(07) Proposal: Make Nuclear Missiles Better

Status
Not open for further replies.
I was only speaking within current VP situation, reducing supply would certainly help against doom carpet but that's another topic entirely.

In term of actual use for nuke there's little that can be done to make it fun, either all in or nobody touching it, thus if you're to put in the effort to make things interesting I would say improving tactical combat would be better, as there're a lot more chance for the changes to actually be used. The changes you mentioned (aside from nuclear winter threat) are also mostly tactical anyway, locking them behind the diplomacy of nuke isn't very nice.
 
How about also doubling fallout radius but halving the damage it does.

I support increasing range and reducing costs.
 
Last edited:
I was only speaking within current VP situation, reducing supply would certainly help against doom carpet but that's another topic entirely.

In term of actual use for nuke there's little that can be done to make it fun, either all in or nobody touching it, thus if you're to put in the effort to make things interesting I would say improving tactical combat would be better, as there're a lot more chance for the changes to actually be used. The changes you mentioned (aside from nuclear winter threat) are also mostly tactical anyway, locking them behind the diplomacy of nuke isn't very nice.
One could leave the missle as-is except greatly increase range. ICBMS can hit basically any target in the world. Therefore if you use it, it's guaranteed your capital will be decimated.
Then add a tactical nuke that is cheaper, with low range (4? 5?), and lower damage(1-tile radius). The anti-nuke bunker makes the city immune to it (but not ICBMS). I would imagine a land unit that can carry guided missiles and tactical nukes like missile cruiser can on sea.
 
I think you're missing my point. The thing with nuke is once you use it you can almost say goodbye to all diplomacy option (or any other options but warfare), thus it can only be used within a very limited timeframe (shortly before the game ends, either you dominate the world or the whole world gang up on you). Spending time and effort just for that small timeframe isn't a very good investment, and it's better to put them into other tactical combat options which can be used a lot more.
Just my opinion, since there might be ppl who simply enjoy dropping a nuke on their enemies and want to have more ways to drop nukes on enemies.
 
Once utilized, the diplomatic penalty should be particularly harsh, including with City-States
I don't think it is necessary, it isn't like the USA became a world pariah after dropping two in WWII. However, it makes sense to add major diplo penalties on the Non-nuclear Proliferation in the World Congress, which makes it easy to communicate to the player what they are getting for nuking. It also gives diplo civs a way to deal with a nuclear Gandhi runaway.
 
Proposal Sponsors: Recursive.

(Sponsors have indicated that they are able and willing to perform the code changes required for this proposal if the community votes Aye on it. Other coders are free to sponsor this as well. A proposal without a sponsor will not advance to the Voting Phase.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom