Nukes - an underused part of Civ

[Kan' Sharuminar]

Nukes are definately not underused in my games

Is it true that the AI will not use nukes unless you yourself has detonated one first? Seems a bit too cautious for me, I'd like to have the fear that, if I declare war on a nuclear power and am winning the war, they will retaliate with nukes as a last-defence.

 

[Marshall Thomas]

How are nuclear weapons factored into the power graph? Will a nation without nuclear weapons ever declare war on a nation with nuclear weapons?

 

[Ronin228]

The nukes are a joke once your enemy builds SDI and bomb shelters.

 

[jimbob27]

Nukes are definately not underused in my games

Is it true that the AI will not use nukes unless you yourself has detonated one first? Seems a bit too cautious for me, I'd like to have the fear that, if I declare war on a nuclear power and am winning the war, they will retaliate with nukes as a last-defence.

It seems since any of the patches, the AI doesn't use nukes at all.

Oh... if you gift them in world builder they will, but after dozens of games that have entered the modern era, I've never seen the AI build a nuke themselves.

How are nuclear weapons factored into the power graph? Will a nation without nuclear weapons ever declare war on a nation with nuclear weapons?

Each nuke just counts as a large number of soldiers. Mostly every military unit and structure has a power value associated with it (measured in soldiers), and nukes have a very high value... so 1 nuke will equal the same number of soldiers as several normal units.

 

[Esox]

The nukes are a joke once your enemy builds SDI

Funny how a pipe-dream technology in the real world can make such a difference in the game.

 

[joesf35]

Funny how a pipe-dream technology in the real world can make such a difference in the game.

Ya, nukes are a big disappointment.
Why do the programmers of civ4 cease to be historically accurate in the modern age? With nuclear weapons being harmless, and global warming turning beautiful towns and farmland into a wasteland.
When was the last time any full scale rocket was successfully shot down by lasers?
When was the last time a big a forrest was baked into a desert?

 

[Howitzah]

Ya, nukes are a big disappointment.
Why do the programmers of civ4 cease to be historically accurate in the modern age? With nuclear weapons being harmless, and global warming turning beautiful towns and farmland into a wasteland.
When was the last time any full scale rocket was successfully shot down by lasers?
When was the last time a big a forrest was baked into a desert?

When's the last time we flew to Alpha Centauri?

 

[Overlag]

When's the last time we flew to Alpha Centauri?

im sure one of the voyager1/2 or Pioneer10/11 probles are on the way there...(they are all aiming to certain stars). but it sure takes time.

But your point brings me to my main "moan" about this game. The space Victory is WAY too early in this game. Its the first, and ONLY Victory i see in almost all of my games and its totally boring. At least Civ3 and Civ2 it was more mixed.

the Space Race to Alpha Centauri should be a future tech era, Where the current Space race is, should be a simple but very popular Moon race wonder/project or something.

 

[KiOwA_25]

Personally, I think the reason why nukes are under-utilised is because of the horrendous effect on global warming. One nuke, and the place starts heating up faster than a bar with a butt-naked Jessica Alba. But I digress.

Same for nuclear-powered plants. High risk of meltdown, with no advantages whatsoever - at least in Civ 3 they had a higher production bonus.

If nuking my enemy is gonna do more harm to me in the long run, then I sure as heck won't. I know it's not realistic, but it means that nukes are left on the shelf. Hey, if artillery works very differently in Civilization than from real life, why not nukes?

 

[Marshall Thomas]

What I cannot understand is why nukes are not a major factor in peace talks. I was fighting a war against Spain which she started. During the war, I built the Mannhattan Project and soon after build ICBMs. Before Isabella would talk to me, I used the ICBMs on three of her cities including Madrid. She didn't have any nuclear capabilty. Finally she stoped refusing to talk. She had one technology which I didn't have, so I demanded it as part of the price for peace(I didn't ask for any citiies). She refused. That's really quite unrealistic as it would seem that a leader would definately give up a tech in order to end being on the losing end of a nuclear war. Has anyone else can this happen to them? Is this experience typical or is the AI usually more fearfull of the threat of nuclear war?

