Is nuclear war underrated

[Peter Hennesy]

On the AI - sub - nuke thing.... interesting never realised the AI actually used subs (or carriers) for that matter. Played a few pacific scenarios where its essential and nothing seems to happen. Remeber the classic in a ww2 scenario when the US sent 3 aircraft carriers across the pacific... without any aircraft or support for that matter.

Woul be interested to try to it but Ive always thought that it was hard to fight a proper nuclear war because Im sure the AI cheats to find the location of my subs (no matterhow careful I am, they seem to just take the things out willy nilly). anyone else found this or am I just being sceptical again?

[Puaxant Tuvip]

yep the ai knows where your subs are, so I rarely build them. Their movement is terrible anyways. I will use my unit the ballistic sub which has movement equivalent to a carrier and a good defense.

[War4ever]

Well personally i believe nukes are great for lightning strikes.... and for takign out the opponents navy where there is no pollution. However be warned that nukes opens up a new can of whupass if your not carefull about it. Nuke a capital and four of the surrounding large cities and move your engineers in. Nukes are the ultimate power in the universe

------------------
War is the answer when you need to strike first.

War is the answer when you think you should strike first

war is the answer when you think others may strike first.

[Aurelius]

wrong thread

[klesh]

I hesitate to develop nukes.
Everyone complaines about the AI war strategy, but it's Nuke War is not too bad.
You see, I always feel bad when I nuke a city, I'd rather overpower with tanks and howies. But the AI has No feelings. I've had them Nuke one city 3 times in a round, had entire regions (8 cities) befouled by polution, roadways destroyed. Defenders rendered non-existant. Not good.
If I do engage in Nuclear War I do Four things:

1. Have SDI's in ALL my cities.
2. Make the strike preemtive
3. Make the strike quick (1 turn)long
4. Follow up with Paratroopers, then move in transports with defensive units and engineers. (A must)

And get the War overwith quick, nothing worse than a lingering bloodbath.

[This message has been edited by Field Marshal Klesh (edited January 01, 2000).]

[War4ever]

I totally understand the need for engineers but i will nuke with absolutely no hard feelings if need be ...... and then later clean the mess

------------------
They call me Mr. Fierce

[My Wife Hates CIV]

I've used subs in the past to bring nukes in range of the AIs large cities. The AI does not attack subs with cruise missiles the same as when you bring a battleship in range. I can move to the AI homeland, unload all the nukes and move away without a single cruise missile attack. I wish subs could hold a few marines also. Can you do that in a *.txt file??

[Bohlen]

Just finished up a game where those pesky Indians built the Manhattan Project. I never allow this to happen, but I was unable to prevent it this time. Anyway, I thought the game might be over because I was looking at about 2008 and 10 or so Indian cities left to go. With the AI having nukes, I thought my 1 city per turn plan would fail. Well, as I have been in very few nuclear wars (back when I first started playing...ignorant warmonger), I was looking for the usual AI cheats that would allow my stronghold on the Indian continent to disappear. However, it did not happen, but almost did. The Indians used 2 nukes and I used only 1 for the rest of the game. I didn't even build my nuke, but took it when I bribed a city. Although I almost lost my new capital of Bombay during a nuke strike, the combination of my cruise missiles and my 1 nuke won the game for me. I thought that whenever the AI could build nukes, I would never survive or that the war would go on forever, destroying the world. I was wrong. Even though it does seem like the AI does a better job at warring when it has nukes, it still doesn't follow through all the way.

Yeah, I know...play MP for a real challenge. Ok. Anyone for a game?

[SandMonkey]

Bohlen, you're right. The AI rarely follows through with it's wars. I, myself, like to have a large initial attack force, and then have a steady stream of reinforcements coming to back myself up, just so i don't get spread too thin. That's what tends to happen to me in Nuclear wars, i take too many cities at once, and then if you don't follow through right away.... well i am pretty sure that's happened to some of you before.

[Fistleaf]

To see what real nuclear war should be like, try SMAC. Entire cities blasted to oblivion, leaving huge craters. Adds to pollution that cannot be negated ever. Whole planet flooded by global warming.

[Bohlen]

I hear you SandMonkey. I'm probably too careful when it comes to making sure I don't spread out too thin. Must be why my conquer games go on for a while.

[jlmk]

Wow!You can use nukes or cruise missiles in subs to attack a city? Wow!

[jlmk]

Darn.My first double post.
[This message has been edited by jlmk (edited January 05, 2000).]

[klesh]

I'm almost certain that if the ai can't see your subs, they sure can see the nukes or cruise missiles IN the sub!

If you notice, when you finish moving a sub that has sleeping missiles, the missiles overlap the sub in the stack.

Can they see the ICBM's poking out of the water?!? Ha

[Mad_Conquest]

Nuclear war can be quick and fun, or it can be long, bloody, and gory. I rarely actually have HAD to face a nuclear war, usually I am so far ahead in tech it's spooky, but one time it was BAD. I was USA and I had spent thousands of years building on my technology. I had gunpower based techs while the other civs, all in europe, asia, and africa, just were still researching feudalism. I arrived in europe and all hell broke loose, by the time I had modern tech they all had nukes and were pounding me into dust (diplos). It took me a few hundred years of constant nuclear war with every civ against me before I finally managed to dig out and win, it wasn't pretty though.