Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Nuclear defense

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Shadow Empire >> Suggestions and Feedback >> Nuclear defense Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Nuclear defense - 5/5/2021 2:47:39 AM   
Sieppo


Posts: 933
Joined: 12/15/2012
From: Helsinki, Finland
Status: offline 		Game needs nuclear defense.

EDIT: to be more clear, defense against nuclear attacks. Just some means, does not need to be perfect. ICBM:s apparently can be a game ender in P2P and that always suck.

< Message edited by Sieppo -- 5/5/2021 2:50:29 AM >

_____________________________

> What is the hardest thing in the universe?
> A diamond?
> No. 500 machine gun men on a mountain.
Post #: 1
RE: Nuclear defense - 5/5/2021 8:26:08 AM   
varangy


Posts: 198
Joined: 11/1/2018
Status: offline 		I think a viable option would be anti ballistic missiles buildable in cities. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-ballistic_missile

(in reply to Sieppo)
Post #: 2
RE: Nuclear defense - 5/5/2021 9:20:07 AM   
zgrssd

 

Posts: 3385
Joined: 6/9/2020
Status: offline 		Supreme Commander back in the day had a "No Gameenders" rule modifier.
It disabeled Nukes. However it did not cover their experimental units, like the DLC Factions Special Nuke Launcher. Or artillery that could fire across the entire map.

I think someone a while ago suggested a Lore explanation for it/limit to Airforces:
There is a set of orbital satelites with lasers, shooting down anything that flies to fast or over a certain height. It could thus block the IC part of the ICBM, greatly reducing their unfairness. It oculd also prevent high fliers or supersonic flight, depending on what you want during setup.

Of course that should come with a expanded tactical use of nuclear weapons, like nuclear armed bombers.

< Message edited by zgrssd -- 5/5/2021 9:21:40 AM >

(in reply to varangy)
Post #: 3
RE: Nuclear defense - 5/5/2021 10:56:25 AM   
mroyer

 

Posts: 914
Joined: 3/6/2016
Status: offline 		Something like this from Traveller, the old 1970's era role-playing game:
https://wiki.travellerrpg.com/Nuclear_Damper

-Mark R.

(in reply to zgrssd)
Post #: 4
RE: Nuclear defense - 5/5/2021 7:14:31 PM   
Zanotirn

 

Posts: 113
Joined: 3/12/2021
Status: offline 		https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUb5vhiFfpU

Interceptor missiles are somewhat more realistic though as something buildable (they probably wouldn't be positioned *in* the city though - but interceptor missiles still need early warning radars between the source of threat and the protected target and/or a network of satellites.

A game start option sounds interesting - and definitely something that could have been deployed during dissolution war.

< Message edited by Zanotirn -- 5/5/2021 7:18:54 PM >

(in reply to mroyer)
Post #: 5
RE: Nuclear defense - 5/8/2021 4:19:03 PM   
Sieppo


Posts: 933
Joined: 12/15/2012
From: Helsinki, Finland
Status: offline 		It could also be for example a laser shooting down warheads (ICBM's usually have multiple warheads) and thus a roll would be made how many are shot down.

(in reply to Zanotirn)
Post #: 6
RE: Nuclear defense - 5/9/2021 6:40:55 PM   
DeltaV112

 

Posts: 45
Joined: 10/16/2014
Status: offline 		ICBM's being game-ending isn't I think in and of itself an issue, it basically acts to ensure that games do actually have a timely ending- eventually one side will tech to nukes and put an end to things. The issue probably more centers around when in the game's progression this occurs and preventing the case where both sides trade nuclear salvos leaving them without the means to effectively finish their opponents. Probably the changes need to be to push ICBM's later in the tech tree, add pressures to create the resources to make them even before they get teched(i.e more uses for radioactives) and making the late-game ICBM tech more immediately lethal.

(in reply to Sieppo)
Post #: 7
RE: Nuclear defense - 5/9/2021 9:05:25 PM   
Zanotirn

 

Posts: 113
Joined: 3/12/2021
Status: offline 		One option is instead of pushing them to later technologically, split off weapon-grade radioactives into their own resource, produced in low amounts at nuclear reactors and in larger amounts at (expensive) dedicated assets.

(in reply to DeltaV112)
Post #: 8
RE: Nuclear defense - 5/16/2021 11:00:28 AM   
BlueTemplar


Posts: 887
Joined: 4/29/2010
Status: offline 		Radioactives are already not particularly easy to come by... I suppose that they would also be used a lot more if solar wasn't so OP (so nuclear was relatively more viable) ? Vehicle Fusion Engine is also available quite a bit earlier than ICBMs.

