Nuclear Missile

Nuclear Missile
Cost: 100.000
Description: Able to fly a large distance and blow up a large radius in a country. Only available for those that are wealthy.
It can only move once, so after it has been moved it will explode there.

Nuclear weapons (ICBMs, SLBMs, ALBMs) would be a nice addition indeed. They would wipe out a SINGLE unit stack of units if dropped on it.... instead if launched on a city, they would completely negate any economic/production benefits from it, for the rest of the game. Of course, any units in the city would also be wiped out.
Perhaps even include Strategies for this new unit? Like a Strategy to counter it, think of "anti-ballistic missiles defense" strategy, which would add a certain chance (50%?) for the nuclear missile to "fail", because it's destroyed.

Anyway, i'm in favor of including nukes into this game, it would add another strategic layer and it's simply fun and adds flavor.

It would make turtling up to easy I think. Attacking by navy would be really much harder and slower than it already is. Any stratagy to counter them with missiles would be quite un realistic or to complex and time consuming. Also no one would bother with anti nuke units unless nukes were used often, if they were common then well it would break the game. You would ahve to rebalance everything in the game for one probably very rare unit.
It might be fun to have the option to use nukes in the server setting though for some sillyness.

Just my thoughts.

There will be nukes, but they will be pretty rare and most probably not available for regular production (or with severe limitations). We don't want to ruin the entire game balance, do we?

I say they require a known uranium deposit in the world(could be randomly generated) An amount of income and a certain amount of joined territories. Developing a nuke should take several turns and the other players should be informed what is going on. The nuke can be stopped by primarily anti-air units which will then serve a more better purpose in the game for they do not do that great atm.

Something for me to get my mind around I think, it will be intresting to see how you decide to implement this. To me a nuke would have a huge movement range and area of effect. One positive thing it could mean is less huge unstoppable stacks of doom and more spread out tatical movements of smaller stacks.

Would useing a nuke also stop anymore units being built or money gained from the nuked country/city?

Then again we could just have smaller tactical nukes heh.

I think it's quite hard to get 100,000$ and to wage war against someone at the same time. I might be wrong though...

Well atleast I never go above the 10,000 unless I play guerilla warfare or something.... Makes me think of changing the price to what strategy someone uses... Then again you just donate your money to the guy who doesnt have to pay much for it.

I'm thinking a way they could work (if it's possible) is to make location's on the map called "cilos" were nukes can be produced -for a price. Im thinking 5000 is a good price. Now, places like Russia are going to have more cilos then somewere like Tazania, but to even it out you'd have to place cilos's accordingly on the map (I.e, a few in the ural moantains, few in the juristiction of Moscow). The missle itself has all the ideas listed before me, excluding the price for a missle, the damage should be either 200 or 666(pun intended) and have a blast radius the size of Great lakes territory, maybe less or more. It affect's everything in the area,(i.e kills any units moving through said area, or if a city doe's the same).

Hmm, the gamer in me screams YESH! NUKES! but i think this really could ruin the game itself. But i don't want to judge here before this isn't implemented of course. Maybe there's a real good way to introduce them without destroying any balance issues.

I see the problem in this way: If they are too cheap and available as normal unit anywhere it will cause a mass destruction and make normal units almost unimportant. If you, on the other hand, make them too expensive then the weaker countries become even more weaker and have less chances to fight a bigger one. If you include them into some new strategy (lets call it "Nuclear Force" or something), which requires some certain higher amount of earned SP then this might become a balance problem between higher and lower ranked players. So, in any way this will be hard to be balanced right i guess. Maybe, regardless in which way they will be implemented, there also should be an option to turn them on or off in a game before it starts. In this way new players could decide wether they join a "nuclear" game or not.

Soem new idea: teh only contrys how could buy nucs are the great and rich ones, so africa and southamerica are fucked, maybe they could steel the wapons....

Kirjoittanut LEGION, 06.02.2011 at 07:48

Soem new idea: teh only contrys how could buy nucs are the great and rich ones, so africa and southamerica are fucked, maybe they could steel the wapons....

Thats exactly how it shouldn't be in my opinion because that would lead to the situation i mentioned above.