Nukes - Proper/Practical Usage (I nuked joo Monty die die)

[TheMeInTeam]

If there is such a thing with these death missiles .

Anyway, nukes seem like they have incredible potential, the kind of weapon that lets you pwn SoD's, such as a stack of 70 knights/cavalry that montezuma likes to keep around.

However, I've not seen too many Emperor+ game summaries where nukes are apparent, and I myself have limited experience with them. However, I've been in a number of games now with a large, runaway-sized AI on my hands and wondering how to deal with its SoD's, which are usually unbelievably massive. After thinking about it, I thought might be the answer.

Still, if it were effective I'd imagine more people would do it? I'd have probably not considered it, if not for Obsolete. It seems he uses them to excellent effect, even forcing capitulation with them once!

What say you guys? Are nukes viable on Emperor+ outside SSE/WE? The AI seems to take its time to fission sometimes.

Also, say you have an AI that's catching up decently. If you drop a nice little missile right into each one of their cities, blasting the pop to hell and putting fallout everywhere, does this slow them down badly enough that you can just run away on them in tech? I'm thinking of say, Shaka with tons and tons of rifles or infantry, but not nuke defense. In this scenario, nuking his cities and his SoD down would in theory allow me to get mech infantry long before him, even if I attacked someone else first, right?

Of course, I'll probably try this out regardless, but I'm curious to see some other opinions also.

 

[Everest]

...Obsolete...

Is it just me or is there a "nuked them sneak peak" in every single one of his threads?

I'm sure it can work given the right circumstances. Please tell us as soon as you tried it out yourself.

 

[M.Inglehoffer]

I think fallout decays over time. In my last game, I gifted Cathy a couple of tactical nukes to help her defeat Kublai Khan, who was more advanced and had more/better land while she was a tudra colony of Sitting Bull. Neither she nor Sitting Bull had ecology, but she was able to clear fallout from her lands about 10 or 15 turns after she used the nuke.

 

[DaveMcW]

The cost of building a nuclear arsenal is comparable to building a spaceship. Especially if your opponents build SDI.

So there's not really any reason to detour to nukes, unless you have way too much production and not enough research.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

The cost of building a nuclear arsenal is comparable to building a spaceship. Especially if your opponents build SDI.

So there's not really any reason to detour to nukes, unless you have way too much production and not enough research.

Just because space is easier/more practical doesn't me I wouldn't rather win militarily . Mind you however, what I am suggesting here is winning the race to nukes by enough that opponents can not field SDI, meaning ALL ICBMs would hit, not just 1/4 or whatever. If I can hit every good city of a tech-leading AI with a nuke, what kind of damage is that to them? I'd imagine it would be quite dramatic. Tacticals would reduce the hammer cost of this somewhat.

Nukes ARE available a lot earlier than space is though, which seems to me like you can use them while teching, or to cap a game militarily. Again though, without practice with them myself it's all theory for me.

Also, in some games too much production/not enough research sums it up pretty well as I have a serious tendency towards war in general.

Also, a bit of a side topic:

What unit has the best power rating/hammer ratio in the game (in other words, what's the cheapest AI deterrent? Nukes are tied with modern armor in soldier count, but IIRC are more costly).

 

[Olodune]

The cost of building a nuclear arsenal is comparable to building a spaceship. Especially if your opponents build SDI.

So there's not really any reason to detour to nukes, unless you have way too much production and not enough research.

But, you can shut down research and rush-buy nukes -- and you can build your arsenal sooner. Tactical nukes add a lot of versatility that I haven't fully explored.

I think the best time to go Nuclear is when the late game boils down to a 1-on-1 contest between 2 superpowers (you being the weaker of the two). In this case you can shut down research while building the Manhattan Project, then rush-buy your arsenal 2 turns after it finishes (ideally with the Kremlin discount). The AI likes to build bomb shelters very quickly, so speed is key.

I suppose you can try using mass Spies to remove bomb shelters .... but I haven't tried that.

I will typically double nuke cities with large stacks, and those I can reach (to raze) on the first turn (generally coastal cities). This will slow down the AI considerably

Oh, and pillage your opponents Uranium

In a contentious game with 3-4+ competitive AIs I wouldn't advise a nuclear war ... diplomatic penalties are severe and you will have just "tossed away" a huge pile of hammers ...