 

[Overlag]

What I cannot understand is why nukes are not a major factor in peace talks. I was fighting a war against Spain which she started. During the war, I built the Mannhattan Project and soon after build ICBMs. Before Isabella would talk to me, I used the ICBMs on three of her cities including Madrid. She didn't have any nuclear capabilty. Finally she stoped refusing to talk. She had one technology which I didn't have, so I demanded it as part of the price for peace(I didn't ask for any citiies). She refused. That's really quite unrealistic as it would seem that a leader would definately give up a tech in order to end being on the losing end of a nuclear war. Has anyone else can this happen to them? Is this experience typical or is the AI usually more fearfull of the threat of nuclear war?

i dont understand that either..... but it seems if the AI hates u it wont give you anything... even if it is to stop you killing them.

 

[CharmzOC]

i dont understand that either..... but it seems if the AI hates u it wont give you anything... even if it is to stop you killing them.

Few truer words have been spoken. Getting a city out of an AI civ is downright impossible unless the city is either about to culyuralyy convert anyway or is completly worthless.Once in civIII I offered my entire empire for one city for horsehockys and giggles and they wouldn;t take it, Also, why is there diplomacy + points for returning a city to its original owner. I was the Persians and I was very close with France and America. They both ended up at war with monty and lost besacon and chicago, repectivly, to the Aztecs. I declared war, sent over an army, recaptured the cities and returned them to their rightful owners, To my surprise neither liked me any better for sacrificing my troops for them.

 

[Surtur]

The most funny thing is that the AI doesn't even build nukes...

 

[burunduk34]

Will a nation without nuclear weapons ever declare war on a nation with nuclear weapons?

It will. I'd build just one nuke, before the UN voted to outlaw them. Then I got attacked by France and had the pleasure of dropping it on France.

 

[CantaloupeKing]

I don't know if this has been done before, and when that is said it usually was, but I am pretty confident in saying that a tactical nuclear missile, which as stated earlier in the thread by a group of individuals as being cheaper to produce and less effective, could be made.

My idea, if not taken already, is that a small precision nuclear device can be fired from a naval unit with the sole purpose of launching these missiles at one particular plot. The bomb is small and drastically weaker than the ICBM, and while it does not have the capacity to kill any units in the target tile, it will destroy any improvement inside, roads and rails, and instantly and assuredly leave fallout with a 100% success rate. To make things more efficient, this precision fallout should take twice as long to sweep by workers, effectively making the tile useless for a long period and robbing the target civ of its benefits and resources.

This smart bomb should be limited though, as to not make it too easy for the better players...theres gotta be some challenge. By this I mean that the missiles can ONLY be fired from a missile-only naval unit with a limited range, say 2-4 or five tiles away from the ship. This way, strikes are more strategic and rewarding, as well as planned better than a super ICBM death explosion that leaves everyone dead and everything radioactive. By limiting its capabilites but giving it longer effect time, I can see a strategic missile being the next "Pillage", allowing you to assault a city with your land units on one side of the continent and destroy improvements for the naval capitol on the other end, to stem the flow of soldiers from the well established capitol onto the city being seized.

These missiles could provide a delay that would definitely save a small attack force on land, so seeing as how I said they were good and all, I'm deciding whether or not they should be more production-expensive than the ICBM. Thats up to Sid tho.
-The King

 

[patrickkrebs]

It's a shame that most Civ games are won before the modern age, unless I purposely prolong them.

I think you're just not playing on a hard enough level.

 

[patrickkrebs]

Bring back tactical nukes from Subs!

And whatever happened to "My words are backed with NUCLEAR WEAPONS!" as in an immediate impact on diplomacy - i.e people making NICE with you because you can annihilate them - and vice versa!

I agree that was one of my favourite aspects of the original.

 

[KiOwA_25]

To get an idea of how important nukes are in world diplomacy, just look at North Korea and Iran, for goodness sake.

The former has the warheads but lacks sufficiently reliable delivery platforms, but as a result everyone is gearing up militarily. Iran probably doesn't even have any nukes yet, but the U.S. is already mighty jumpy over the issue.

Methinks nukes are very important in changing the way the world views you.

 

[gdpdht]

The most funny thing is that the AI doesn't even build nukes...

Yes, I have never seen an AI build nuke so that has to be fixed. I hope that the expansion pack will fix that, but I doubt it. Also, if you give the AI nukes via the editor and the AI drops a nuke on your city you don't even get to see the explosion, and this is with show enemy moves turned on.