Infiltrator
Warlord
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2009
- Messages
- 293
Realism.. how come people are so HUGE? I mean there's a hill and 6 people can barely stand on it. Everyone's a GIANT.
I wonder if the mod should allow multiple launches of ICBMs. Realistically a nation might build up a stockpile and if they really wanted to take someone out they'd launch a bunch at once. The mod will need to differentiate between super powers and smaller nations. I guess if you are kicking ass you're likely a superpower and can launch a bunch at once if you have them.
It would be interesting to try to simulate all-out MAD nuclear warfare, seeing as the game is turn-based. One turn travel time for nukes?
Yeah, I do need to kinda take that back; another page says that one could theoretically carry a single 37.4 megaton nuclear warhead. It's still not the common case though, MIRVs are more usual. Still not exactly Earth-cracking in any case.
One turn on nukes? How many years pass per turn?
Well, I must admit that I cannot tell the difference between Imperial and Non-Imperial Mandarins
Yes, 1945 nukes are ok.....year 2000 nukes blow up planet. Good point. Not all Nukes are equal so that has to factored in to the realism mod. Nukes progressively get more powerful.
It would be interesting to try to simulate all-out MAD nuclear warfare, seeing as the game is turn-based. One turn travel time for nukes?
Yes, 1945 nukes are ok.....year 2000 nukes blow up planet. Good point. Not all Nukes are equal so that has to factored in to the realism mod. Nukes progressively get more powerful.
I think a realism mod should first and foremost deal with the political side of things. That is: Nations being created and falling, rebellions, revolutions, events beyond the player's control, randomness. Similar to the Revolution mod, which kind of became the basis for all Civ IV modding.
Nothing is really impossible with a bit of creativity, well unless you are completely inflexible.However, a number of unrealistic restrictions seems to apply to the gameplay and it is not clear whether or not they could be modded.
How is Chernobyl doing now days? That wasn't even a bomb.There have been approximately 2000 Nuclear weapons tests on earth, ranging in size from 0.5kt to 50mt, yet even in some of those test sites, there are still livable areas, Hiroshima and Nagasaki are both populated cities, Hiroshima has a population over 1 million and Nagasaki has a population of just under 500 thousand.
Realism is also highly subjective because you can't model something to be exactly like it is in the real world due to the game scale, timeframe, etc. So when adding 'bits' of realism you have to be prepared for lots of people screaming about how it isn't realistic or asking why you did that but not something else. I think it's best to consider it adding detail, not realism, and then you can decide where the game needs added detail to make it more interesting (but avoid the R word, you'll thank me later).Imho, you can add bits of realism, but it could quickly lead to too much micromanagement and ultimately less fun. Once you start adding realism how you can not add something because it removes fun while leaving in unrealistic features?
How is Chernobyl doing now days?
Don't think I said anything about mutant babies or millions dead but I'll scroll back up and check again. Just curious how many of the hundred thousand or so that evacuated were back and living there since everybody always likes to mention Hiroshima and Nagasaki when they argue that nukes won't have any effect on the world.It's a thriving wildlife sanctuary, one of the largest in Europe.
The impact on the general population is also not as bad as you probably think. The only really notable impact (aside from those directly exposed and killed in the reactor) was an increase in the incidence of thyroid cancer among the general population, which is almost always curable. The whole "Chernobyl = mutant babies" and "Chernobyl = omg millions dead" are complete myths.