Proposal: Long-range missiles

[Jippes]

In real world we have ICBMs, intercontinental ballistic missiles. ICBMs wouldn't leave a fallout behind.

They would spice up the late game by being able to hit cities and units from far away. Problem I see in current late game is that there no time to get your troops to other side of the map. With missiles you could at least try to do something.

Is there support for something like this, please discuss. Other option would be to make nuclear missiles have unlimited range.

 

[Kim Dong Un]

DPRK for VP will soon be introduced while featuring a unique missile unit. Initially it was to have a long range, almost ICBM like, but I realized how cheese it'd probably feel in game applications, especially since mine will be accessible throughout the early stages of the game. I dropped my range down a few notches, so take from that what you will, though mine is a special instance not perfectly fit for comparison. I'm actually intrigued to see how the majority vote on this poll, as it might have a say on my unit.

Obviously Best Korea adores the concept of limitless death from above using his Supreme arsenal of tactical warheads, but I've refrained from voting for now due to my doubt about the feel.

 

[Jdoug312]

An argument in favor of this idea:

The 12 tile strike range of the nuclear missile scales rather poorly with map size. 12 tiles on small encompasses much of the map, but on huge it's not that far.

On huge maps with the associated settings, you also have more players in the game, meaning more potential wars.

Yet the distances between your cities and those of non-neighbors are so vast that barring an open borders treaty with the civilization buffering your borders and those of your rivals, you're likely not coming into direct conflict and those wars are merely verbal/sanction/proxy-based.

Insert ICBMs and now civs can still damage their enemies from far away. It'd be a nice gameplay improvement, and it's consistent with real life.

 

[Fluffball]

As someone who has always played on the largest map, huge maps are approx 1.5x the size of normal maps and epic speed is 1.5x the turns of normal speed so huge maps should really be played on epic speed for balanced scaling and relatively equal travel times to traverse the map.

This doesn't really solve all the issues, specifically in regard to late game units that don't specifically move themselves but have a set range such as missiles and aircraft but that is what aircraft carriers and missile subs are for.

While we do have ICBM's in real life and while they were sometimes fun to use (out of boredom) i found they don't make an interesting gameplay mechanic and enjoy the fact they weren't really included in civ 5/vp. I have certainly had more interesting games with the use of nuclear weapons in civ 5/vp than in previous games in the franchise where in essence ICBM's become and "I win" button if you are first to get them instead of having actual 'nuclear wars' like we currently have.

 

[Skidizzle]

Is it possible to scale air and missile strike ranges by map size? Like x1.25 for aircraft and x2 for missiles

 

[Teholb]

I believe increasing range exponentially increases the calculations that AIs have to churn through for target prioritization. We're in a very good place performance wise, and I wouldn't want to see that taken away for missile spam. I also just dislike the idea of being bombarded from sources that I have no capability to strike back against, it doesn't sound like it would be very fun.

 

[bahamut19]

I like the idea of using the DPRK as an inspiration for a missile. Sure, missiles can be quite powerful in game with a long range. The current tradeoff is they are spent after one use. It would be kind of fun if there was a more powerful North Korean style missile, but with more power comes with 2 types of malice. The first is a small random chance the missile explodes before hitting the target. The second is the missile could miss its target and land in an adjacent tile. I could see it being cheap to build since it is always using outdated technology.

 

[Kim Dong Un]

I like the idea of using the DPRK as an inspiration for a missile. Sure, missiles can be quite powerful in game with a long range. The current tradeoff is they are spent after one use. It would be kind of fun if there was a more powerful North Korean style missile, but with more power comes with 2 types of malice. The first is a small random chance the missile explodes before hitting the target. The second is the missile could miss its target and land in an adjacent tile. I could see it being cheap to build since it is always using outdated technology.

Well my friend, it just so happens that you are in luck because DPRK is already in the midst of being created for VP, and it is obvious that great minds think alike because you are on the right track. Though, you will be happy to find that the Supreme Leader(s) have some tricks up their sleeves -- you're going to quite literally be able to carry around this unique missile (faith purchased) and launch it via the Leader, like a land carrier. The 4UC UU is also the Koksan, which will include a mechanic that operates around a "backfire" type concept.

Stay tuned!

 

[Zanteogo]

Do ICBM's still take 2 uranium? I haven't built one in ages but recall them being near worthless for the time taken and resources needed.

 

[Kim Dong Un]

Do ICBM's still take 2 uranium? I haven't built one in ages but recall them being near worthless for the time taken and resources needed.

Atomic Bombs and Death Robot are 1, while Nuclear Missile is 2. They hit hard, but yeah the production cost is nutty...that's why DPRK has faith bought nukes as a part of their UA!

 

[Bruhmoment]

Atomic Bombs and Death Robot are 1, while Nuclear Missile is 2. They hit hard, but yeah the production cost is nutty...that's why DPRK has faith bought nukes as a part of their UA!

The only Korea that will be added is the True, technologically advanced Korea.
I guess you could make it unlimited range in order to change something