Kyte Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 (edited) 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 March 21, 2017 by Kyte Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James XVI Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 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? Quote 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... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Them Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 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. 2 Quote [insert quote here] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryleh Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 You can instawin a war with this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sketchy Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicente Martinez Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 (edited) 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 March 22, 2017 by Vincent de Beer Quote "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 More sharing options...
Apeman Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 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 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Placentica Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 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. Quote Hello! If you don't like this post please go here: https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=usercp&tab=core&area=ignoredusers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.