Nuke Salad

[Pyrodrew]

From the Soren AI Transcript...
You can't destroy enemy cities with nukes... Nukes do not destroy enemy cities... it used to work that way but it was deemed too powerful. so there is no way of doing it

Umm... someone tell that to Japan. Regardless of cities, someone mentioned a nuke not even being able to kill any of the 10 knights they dropped it on. It seems like a nuke is simply a $1billion cherry bomb which just makes lots of smoke. Why pay so much for it & risk so much (global warming & having the other AIs hate you) only for smoke? And if having it do more damage would be deemed "too powerful", couldn't you do other things to offset that power. Example - increase the production cost, increase the unit fee for nukes (instead of 1 gold/turn, 10 gold/turn), make it cost a population point or 2 (people leaving your civilization for making it), increase the odds that cities will now defect from your civilization for using a nuke, for each nuke used a protestor will appear in each town for x turns, make nukes unable to target capital cities, or... something.

But bottomline if someone puts a salad in front of me & tells me it's a hamburger... that doesn't make it a hamburger. Likewise, the Civ3 nuke isn't a nuke... it seems like more of a big expensive cherry bomb.

[Yoleus]

Agree!
You fascist bastards! We will now punish you with our superior cherry blossom bomb! The cute effect is so strong it may even kill one of your soldiers of a heart attack!

BTW, you thread showed one of the best titles in a while, IMHO

[Skanky Burns]

I agree totally though. And the Manhatten project shouldnt allow everyone to start their own nukes... the Americans certainly didnt hand out the schematics after they discovered how to make a nuke.

[Timeline]

Agree!

[Yoleus]

Originally posted by Skanky Burns
And the Manhatten project shouldnt allow everyone to start their own nukes.

Right. Luckily now The Manhattan is a MINOR wonder, so everybody has build THEIR OWN before building nukes, at least this is mich better - and welcome.

[Haphazard]

Originally posted by Skanky Burns

the Americans certainly didnt hand out the schematics after they discovered how to make a nuke.

Not for a few years after WWII at least...

Spies would eventually get their hands on the info, so the Civ2 approach isn't too unreasonable. Minor wonder status to represent the infrastructure req'd is a fair idea.

[David Murray]

Haven't got the game yet--what exactly do nukes do, then?

In Civ2 they destroyed all units in a city, reduced the population by half and polluted some squares. They were pretty weak for my taste back then.

[Haphazard]

They're weaker now. Only 50% chance to kill each individual unit in blast radius. What's the difference between Tactical and ICBMs except range?

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by David Murray
Haven't got the game yet--what exactly do nukes do, then?

In Civ2 they destroyed all units in a city, reduced the population by half and polluted some squares. They were pretty weak for my taste back then.

same as before, only they don't kill all of the units.

[derdede]

It might be slightly OT, but the same applies to cruise missiles.
I really loved those in CIV II. Long range, enough firepower to sink even a cruiser (which isn't all that unrealistic) and inexpensive. But now...
You can't put them in a sub !!!!!!!!
They aren't treated like a nuclear missile, nor like an air unit. Instead they are an artillery type of unit !
You have to put them on a transport, they have a movement of 2, and they aren't allowed to destroy anything.

They suck !

[derdede]

Oh, I forgot. Their range also sucks !

[David Murray]

Surely there must be some way to tweak the firepower/range/attributes etc of units in the game.

[mharmless]

Umm... someone tell that to Japan.

The civilopedia says that the 'tactical nuke' is a sub-five megaton yeild weapon. Compare this with the 'Fat Man' bomb droped on Nagasaki, which was was the more advanced and complicated of the two devices used. It was a plutonium implosion weapon, and had a yeild of about 20 megatons.

Nagasaki is still inhabited to this day, and in fact there is a lovely park at the point on the ground above which the Fat Man device was detonated. The destruction was immense, but it certainly did not wipe out the city. A five megaton yeild is pretty damn weak.


