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

Nuclear weapons

Discussion in 'General Balance' started by BliTTzZ, Feb 17, 2020.

  1. BliTTzZ

    BliTTzZ Warlord

    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    Messages:
    105
    I was thinking about nuclear warfare recently. Sure it's very annoying once your cities are bombed into oblivion. But this strategic defense structure offers too much of safety against nuclear bombardment. Plus nuclear missiles feel somewhat underwhelming considering their resource price.

    1. Not too long ago I thought nuclear bombs can be shot down by fighters/mobile AA and this balanced them with nuclear missiles quite nicely. However considering how things really are (both weapons being invulnerable to AA), nuclear missile feels very underwhelming by providing just a bit more range and detonation radius over nuclear bomb. It's really a lot better to build 2 bombs instead of 1 missile, especially when uranium is scarce and you're not Russia/chose Autocracy. Even while being Russia with Autocracy I chose bombs over missiles quite often. So at least make range of ICMBs almost global? For example leave other parameters the same, but increase the range to twice as large that of the bomb's.

    2. Strategic defense building also indirectly encourages you to build bombs, since it has identical modifiers against both these weapons. What about having different modifiers? Also lowering chances to detonate a bomb/missile without damage to the city? In return it could decrease damage done to population and city buildings.

    Curious to hear your opinions.
     
  2. SuperNoobCamper

    SuperNoobCamper Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2017
    Messages:
    355
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Egypt
    So you want a scarce mineral-required extremely expensive & extremely late in the game unit/bomb detonation to be chance based ? why not also bring the spearmen destroying tanks from civ 3 ?
    With all due respect but adding more RNG/chance based mechanics to the game is one of the worst things that could be done.... i really don't want to spend 10-15 turns building an ICBM and have an oopsie, the fuse is not working because my opponent had strategic defenses.
     
  3. BliTTzZ

    BliTTzZ Warlord

    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    Messages:
    105
    From what I know these buildings already have 50% chance to detonate nuclear weapons without any damage done to the city. So what I propose is to lower this value. In return this building could increase survivability of citizens (less population dies from nuclear attack).

    EDIT: I checked. It already has 50% chance to detonate nuclear weapons without damaging city or surrounding tiles. And it already reduces population loss by 75% from nuclear attack.
    This RNG should be toned down or removed in my opinion.
     
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2020
    Arthur Jama and SuperNoobCamper like this.
  4. BliTTzZ

    BliTTzZ Warlord

    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    Messages:
    105
    Or at least nuclear missiles could cost 1 uranium instead and be considered as atomic bomb upgrade and not standalone unit.
     

Share This Page