 

[Olodune]

Also, a bit of a side topic:

What unit has the best power rating/hammer ratio in the game (in other words, what's the cheapest AI deterrent? Nukes are tied with modern armor in soldier count, but IIRC are more costly).

Well this thread seems to have the soldier count. I didn't do a thorough analysis but it looks like Modern Armor and Cruise Missiles are tied for the most soldiers/hammer (at 167 each).

Some of the UUs are surprisingly powerful as well, such as the Babylonian Bowman (150 soldiers/hammer) and the Panzer (167 as well). ICBMs are pretty poor deterrents at only 80 soldiers/hammer. Even warriors are "stronger" (100 soldiers/hammer)

 

[r_rolo1]

^^PRO walls with stone are a nice investiment as well in soldiers/hammers ratio

There is a good use for tac nukes in naval warfare: the elimination of Naval invasions. In one of my games I used 3 tacs to completely wipe out a modern naval invasion stack from Zara ( that war became a nice fire work with 20 nukes exchanged between me and him just in the first turn of it ). Considering the hammers spending ( 3 subs + 3 tacs ) it was a really nice investiment....

 

[tycoonist]

soldiers per hammer doesn't matter if you can make one turn units though

 

[qwertz]

Nukes are a quite cost-efficent way of killing large enemy SODs. When Monty comes at your door with 859367459345 units, throwing a nuke or three will cost him a way more than you.

 

[Olodune]

soldiers per hammer doesn't matter if you can make one turn units though

Very true ... also fewer units means less upkeep. Still the soldiers/hammer is an interesting metric.

 

[Olodune]

( 3 subs + 3 tacs ) it was a really nice investiment....

IIRC, you can load three Tacs on a single sub ... those pack a punch

 

[r_rolo1]

3 subs could cope better with the second wave that was one turn behind ( Zara really wanted to kill me that day : you know, he wanted to win by Dom ( he even made Manhattan by himself ), I launched the SS, he become pissed.... )

 

[Gliese 581]

The danger on higher levels are that you might just get nuked back and global warming and fallout is such a hassle.
But I think many players like me get bored in the late game and just want to finish it, that has always been a problem with the civ series for me. I'm sure nukes are useful vs SODs though but you already conquered your own continent in the early/mid -game didn't you?

 

[JBossch]

I used to always think nukes were just a fun thing to launch while my spaceship was on its way but I learned differently in the latest Immortal University thread (Immortal U. V - Cyrus). While I did not win as early as some, I got a conquest victory in 1948 using a massive first strike against Churchill. I think nukes have been improved a lot in BTS as I was able to take out all defenders in most of his cities with just 2 nukes then walk a paratrooper in on the same turn. He capitulated as fast as he could.
As Olodune has pointed out, the key is to turn off science for a few turns while telling every city to build nukes. When you have enough cash, just rush buy in every city where you can afford it. Then, let the nukes fly!

I do think there is a limited window before your target gets SDI and you need to crush them quick before they can build there own nukes. In the immortal University game I used carrier strikes to destroy Churchill's uranium mines every turn after completing Manhattan Project.

Note: Be careful of your allies'/vassals' troops as you will not be allowed to drop nukes where they can be hurt by them.

 

[InvisibleStalke]

I agree - single superpower opponent + unique possession of fission tech + US = stop research to accumulate cash while building MP + rushbuy nukes + devastation of AIcapital /HE / Ironworks cities + capture of all reachable cities in first turn of war = victory.

 

[Olodune]

I agree - single superpower opponent + unique possession of fission tech + US = stop research to accumulate cash while building MP + rushbuy nukes + devastation of AIcapital /HE / Ironworks cities + capture of all reachable cities in first turn of war = victory.

^^ And I thought I was succinct

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Hehe...thanks all. You mentioned diplo hits...is there a diplo penalty for nuking someone that people hate, or it it just "you nuked us!" and "you nuked our friend" that I have to worry about?

I can think of scenarios in past games where I could have nuked the most hated guy or heathen.

 

[Everest]

Its a "u used nukes" penalty IMHO.

If you're going to use nukes corporations and settled people play an important role as they aren't going to be affected by global desert-warming

 

[siggboy]

Does anybody here play Rhye's and Fall and has tried the nukes there? In the manual for that mod it says "nukes are now a deadly weapon"...