That being said, I wish at least the ICBMs packed some more punch. For me, the nukes fail the 'fun' test. Now SMAC nukes, those pass the fun test. My god, those were some extremely potent weapons =)

Edit:
Oh, and Manhatan project is definitly still a major wonder. The americans built it in my last game, and I was sudenly able to make nukes.

[Venger]

Originally posted by mharmless


The civilopedia says that the 'tactical nuke' is a sub-five megaton yeild weapon. Compare this with the 'Fat Man' bomb droped on Nagasaki, which was was the more advanced and complicated of the two devices used. It was a plutonium implosion weapon, and had a yeild of about 20 megatons.

Holy $hit you are wrong as all hell! 20 KILOTONS.

Nagasaki is still inhabited to this day, and in fact there is a lovely park at the point on the ground above which the Fat Man device was detonated. The destruction was immense, but it certainly did not wipe out the city. A five megaton yeild is pretty damn weak.

Holy $hit you did it again! 5 Megatons is weak? The US doesn't even actively deploy anything approaching a 5 Megaton bomb! Most yields are under one megaton.

Oh, and Manhatan project is definitly still a major wonder. The americans built it in my last game, and I was sudenly able to make nukes.

Well you got this part right.

Venger

[Trifna]

I agree. And I also agree that people in our own civilisation should not like to see us do so. There's always a little part of protestators when doing such. Maybe it would affect less in certain political systems, but stil, some wouldn't like. Maybe some other civilisations would have some of their citizens unhappy til they attack or do something against the one who used nukes??? Or some would ask for disarmement?

[Wulfram]

I'd say it should add to war weariness, do nasty things to your relations with other civs (unfriendly becomes hate, neutral becomes unfriendly, friendly becomes neutral and worshipful becomes friendly) and increase the likelyhood that others would use it on you (the proportionate response). The thing that stopped the USA or the USSR using nuclear weapons was the fact that if you used Nukes then others would use it on you.

[HugoHillbilly]

I admit the nukes are kind of lame, but they are really usefull if you use them properly. First of all the ICBM has unlimited range. This is extremely awesome, you dont have to worry about protecting it like in previous civ games.

Also because of the fact that cities of >12 give a better defensive bonus then <13 cities a drop in half is REALLY useful. the 50% to destroy enemies is an added bonus. Remember it now destroys enemies around the city not just in it.

Ok now if that isnt enough, it destroys all the improvements around it and pollutes all those squares. The nuke would be super-weak in Civ2, but this is Civ3. That city is now disconnected from the trade route, ie no strategic/luxury resources. Their production is totall fcked, reinforcements cant be warped into the city ala railroad, it is starving (and combined with some artillery bombardment) you can easily get it to <7 for NO defense bonus.

whew ok that is alot, I think the Nuke is Extremely powerful Balanced for civ3 not civ2.

My only complaint is after its dropped you gotta wait for the computer to calculate before the effects are seen, so the fun factor is missing.

As I said I think the nuke is lame but thats my opinion, I think its good if everyone considered the other side instead of ranting and raving on the forum.

[Yoleus]

Hugo[...], that's a nice point of view. It seems it makes sense. Anyway, I miss the Big KaBoom!!!!

[Shadowstrife911]

20 kilotons? No I believe it was megatons...unless u were being sarcastic.

[Jaybe]

Originally posted by Shadowstrife911
20 kilotons? No I believe it was megatons...unless u were being sarcastic.

Nagasaki & Hiroshima. They were 15-20 KILOTONers. Not Megatoners.
Venger has his info correct.
(Multiple warheads of smaller yield, spaced properly apart, produce much more damage than single warhead of large yield. OTH, fatricide effects (EMP from blast destroying electronics of an incoming warhead) might in reality make later incomings a bunch of duds).

Now I will leave this thread alone. Firaxis will either modify the nukes or they won't.

[ProfessorPhobos]

The Atomic weapons dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were in Kilotons. All tactical nuclear weapons (artillery, torpedoes, etc) are in Kilotons. Some of the bigger, long range hydrogen devices went into the megaton range, but eventually both sides realized that there really wasn't much point to anything above a megaton. In fact, most Soviet ICBM's were about 500 kilotons. A Nuclear Weapon doesn't kill everything in a city, blight the landscape for 200000 years, and destroy every military unit in the city. (50% might actually be a tad excessive...)
Most major cities were targeted with multiple warheads to ensure total destruction. The only real problem with Civ3's nukes is that they are pretty expensive, not because they don't do enough destruction.