There are already tiers of ICBMs, (and getting to the first one has a lot of pre-requisites), though since the tech tree doesn't list tech costs (and I don't think that tech costs are independent of techs or even tech groups ?) it's hard to say how late they are exactly ?

I'll hopefully be able to try ICMBs myself soon, it's my understanding that the first 10MT one isn't *particularly* destructive ?
(And technically speaking, several kinds of also nuclear attacks are available earlier : TacNukes, Micro Nuke RPGs, (Non-ICBM) Atomic Launchers...)

Alpha Centauri might be a good comparison, it has 3 tiers of ICBMs, with the first one available by "mid-game"¤, and already instantly wipes out EVERYTHING on a tile, including a "city" and some elevation (See the 4th tier of ICBM here.)
(¤Note that in SMAC(X) "mid-game" is effectively "end-game", because choppers are OP.)

The only defenses against that were "attack" satellites (basically a building-"unit" that you can have as many as you want in a rangeless "orbital space" dimension, which can be deployed once per turn to kill a nuke (or another sat, including "economic" ones), and sacrifice itself to kill a 2nd nuke/sat), or not being in range... and/or cheesing it by blocking the path of the missile with units.

Then with the Alien Crossfire expansion a 4th tier of reactor was added, but also a "Flechette defense" building which has (IIRC) 25% chances of shooting down any nuke attacking within some overlapping range (IIRC 3 tiles ?).

< Message edited by BlueTemplar -- 5/16/2021 11:01:38 AM >

(in reply to Zanotirn)
Post #: 9
RE: Nuclear defense - 5/16/2021 4:19:01 PM   
Pratapon51

 

Posts: 100
Joined: 6/28/2020
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BlueTemplar

Radioactives are already not particularly easy to come by... I suppose that they would also be used a lot more if solar wasn't so OP (so nuclear was relatively more viable) ? Vehicle Fusion Engine is also available quite a bit earlier than ICBMs.

There are already tiers of ICBMs, (and getting to the first one has a lot of pre-requisites), though since the tech tree doesn't list tech costs (and I don't think that tech costs are independent of techs or even tech groups ?) it's hard to say how late they are exactly ?

I'll hopefully be able to try ICMBs myself soon, it's my understanding that the first 10MT one isn't *particularly* destructive ?
(And technically speaking, several kinds of also nuclear attacks are available earlier : TacNukes, Micro Nuke RPGs, (Non-ICBM) Atomic Launchers...)

Alpha Centauri might be a good comparison, it has 3 tiers of ICBMs, with the first one available by "mid-game"¤, and already instantly wipes out EVERYTHING on a tile, including a "city" and some elevation (See the 4th tier of ICBM here.)
(¤Note that in SMAC(X) "mid-game" is effectively "end-game", because choppers are OP.)

The only defenses against that were "attack" satellites (basically a building-"unit" that you can have as many as you want in a rangeless "orbital space" dimension, which can be deployed once per turn to kill a nuke (or another sat, including "economic" ones), and sacrifice itself to kill a 2nd nuke/sat), or not being in range... and/or cheesing it by blocking the path of the missile with units.

Then with the Alien Crossfire expansion a 4th tier of reactor was added, but also a "Flechette defense" building which has (IIRC) 25% chances of shooting down any nuke attacking within some overlapping range (IIRC 3 tiles ?).


No, the base SMAC already had 4 tiers of reactors and 4 tiers of Planet Buster. As an aside, the little flavor bits state this:

quote:


#PLANET BUSTER
Designation: Mk. 714 Plasma bomb
Active kill radius: 2000 km
Explosve force: 296 gt TNT
Target acquistion: Charged particle


They're a little bit more powerful than what we can field in SE, typos aside.

(in reply to BlueTemplar)
Post #: 10
RE: Nuclear defense - 5/20/2021 8:19:48 AM   
BlueTemplar


Posts: 887
Joined: 4/29/2010
Status: offline 		Oh, really ? (I haven't played the base game in ages...)

Also, I misremembered the exact stats of the Flechette Defense System...
(Unless it's the "The Will To Power" mod changing these values ?)




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by BlueTemplar -- 5/20/2021 8:20:45 AM >

(in reply to Pratapon51)
Post #: 11
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Shadow Empire >> Suggestions and Feedback >> Nuclear defense Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.734