They Should Probably Fix Global Warming.

[TheMeInTeam]

Before.

After.

And this is on normal game speed. Not marathon, where it would be even worse (since GW does not scale).

Nukes = GW is not based on realism. This is some true garbage!

That is all.

But man, it's fun to gift or launch over 100 tac nukes . MM went from about 10 turns from culture to having all of his cities except 2 razed, and those 2 left smoldering in radiation.

Stupid GW. Where are you Al Gore? Where?!

 

[r_rolo1]

Mad Max strikes again

I do remember the days when people talked about nuclear winter

 

[Camikaze]

I do think that using 100 nukes would have some detrimental environmental effects, though.

Maybe this is a little overboard, and I for one would like to see global warming become more complex than completely random tiles turning to desert, but maybe it's just a good game balancing technique, to stop the overuse of nukes?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I do think that using 100 nukes would have some detrimental environmental effects, though.

Maybe this is a little overboard, and I for one would like to see global warming become more complex than completely random tiles turning to desert, but maybe it's just a good game balancing technique, to stop the overuse of nukes?

That's pretty arguable, considering it screws over everyone, not just the nuke-user . That's why I showed the AI tiles - they were not spared!

I just started really looking @ how nukes work in practice @ high levels (this one was on immortal, but I fell really far back in tech because the AIs were all huggles trading for most of the game). I actually could have won if I'd taken the trouble to build more ground troops and cap a few people...and not let louis get so huge (fed his side too many nukes compared to mao's).

Nukes are incredible. Before SDI, you can completely nullify any stack for the price of around 4 infantry. After SDI, you usually need 3 tac nukes rather than 2 on average :/. Definitely the way to go vs those runaway power graphs.

 

[r_rolo1]

Well, if we count all the nukes that were used so far since the Manhattan project, we should not be that far of 100 nukes and the world had not suffered such kind of dramatic effects

@ TMIT

new strategy for high levels:
-Get sushi
-Get nukes
-Nuke the world
-starve the AI
-profit

 

[sfnhltb]

There have been at least 500 atmospheric nuclear tests. Of course they have had many and varied negative environmental effects, but they haven't quite turned the world into a desert that I noticed.

 

[Redcoat Captain]

Hide behind the Cows! they somehow managed to survive a nuclear war

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Hide behind the Cows! they somehow managed to survive a nuclear war

I like the beavers more myself.

 

[deanej]

Am I the only one that remembers the changes to global warming that came with the 3.17 patch? The amount of forests and jungles still in the world is now taken into account as well (but nukes still are as well).

 

[Joecoolyo]

Well someone was a little trigger happy . That red button is very tantalizing

 

[conception]

I think global warming should be a factor if 100 nukes were launched at once or within a very short time span. But I hate that the game starts to implement it after just one or two nuclear launches. It's just absolutely silly that the game gives us nukes yet they merely act as a double edged sword. I think that, just like in real life, the real deterrent to using nukes should be getting nuked yourself.

 

[UWHabs]

Probably the best way to counter nukes would be that for every nuke launch, you get a 10 turns whip-like penalty for "you used a WMD!" Since if you got rid of global warming, there would be no dis-incentive to nuking someone if you were even slightly ahead in tech (ie. had fission and they didn't). Throw on some heavy negative diplo modifiers, and a slight increase in global warming (assuming they fix it to not just turn the world in a desert), and that's reasonable.

Even if global warming was switched to another completely idiotic thing like -1 food or production or -2 commerce on a tile, then have it be able to compound itself, that would be fine. Or even if we had facilities like terraforming from civ2, then we could at least battle it. It would be a nuisance to keep sending workers all over the place converting back the desert, but at least then you could maybe manage it.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I think global warming should be a factor if 100 nukes were launched at once or within a very short time span.

Sort of like how if you improve more than 3 banana resources you have a 25% chance to have a city explode outright, correct? They make about equal sense .

I think that, just like in real life, the real deterrent to using nukes should be getting nuked yourself.

Somewhere in the > 100 nukes produced either gifted or launched, I was hit by...

0 nukes. The AIs had the techs for it, but were always tied up by other AIs. When I did declare, MM might have had nukes. I don't know. Every coastal city he had got razed on turn 1 after getting hit by 3 nukes, and each of his interior cities were hit by 2. I'm not sure if his nuclear missiles would have survived, if he had any. Nobody else launched on me, either, and that's why the AI sucks .

Probably the best way to counter nukes would be that for every nuke launch, you get a 10 turns whip-like penalty for "you used a WMD!"

It's an interesting idea but they'd DEFINITELY have to remove the ability to gift them then, else you could cause two AIs to starve themselves to pop 1 globally and disband all their troops.

Throw on some heavy negative diplo modifiers, and a slight increase in global warming (assuming they fix it to not just turn the world in a desert), and that's reasonable.

I know I didn't post the save, but there ARE negative diplo modifiers already. You get -3 for nuking someone and -2 for nuking a friend. I had AIs at -50 with me .

They could just kill the GW and make nukes do less damage or cost more, too. Tactical nukes are cheap! You can make one for less than the hammer investment of 2 infantry...and considering 2 of them basically eradicate anything...!

 

[mechaerik]

Nukes are immune to other nukes IIRC.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Nukes are immune to other nukes IIRC.

Not if the result is you entering the city they exist and razing it .

 

[nanomage]

yes, GW is horrible in CIV. i'm afraid it will never be fixed, and actually i do not think anyone really know what will happen if the world is overpolluted or nuked to devastation. There are talks about sea level rising and deserts enlarging, as well as about global winter due to the athmosphere being filled by ash or something, but i'm afraid noone really know how will it look in real life - and how should it look in CIV.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

They could just remove it. It's not like it serves a balancing role or something. I really doesn't do anything but annoy us and screw up HoF time victory scores for the poor souls who attempt to tolerate that.

 

[ston]

Well someone was a little trigger happy . That red button is very tantalizing

Couldn't resist...

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1153869/history_eraser_button_ren_and_stimpy/

 

[Iranon]

What's worse... if you prepare for it, Global Warming is a good thing. Corner the market on corporations, particularly food ones, and the AIs are left in the dust even after they scrub the fallout.

 

[Rusty Edge]

I'd like to see a change in sea level over the course of the game to demostrate an ice age and global warming if and when they occur.