• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
I will accept possible suggestions, but bear in mind they have nukes.
 
He was supporting the Russkies when he defected to the rebel states. Opportunist. :>
 
He was supporting the Russkies when he defected to the rebel states. Opportunist. :>

He also started the nuclear exchange, first by striking Moscow, second by striking troop concentrations in Northern Italy. He also was responsible for worsening conditions in German POW camps when midway through the war he ordered meal rations cut back to one single 1k cal meal a day and water limitations, contributing to an increase in camp mortality rates by 300%. (I made half of that up, but it sounds good so lets run with it!)
 
I applaud him! Cool certainly made his mark on history! :p
 
Make level ten AA all around the US. Canadian Border, Mexican Border, Atlantic and Pacific; the you may not get nuked.
 
Make level ten AA all around the US. Canadian Border, Mexican Border, Atlantic and Pacific; the you may not get nuked.

ICBM's ignore AAA and fighters. He'd actually be better off building interceptors in the hopes that they launch nuke strikes using Strat bombers.

Though the best thing he can do is sit tight and wait until the big 2nd Communism vs Fascism showdown and hope they use their stockpiles on each other. Then make a commando paratroop strike into enemy nuclear facilities to prevent future construction.
 
ICBM's ignore AAA and fighters. He'd actually be better off building interceptors in the hopes that they launch nuke strikes using Strat bombers.

Though the best thing he can do is sit tight and wait until the big 2nd Communism vs Fascism showdown and hope they use their stockpiles on each other. Then make a commando paratroop strike into enemy nuclear facilities to prevent future construction.

Nuking nuke facilites is actualy worse then taking them. Rebuild really slowly and can't place more...
 
Nuking nuke facilites is actualy worse then taking them. Rebuild really slowly and can't place more...

It's obvious that would cause more nuclear damage, making a gigantic firework display of nuclear fallout, heh, I wanna see a Chernobyl times 10.
 
Nuking nuke facilites is actualy worse then taking them. Rebuild really slowly and can't place more...

Re: London

So what happened to London then? :eek: :confused:
 
Well that mainly depends on the kind of attack. An air detonation would destroy most of the buildings but only cracking the reactor itself open and burring it under rubble, pretty much the same amount of radiation like Chernobyl.

In the case of a ground detonation however... modern reactors contain up to 100 tons of uraniumoxide, not counting in the waste that is stored at the site and since the HoI2 reactors only serve a military purpose and double as enrichment facilities we have something between 50 and 150 tons of uranium and plutonium (just a guess, i cant find data about the reactor the Manhatten Project build). Wenn the nuke goes off at ground level it will vaporate all of this, all the iradiated materials of the reactor and adds a nice load of irradiated soil itself to the disaster. So... yeah... i guess you get the picture...
 
Ah, finally caught up to this AAR after several months away from the forums. I must say I don't think I've ever read anything that's made me prouder to be Australian.

Speaking of which, any plans for the land down under in the near future? Aussie-spearheaded liberation of PNG/Indonesia from the Brits maybe (A-la East Timor)? Maybe the odd broadcast from ABC radio?

In any case, keep up the excellent work my friend, and whatever happens, do not let this AAR succumb to HOI III.

Also, RIP Patton. One of the finest generals of WWII, Germany WILL burn for this!
 
(just a guess, i cant find data about the reactor the Manhatten Project build).

The Manhatten project was spread over a few differant sites.
Oak Ridge, TN (They still manufacture Tritium (H-3) when needed)
Hanford, WA
Los Alamos, NM

They might also have had some stuff in Arco, ID, which was a major nuclear reactor test site during the 50's and 60's (and the site of no less than 3 nuclear accidents, including the only US nuclear accident to produce human casualties, YAY!).
 
Wasn't Oak Ridge closed because it became too contaminated, or was that only part of the facility?

Probably only part of the facility before we really learned how the heck to properly perform radcon. Hanford has similar clean up issues and is a designated superfund site.

That said, both are still sites that house operating power reactors. Oak Ridge is under the authority of the TVA. Hanford is still DoE. Hanford is actually a fairly huge site with large ammounts of things going on in it. We're still cleaning it up today, but we're making progress.
http://www.hanford.gov/
 
Cool info.


So, on that note, don't travel to London?:D
 
Cool info.


So, on that note, don't travel to London?:D

I dunno, people still go to and live in hiroshima and nagasaki, if anything the weapons exchange between you and the Axis probably used cleaner bombs. They're cleaner because they're more efficient, and thus burn more material upon detonation. That said, a major nuclear site would likely cause quite a bit of fallout due to production and refinement of Plutonium 239 and the resultant nuclear waste slurries created.

It's actually kind of funny, because of all the nuclear warfare most people are actually more likely to be knowledgable about radioactivity and less afraid of it in this time line. From this site about chernobyl they specify the worst contamination of 202 Curies per square km. Which works out to .2 mCuries per sq meter, which will probably give a .2 mrem/hr dose to the chest (as much as 6 mrem/hr to the feet). That said radiation poisoning kicks in when you pull at least 100 REM (100000 mrem), So you'd have to walk around for about 500 thusand hours, that said, sleeping on the ground would yield a higher dose. You'll also kick up dust that you could inhale and drag with you for the next five years (average biological time Cs 137 remains in the body). So it might be like Chernobyl, Chernobyl was probably bigger, and it was designed for weapons production in addition to power production so they have that similarity.
 
At the very least, radiation won't be as much of a concern for you.