Nuclear War Ideas

[DarkCloud]

Hmm... just wondering, what do you all think about the following two ideas for new Nuclear War build options:

1. Anti-Espionague Task Force
<i>(After being built, this force will foil any and all incoming spies)</i>

2. Stockpile Iron
<i>(After being built, you can build 2 cities in one turn rather than building 1 on turn 1 and another on turn 2... this way, other players don't know about your dangerous plans for expansions until it's too late ;))</i>

[Trokair]

How long would the task force last for? If it was "infinite" that wouldn't work at all. However the stockpileing of Iron is a very interesting idea.

[DarkCloud]

Well, I suppose it could either last only 1 turn... or it could foil a total of 2 espionague teams (therefore, if 3 nations sent spies, then one would get through ;))

[GeoModder]

Then the problem is <i>which</i> ones spy got through... ;)

[DarkCloud]

That could be determined by the times in which the players send the PMs ;)

[DarkCloud]

This other idea's a bit strange however-

3.) Self Destruct
<i>(You construct a "cancel all orders and launch atomic device" weapons system that will react when your final citadel is destroyed- this will automatically send all your warheads at the nation which attacked you and will cancel all your remaining build orders)</i>

[:) Smiley]

How about simple counterespionage, where you can use your own spy to make yourself immune to all sabotage for one turn.

[DrSpike]

Spies were imbalanced for the early wars, and out of my suggestions the group chose to have bunkers as the counter to spies. The counter-espionage idea was considered, but I'd have to give more thought to implementation to retain balance. It is much easier to throw up ideas than it is to make an option viable but counterable, which is the goal.

Stockpile iron I think is superfluous. I don't think there are many occasions where you would forgo having the first city built for 1 turn - it may save you.

Self destruct is also a bad idea IMO. It discourages attacks too much.

[Spaced Cowboy]

Ah... remember the fun we had with governments....:cute:

[DrSpike]

Yeah. :(

Originally posted by DrSpike
It is much easier to throw up ideas than it is to make an option viable but counterable, which is the goal.


:)

[Jamski]

Ah... remember the fun we had with governments....

It could have worked :cute:

-Jam

[DarkCloud]

Stockpile iron I think is superfluous. I don't think there are many occasions where you would forgo having the first city built for 1 turn - it may save you.
I can think of many reasons- people building cities give away what they're doing with their turn- in essence they betray intelligence that they could use to covertly help themselves! ;)

[DarkCloud]

Self Destruct may or may not be a bad idea- Maybe if it takes 2 turns to construct, it could be balanced?

Hmm... Anti-Espionague would seem redundant if bunkers already do that.

But I still think the other 2 ideas are viable.

[:) Smiley]

How about secret cities that take 2 turns to build?

[DarkCloud]

How would anyone destroy them?

I can see them possibly working- but they don't seem that realistic.

--If they were to be used (here's an idea):

1. If Player A has 3 cities... and 3 nukes are sent, the 4th city is revealed... if 4 nukes are sent- the 4th autodetects radiation from the 4th city and destroys it.

2. If Player B sends a spy to Player A to disrupt stuff, B detects the 4th city.

[:) Smiley]

Can someone elaborate how the governments worked?

[vovan]

Basically, each player chose a government at the start of the game. Each government gave certain benefits, and had certain drawbacks. IIRC, communism, for example, allowed for faster production of nukes, but you couldn't build new cities, or some such. You could also change your government mid-game, but that took a turn, so noone did it. The governments were abandoned, because they were too hard to balance. IIRC democracy was way out of balance, though I don't quite remember why - I think it allowed to construct two cities per turn? There was also a "propaganda" order, which allowed you to take over another person's city. Maybe democracy had something to do with that.

[vovan]

Actually, turns out, I was way off on the benefits of governments. :) Check out this thread:

Nuclear War II (http://www.apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=102798)

The opening post by ADG has the rules.

[DrSpike]

Democracy was imbalanced since you could use propaganda on all the other govt types and get 2 cities. :)

[Skanky Burns]

And propaganda itself was twice as powerful as nuking or building cities. You were effectively doing both.