Jump to content

Make Nukes Great Again


Kyte
 Share

Recommended Posts

TL;DR: Build a national project to launch 1 nuke per enemy city, regardless of current MAPs.

 

 

12 MAPs to launch a single nuke that might get intercepted. It just doesn't seem worth it with today's mechanics.

 

Proposal: Create a national project called the Nuclear Triad which allows you to launch a wave of nuclear missiles, one for each opponent city. 

 

 

Nukes are a joke, no one is going to store up the MAPs to use just one nuke when the enemy is pounding you with ground, sea, and air strikes. This project/mechanic would not only make nukes viable again as both an offensive strategy, but also as a deterrent. This project is also already balanced in that the initial cost for nukes, as well as upkeep costs are relatively high. 

 

The function for the number of nukes to retain is f(x) = (opponent_max_cities + 3_spy_ops). If the opponent has the Vital Defense System then f(x) = (opponent_max_cities * 1.2 + 3_spy_ops)

 

For a simulated opponent with 20 cities, the VDS, and spais, the number of nukes needed to ensure a complete second strike is 27 nukes. The initial cost would be 20k alum, 12.5k gas, 6k uranium, and 47 million dollars. Upkeep costs would be 945,000 per day in peacetime. As the game currently stands, I believe this is balanced *enough*, although thoughts and suggestions are welcome.

 

For a brief description of the Nuclear Triad project, click here.

Edited by Kyte
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds interesting, plus the amount of reduction to food production would be hilarious.

 

Though I'd think that the cost of the project would certainly have to be high, plus perhaps the effectiveness of VDS should be increased?

THE Definitive James:

KastorCultist, Co-leading Roz Wei Empyrea The Wei, former TGH warrior, Assassin, and a few more. Player of this game for more time than I want to think about...

infernalsig.png.492fbaaf465234c6d9cf76f12f038d04.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nukes are a joke, no one is going to store up the MAPs to use just one nuke when the enemy is pounding you with ground, sea, and air strikes. // Nukes are a loser's weapon. What else would you spend your MAPs on when your conventional forces are of kill? 
Also, in the instance that your nuke gets blocked by the VDS, you could always take solace in the fact that the guy you're at war with spent over 75 million on a a useless piece of junk with a ROI that's worse than that of baseball.

 

Basically, nukes are supposed to be bad. If you want to deal more damage, try to win your wars.

  • Upvote 2

[insert quote here]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nukes are a joke, no one is going to store up the MAPs to use just one nuke when the enemy is pounding you with ground, sea, and air strikes. // Nukes are a loser's weapon. What else would you spend your MAPs on when your conventional forces are of kill? 

Also, in the instance that your nuke gets blocked by the VDS, you could always take solace in the fact that the guy you're at war with spent over 75 million on a a useless piece of junk with a ROI that's worse than that of baseball.

 

Basically, nukes are supposed to be bad. If you want to deal more damage, try to win your wars.

 

^this

 

Nukes don't need a buff. They operate as intended.

XLL3z4T.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This seems like a good suggestion,but there's a huge problem,nukes are already extremely destructive weapon,in this system,people would be able to wipe out entire cities in just one attack.This would probably be much more better with missiles.

Edited by Vincent de Beer

"If a person is satisfied with everything,then he is a complete idiot.A normal person cannot be satisfied with everything."~Vladimir Putin

 

"Every human being makes mistakes."~Ian Smith

 

We do not know what tomorrow will bring. We are not prophets. This is a step in the dark. We can only proceed into the future with faith.~Pieter Wilhelm Botha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I sorta like them the way they are. Nukes are a losers weapon because one on 8 can't possibly win, but I can mess up the whole alliance teehee. Change them or leave them alone meh. I say we nerf planes because they are a losers weapon also or ships or tanks just cause I don't need to provide proof but just cry into my blankey

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apeman speaketh, we all listen.  Nukes should always be a weapon of last resort that can still bring a bit of pain.

 

Also, when the nuke people are staying this is OP....it's really really OP. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.