Nukes are not nearly damaging enough

[gregorsamsa]

Anyone else agree? They don't cause nearly enough damage, and there's no reason to avoid using them. Every time I attack a sufficiently advanced civ, they open first with any nukes they have, which seems disastrously stupid. Seems to me like the game would want to force you to deeply consider the use of nukes.

 

[Myomoto]

I have to agree. I also dislike the fact that range of the Nuclear Missle is seemingly so low, I'd like to see some ICMB-style nuke that can hit the opposite side of the planet - that would also help make nukes as dangerous as they should be, because they could be deployed with a minimal degree of military infrastructure when you reach the proper late game.

I guess it's a hard balancing act, how you prevent the science lead civ from simply nuking everybody else back to the stone age and then coasting to victory from there.

 

[tide15]

ICBM's would be nice. As it is now if you have an ocean between you and a civ you have to make subs and sail them across.
Civ 3 had the option of ICBM's or tacticle for sub use. They still could be a little more potent though. Expending three or four on a city seems like a real waste of a good nuke.

 

[GWashington]

Yeah, I agree. I like the ICBM idea too. I think jets/fighters should also be able to intercept atomic bombs since they travel in a plane, that would be cool.

 

[Krajzen]

Yeah, intercontinental range would be nice, but still...

...is there any way to DEFEND from nukes? Yeah, I can build shelters to protect population, but other than that? Can anti - air destroy flying nukes?

 

[Tyrus]

If there was some way to implement a version of M.A.D. and re-balance nukes around that, I would very much enjoy nukes.

For example, an ICBM would take one turn to reach the target after firing, and do devastating building damage. If the other civ had nukes in position to fire, they would obviously fire them at this point. Initiating nuclear war completely shuts down diplomacy with any civ for the rest of the game, but defending yourself from nuclear attack has no diplomatic penalties. Perhaps using nukes could get you banned from the World Congress.

More investment required to become a nuclear power, after Manhattan Project, nukes need to be housed in Silos, an improvement that takes workers a long time to make, and needs aluminum.

The thing about that is, in relative "game" time, your nukes would take "years" to get to their target, but in "turns" it makes sense. Perhaps you could have nukes set to auto-fire back if you are subject to attack.

I like bomb shelters, but implementing things like spreading fallout (fallout drifts to reduce tile yields), etc would be great. I think there's a ton they could do with the system.

 

[Helmling]

I'd say nukes do enough damage. Especially since there isn't a way to clean up fallout in Civ V (or is there?). I also hate that there's no SDI any more and your interceptors are helpless against those early atomic bombers, too. I think nukes are really out of balance now.

I'm all for the silos/MAD idea above, but there also needs to be harsher diplomatic penalties for using them. Some AI flavors should instantly hate you if you fire off an ICBM.

 

[sendos]

Yeah, intercontinental range would be nice, but still...

...is there any way to DEFEND from nukes? Yeah, I can build shelters to protect population, but other than that? Can anti - air destroy flying nukes?

Indeed, but when I imagine a Japanese plane trying to shoot down the Enola Gay above Japanese mainland, there is still the risk that the nuke will still be intact until the bomber drops to the ground.

 

[Arachnofiend]

Nukes do enough damage because there's no fear of mutually assured destruction. In a world where using nukes is not only sane but generally recommended, having them merely be a super air raid is quite fair.

 

[Flyboy13]

I don't really mind the lack of ICBMs too much. However, I know I've been hit with a couple of nukes and hardly even notice the difference once my workers clean up the couple of fallout spots.

I've never actually noticed, what's the diplomatic repercussions for nuking? I have a hard time believing it's worse than ye ole' warmongering penalty.

 

[Arachnofiend]

As far as I'm aware, there's no real diplomatic penalty for using them. In fact, having them just makes other civs more afraid/willing to give in to your demands because Atomic Theory ramps up your war power so much.

 

[civ54lyfe]

i've noticed that the only AI to be "Afraid" after your acquiring nukes, are the AI that were "Friendly" to you. if any other status, they are oddly unchanged. it's almost like these other AI want to get nuked

about damage.. units hanging out in radiated tiles should definitely take damage. and yes i also feel that the initial city pop death should not only be higher, but also that city should suffer 1 pop loss per turn, for something like 3-5 turns afterwards.

cleaning up a radiated tile should require some sort of tech.

 

[rexman07]

Remember this is a strategy game, and nuclear weapons are one mechanic in the game. Civ is different from real life. In particular, there is one "winner" in Civ, whereas real life is not a zero sum game. So if nuclear weapons were to be amped up in power, they'd have to be balanced in some way. One way would be to make building nukes extremely expensive. Another way is to inflict a massive happiness penalty on the nuke-launching leader. (The atrocities of mass murder breeds discontent with your leadership at home.) (A diplomatic penalty is probably not sufficient, if nukes are powerful enough; there won't be anyone left to oppose you.)

 

[Kizo]

there isn't a way to clean up fallout in Civ V (or is there?)

There is. Move a worker onto an affected tile and select "Scrub Fallout."

 

[George Abitbol]

There is. Move a worker onto an affected tile and select "Scrub Fallout."

It's quite funny to see the workers cleanning the fallout with brooms and without cbrn suits.

What happen to the fallout on mountains if they can't be cleaned?

 

[Tiny Hands]

If there was some way to implement a version of M.A.D. and re-balance nukes around that, I would very much enjoy nukes.

For example, an ICBM would take one turn to reach the target after firing, and do devastating building damage. If the other civ had nukes in position to fire, they would obviously fire them at this point. Initiating nuclear war completely shuts down diplomacy with any civ for the rest of the game, but defending yourself from nuclear attack has no diplomatic penalties. Perhaps using nukes could get you banned from the World Congress.

I love this idea. As soon as the first nuke takes flight, everyone gets a chance to pick who gets a personalized nuke basket. Units would be frozen in place where they were once the first nuke launched during that period (save nukes, of course).

More investment required to become a nuclear power, after Manhattan Project, nukes need to be housed in Silos, an improvement that takes workers a long time to make, and needs aluminum.

Made me think of Chappelle's Show's Black Bush. "He bought aluminum tubes! Do I need to remind you what you can do with an aluminum tube? Aluminum!"

 

[Callonia]

It's quite funny to see the workers cleanning the fallout with brooms and without cbrn suits.

What happen to the fallout on mountains if they can't be cleaned?

The mountains in this game is forever poisoned by fallout because there is no way to scrub them unless you're carthage I believe.

I should know.. there was a bunch of poisoned mountains I couldn't clean.

 

[reddishrecue]

Nukes do enough damage as it is. I was nuked twice by ai once and I had to scrub the fallout and clean the plundered tiles. Do you know how many turns it took my workers to recover? I had to get the citizenship social policy from liberty to speed it all up and buy more workers. The non-nuclear proliferation easily prevents new nukes from being built but old existing armed nukes can still be launched.

 

[Krajzen]

I will repeat my question - can nukes be intercepted by anti air?

 

[Agent327]

Theoretically: yes. Practically: not a chance (especially with multi-warheads).