[Freeze]

So will they be adding Planet Busters to the game?

[Seraphim]

They're right: the one dropped on Hiroshima had an explosive force of 12-15 kilotons, the one on Nagasaki was 20-22 kilotons. You can read a technical description of each of them here.

[civ-n00b]

i somehow doubt they'll add planet busters. its not like we can already deface the planet and run over civs in this game... heck, i rampaged through 1/2 a huge map with 100-150 units (mech inf and modern armor) without using any nukes... only thing stopping me now is my desire for a space race victory and the fact that CORRUPTION TAKES AWAY 1/3 OF ALL MY INCOME!!!! AHHHHHHHHHHHH!

[Pyrodrew]

1st, Firaxis didn't say they changed the nuke for historical accuracy... I could accept that somewhat. Again, they did it because they "deemed it too powerful." Game tweaking happened up to the last minute & other game balance issues are still debated here. Again if you deem a hamburger too unhealthy (or too powerful) don't put a salad in front of me & call it a hamburger to make up for it.

2nd, Hugo - no one used any "rants" or "raves" when you made your post. That seems like just a weak unfounded attack. Rant - n - To speak or write in a angry or violent manner; rave. The exclamation marks derdede used could be expressed with shock, not always anger. Jaybe used a rant emoticon after you made your post. So "rave" was out of line, unless you're a psychic.

3rd, if we were playing for 100% historical accuracy most of the unit stats would be skewed & we would have 1 warped game. The bombs that hit Japan didn't destroy "all the improvements around it", yet I didn't see ProfessorPhobos complain about that. At any rate would you rather lean towards historical accuracy or fun?

[ProfessorPhobos]

<<<<3rd, if we were playing for 100% historical accuracy most of the unit stats would be skewed & we would have 1 warped game. The bombs that hit Japan didn't destroy "all the improvements around it", yet I didn't see ProfessorPhobos complain about that. At any rate would you rather lean towards historical accuracy or fun? >>>>>>>>>

Whoah! Since when am I complaining? I like the nukes how they are, and I was only trying to point out the strong historical analog to their current settings.

[Pyrodrew]

Whoah! Since when am I complaining? I like the nukes how they are, and I was only trying to point out the strong historical analog to their current settings.

Complain was too strong of a word? ok. Anyways, I was only saying your points were one-sided since you left out all the inaccurate historical parts of the Civ3 nukes.

[mharmless]

Yup, screwed the pooch on that one. Fat Man was definitly a 20 KILOTON bomb. Civilopedia definitly says sub-five megatons on the tactical nuke entry, more than two orders of mangnitude more powerfull. Maybe they are being under represented =)

[gachnar]

Originally posted by Yoleus

Right. Luckily now The Manhattan is a MINOR wonder, so everybody has build THEIR OWN before building nukes, at least this is mich better - and welcome.

Um.

Or not.

The version I bought and am currently playing has The Manhattan Project as a Great Wonder that allows all Civs to start building nukes.

If you edit it to make a Small Wonder, then the effect still stands. Everyone can build their own, but as soon as one civ builds one, all civs can build nukes.

Its actually hardcoded (firmcoded? scripted-but-uneditable) into the game.

[ProfessorPhobos]

<<<<,Complain was too strong of a word? ok. Anyways, I was only saying your points were one-sided since you left out all the inaccurate historical parts of the Civ3 nukes.>>>>>

Well, naturally. If they were historically accurate, their effects would be much different, we'd be able to build MIRV weapons, missile silos, mount dozens of missiles on a single submarine, load them into artillery, and load 'em on bombers...

But there's strong indication that they shouldn't be as powerful, as, say the planet busters in SMAC. Or even as powerful as they were in Civ2. (They could probably be a lot cheaper, though.)