AI nuke building

[Inverse Icarus]

after the SDI gets up tacticals are a godsend.

[Verto]

Don't you think that a sub w/ nukes onboard would have a bit of a blast radius?

[Panag]

hi ,

has any of you ever thought to let the AI start with up to 25 tactical nukes , .....

sometimes there are intresting results this way , ....


and yes the AI does build nukes , ....
it does seems that when its after 2050 and you have won the game and continue to play the AI builds more nukes and uses them more , ...

the higher the level the more use of a nuke , ...

when the AI builds nukes its funny to see them sometimes get in a race with them , lets say three nations build them , then they each shall try to get the number of the other , .... plus one , ...
sometimes its really funny this way , ...

have a nice day

[Verto]

I had the wonderful experience during a Civ2 game(where the AI used more nukes, from my experiences), when I was enjoying my position as the sole superpower, when I hear the dreaded "air-siren"...

The Egyptians, perhaps the 3rd smallest country, went nuts and launched about 9 or 10 nukes at me. I'm not sure what happened to cause that, I had been tweaking some things in the game, but still...

I anxiously await PtW so I can go into an arms race. Behold the glory of MAD.

[Inverse Icarus]

i have a theory, but it's still unproven.

when i turn on only conquest victtory, the AI is more agressive and sues more nukes... maybe it knows thats the only way t can win.

[Ben Williams]

First of all, I think I've seen tactical nukes intercepted by SDI, but I could be wrong.

Second, in the event of a nuclear war it's likely that all subs, once coming under attack, would have standing orders to fire their nukes at pre-designated targets (had they not already launched them). In the game, this would pose problems, serveing mostly as a detterant to sinking subs .

There are so many problems with nukes already that I don't think you can see this as a huge problem in comparison. I think there should be some penalty for building or having ICBM's, this would make tactical nukes more appealing, but mostly I wish Fraxis would get off their ass and stop shortchanging us in the nuke department (no, I'm sure they're working hard over there ), the nuclear age was a major part of world history, you can't cover it with a few units and a little pollution.

[Nakar Gabab]

A few nitpicks:

1) A sub shouldn't go off nuclear-armageddon style if you sink it. Nuclear weapons aren't THAT unstable. Not sure about the launch-if-sunk thing... what if you don't WANT to fire the nuke?

2) The AI might not have nuked the big stack of MA because you were invading their territory. The AI is probably programmed not to self-destruct its own territory when faced with an attack, possibly because it isn't quite smart enough to know the difference between "1 infantryman, NUKE HIS ASS!" and "40 modern armor, it's an acceptable loss compared to losing my whole empire."

3) The AI might have a compulsion against nuking its own cities. If you were close to their city, the splash damage might have threatened to hit a nearby city, which would've caused untold havoc.


4) The AI doesn't use artillery well. It doesn't use bombers well. And it's not unreasonable to presume it probably uses nukes poorly.

I have, personally, dropped an ICBM on my own empire (I aimed it at the ocean and only nuked 3 squares, which contained two landed enemy stacks). It was a risk I was willing to take. But I know the difference between three enemies (which I can easily take out with my token counterattack force) and fifty (which could spread out and decimate my improvements without actually ATTACKING my cities, meaning I'd have to produce more counterattackers, etc.) at a glance. The AI might not.

[Solver]

Good post, Nakar.

Maybe you're right the AI tries to save it's own butt, but from a strategy viewpoint, it isn't always the right thing to do. Like, if I got 40 MA there, they can certainly cause much more casualities than the AI would cause itself should it use a nuke there.

SDI? Oh my, I've never seen it, didn't play it this late into the game.

I want nukes to be altered in PtW. I'd like them to have more difference between ICBM and Tac. Nuke. Tac. Nukes could still be small weapons like they are now, more or less the same effect.

An ICBM should: If dropped on a small town, it gets wiped. Any unit in the square where ICBM gets dropped has a 85% chance of dying. If city is bigger than 6, population gets reduced by 75-90%, each improvement has a 75% chance of being destroyed.

Blast radius: each adjacent square to the attacked one loses all improvements, units 66% chance to die. Squares 2 tiles apart 50% losing improvements, 50% chance for units to die. Squares 3 tiles apart 33% chance of losing improvement, 25% chance for unit to die.

To counter this stronger ICBM, usage of such should also cause regard with other civs go down even when allied. As it is, your allies are very happy if you nuke a mutual enemy. Also, usage of ICBMs should make some of your citizens unhappy. This would probably make you think twice about using it. Oh, and such an ICBM would really be worth 300 shields.

However, I'd like a CtP style disaster model. My last Modern Age game, I launched like 30 Nukes in the Modern Age, and only saw a couple of squares turn into desert. Nonsense. With such massive pollution, there should be a chance of water levels to rize dramatically, submerging cities. This would really put everyone at a slight risk in case of nuclear war.

Remember SMAC? There huge eco-damage could be killing you, you would have to deal with many dozens of Mindworms each turn, having a chance to kill you off completely. Or CtP, where you lost some good cities to a disaster.

Gimme stronger effects to Nukes and their effect on global ecology!

[GeneralTacticus]

Solver: I think the real thing that was feared about nuclear war during the Cold War was not global warming but a nuclear winter. Maybe it could be represented by having forests and jungles die off and everything turning into Tundra or Desert.

[Solver]

Well OK, at least during the Cold War there was a reason to fear nuclear war... like plants and forests dying, birth problems for woment, etc.

[HazieDaVampire]

Originally posted by Verto
Don't you think that a sub w/ nukes onboard would have a bit of a blast radius?

The nukes are designed to never go off! But they do leak, the Americans have leaked some uranium over the English country side once.