - if you put it in between you'd be able to cover more but be open to attack. Bigger empire would need more but make them expensive enough so that covering every last one of your little cities might not be possible - then again who would waste a nuke on a size 4 tundra city?

 

[Deep_Blue]

When I fired nukes against SDI-enabled AI, that chance seemed to go up to 100%

Still, one national wonder vs. individually built nukes is over balanced in favor of SDI. I'd prefer a countering unit that must be strategically placed somewhere within your empire.

Good point. What about SDI protecting only the city were it was built so you need to build it in every city, is this more balanced?

 

[Samuil]

Assuming a modern day Hydrogenic bomb (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba)
that has 1,400 times greater power than the two bombs drooped on Japan combined, hits a city (any city in the world)...
You really think people would continue living there and buildings would continue functioning with all the damage and fallout?
Its damn realistic that it can destroy a city if you ask me, that is why it costs 2 Uranium!
Would any sane person actually live there in the aftermath? I do not think people live in Chernobyl...

Here is part of the text on wikipedia, so you decide if my post makes sense:
The original, November 1961 A.E.C. estimate of the yield was 55–60 Mt, but since 1991 all Russian sources have stated its yield as 50 Mt. Khrushchev warned in a filmed speech to the Communist Parliament of the existence of a 100 Mt bomb (technically the design was capable of this yield). Although simplistic fireball calculations predict a ground impact, its own shockwave reflected back to prevent this.[6] The fireball reached nearly as high as the altitude of the release plane and was seen almost 1,000 kilometres (620 mi) from ground zero. The subsequent mushroom cloud was about 64 kilometres (40 mi) high (nearly seven times the height of Mount Everest), which meant that the cloud was well inside the Mesosphere when it peaked. The base of the cloud was 40 kilometres (25 mi) wide. All buildings in the village of Severny (both wooden and brick), located 55 kilometres (34 mi) from ground zero, were completely destroyed. In districts hundreds of kilometers from ground zero, wooden houses were destroyed, and stone ones lost their roofs, windows and doors; and radio communications were interrupted for almost one hour. One participant in the test saw a bright flash through dark goggles and felt the effects of a thermal pulse even at a distance of 270 kilometres (170 mi). The heat from the explosion could have caused third-degree burns 100 km (62 miles) away from ground zero. A shock wave was observed in the air at Dickson settlement 700 kilometres (430 mi) away; windowpanes were partially broken to distances of 900 kilometres (560 mi). Atmospheric focusing caused blast damage at even greater distances, breaking windows in Norway and Finland. The seismic shock created by the detonation was measurable even on its third passage around the Earth.[7] Its seismic body wave magnitude was about 5 to 5.25.[6] The energy yield was around 7.1 on the Richter scale but, since the bomb was detonated in air rather than underground, most of the energy was not converted to seismic waves. The TNT equivalent of the 50 MT test could be represented by: a cube of TNT 312 metres on a side; or, a train of 666,000 covered goods wagons over 10,000 km long, each 15.2 metres van carrying 75 tons of TNT.
Since 50 Mt is 2.1×1017 joules, the average power produced during the entire fission-fusion process, lasting around 39 nanoseconds[citation needed], was about 5.4×1024 watts or 5.4 yottawatts (5.4 septillion watts). This is equivalent to approximately 1.4% of the power output of the Sun.[8]

Estimated damage if it hit Paris:

Total destruction within the red circle...

 

[LamaGT]

their balance is good,in real life, a single icbm can destroy a city, here from what i see you need two of them, also they aren't really icbms - they have lower range than nuclear bombs

 

[trueblue]

isnt this one of the measures of realism that some quarters are calling out for?


drop a modern nuke on a city and there aint going to be much city left, aint no body going to live there for years either. and there aint no SDI yet in real life, so in game that would just be another GDR... even though its been in previous versions.

 

[trueblue]

Chernobyl is showing serious signs of recovery, for the poster above, well if some limited wild life can be called a serious sign.

some of the photographs of the deserted area are quite stunning.

but then, that was a leak wasnt it, and not an explosion... i imagine theres a difference.

 

[Deep_Blue]

Nah forget about real life I am talking about gameplay balance, realism comparisons are not suitable for gameplay.

In real life a city have capacity for more than one archer unit... in real life it doesnt take a unit 200 years to move from one tile to another in the BCs... in real life the Pyramids didnt make workers build things faster! ..in real life you do not need Nanotechnology to complete Spaceship parts ....... long list here if you want to open the discussion about realism in the game.

 

[trueblue]

i dont want to discuss realism.


but i need to stop posting here. im biting on every second thread where someone somewhere as some daft complaint about Civ5, and that how, if done their way, Civ would be sooooo much better.


no offence meant personally there, mate!

 

[Ddude97]

But still, the cost in uranium, upkeep, transport and buildtime/money is enough to balance, guided missiles being able to intercept would be an effective counter though possibly overpowered?

 

[Deep_Blue]

i dont want to discuss realism.


but i need to stop posting here. im biting on every second thread where someone somewhere as some daft complaint about Civ5, and that how, if done their way, Civ would be sooooo much better.


no offence meant personally there, mate!

Wow

This is not complaining that Civ5 sucks this is suggestion to balance Nukes in the game for future patches or mods.. what is wrong with you really?

now stop the nagging "STOP WHINING" overused phrase for every time someone starts discussion about some aspects in the game. BTW I do like Civ5 that is for you info.

 

[hardcore_gamer]

It should be pointed out that large cities can't be destroyed with just one nuke. You need at least 2 for large cities.

 

[trueblue]

It should be pointed out that large cities can't be destroyed with just one nuke. You need at least 2 for large cities.

its all in the detail. ive never actually used a missle, not been there yet.



Deep blue, cheers dude! i see what i have become! im the whiner whining about the whiners. i think all those other threads have well n truely trolled my ass good! i do love my Civ! apologies for butting in on your thread.