Nukes!

[unmerged(18992)]

I Have repeatedly thought and suggested that nukes in Hoi 1 where out of control. The AI uses them remorsefully, sometimes using them on places like german controled paris. And nuked provinces, THEY SHOULD GRADUALLY REGENERATE. Nukes need to be seriosly worked on!

 

[unmerged(17780)]

Absolutely. FDR or Truman would never even have considered nuking places like Paris to "liberate" it from Germans, so that is one of the most important things that need adressing in the new game. I'm rather confident that Johan and the guys are putting the nukes high up there in the priority list.

 

[Dievs]

Well, I don't think that nukes should be treated as anything special, but together with all other strategical bombings (which was how they were treated at the time).

For the very same reasons, there was a fire-bombing of Dresden, but nobody wouldn't even think of doing that to Paris..

AI should keep track of which countries they 'like', and keep the true owner of the province in mind - even when it is conquered.

It shouldn't be forbidden probably, but a dissent hit for strat-bombing well-liked countries would be a good thing.

 

[unmerged(10574)]

Itd be nice if the AI got a lot smarter in general. Im tired of seeing New Zealand Navally invade Rostock.

 

[Vulture]

I think the problems with nukes in HOI were mostly AI problems (i.e. the AI not knowing where to throw them).

 

[J.J.E.]

Itd be nice if the AI got a lot smarter in general. Im tired of seeing New Zealand Navally invade Rostock.

That's always fun. That single NZ div conquers all of Germany before they are destroyed by 4 rushed-in German divs...good times.

 

[Galleblære]

What about automatic surrender? Japan surrendered after being nuked twice, yet in HoI you need total victory IE control all the enemies lands before winning.

Let us say that the game goes unhistoric, and that for some reason the east front never opens for Germany. Would american nukes have some chance of Germany surrendering? Consider the devestating effect of Berling going up in a thermonuclear cloud...

 

[SecondReich]

What about automatic surrender? Japan surrendered after being nuked twice, yet in HoI you need total victory IE control all the enemies lands before winning.

Let us say that the game goes unhistoric, and that for some reason the east front never opens for Germany. Would american nukes have some chance of Germany surrendering? Consider the devestating effect of Berling going up in a thermonuclear cloud...

Yeah, the peace system in HOI is a serious flaw. I think, if you nuke a province, then its victory points should be yours to be considered for warscore.

 

[Insect2]

I think the problems with nukes in HOI were mostly AI problems (i.e. the AI not knowing where to throw them).

I dunno. I mean, that was a big part of the problem, but the bigger issue in my (and many others') mind was that the nukes were enormously overpowered. As it stands now they permanently destroy all industry, all infrastructure, all military units in a province. Neither Hiroshima nor Nagasaki were evacuated, and the business of life went on as best it could afterwards. The nukes should be treated the way late-40s/early-50s era nukes really worked: Very powerful bombs, but not act-of-god powerful.

 

[kionas76]

Unfortunatelly Nukes in HoI 1 were a tactical weapon and treated in game design as such.We all know that instead they represent the ultimate weapon and only as an strategic mean of(mostly)deterioration.In other words you can liberate Paris fron Germans with them nor defend Berlin from SOV(Aizenhauers words).So if the way nukes will work is going to be a parameter for victory(JAP case in WW2)its ok with me otherwise dont include them because if you want a devastating tac. weapon of MAD then there are other to use .
Instead use the nuke tree for something else.

 

[unmerged(10945)]

I think the problems with nukes in HOI were mostly AI problems (i.e. the AI not knowing where to throw them).

Agreed. I hope they are still as strong as they were in HOI, unless like people have been saying the historical diplomatic impact nukes had on the enemy is felt. Otherwise it would be a waste of resources to put R&D into the nuclear part of the tech tree.

 

[unmerged(10750)]

I dunno. I mean, that was a big part of the problem, but the bigger issue in my (and many others') mind was that the nukes were enormously overpowered. As it stands now they permanently destroy all industry, all infrastructure, all military units in a province. Neither Hiroshima nor Nagasaki were evacuated, and the business of life went on as best it could afterwards. The nukes should be treated the way late-40s/early-50s era nukes really worked: Very powerful bombs, but not act-of-god powerful.

Exactly. Nukes need to be either overhauled, or eliminated entirely.

The most devastating and unrealistic effect that a nuke has in the game is eliminating military units in the province. The idea of a Hiroshima-type bomb completely wiping out multiple divisions is ridiculous, IMO. Having the bomb do nothing to units would probably be more realistic.

Please change at least the effect that nukes have on military units. It should be first and foremost a strategic weapon, not a tactical weapon.

 

[cihset]

How about getting hit on victorypoint provinces give a proportional dissent hit? (i.e. Berlin hit by Nuke, loss of IC and a 10-20% dissent increase)

Something I really wanted to mod myself, too bad that Nukes are hardcoded in HoI.

 

[Galleblære]

Well, if the nukes could like you say trigger a pretty big climb in dissident, and when it reaches high enough, some "surrender" events are activated, and if not accepted, even more hits etc. We need some way to force AI countries or player countries to accept surrender if they are hit hard enough with nukes.

In a modified game as Germany, I destroyed the entire east coast (every province!) of the US with intercontinental nukes, and yet they kept on fighting.

 

[jacob-Lundgren]

think the main thing is to adjust the damage they do and AI use of them.

nukes should be fairly rare maybe a slightly bit harder to get but they really should be destructive. mostly though little permanent damage but a lot of temporary(fleeing refugees lose of power system etc)

 

[unmerged(11486)]

Nukes should cause some (like 5-10%) damage to all units in the targetted province, a complete loss of organization (to represent the destruction of their supply chain and the chaos of civilians fleeing the suddenly destroyed city), the loss of most of the industry, infrastructure, and resources (75% or so), but allow it to be rebuilt. It shouldn't regenerate, just as strategically bombed cities should not regenerate, but it should be capoable of being rebuilt.

I also agree with a huge dissent increase for the province holder after a nuke goes off. No automatic surrender directly, but if dissent goes too high...

Steele

 

[Galleblære]

think the main thing is to adjust the damage they do and AI use of them.

nukes should be fairly rare maybe a slightly bit harder to get but they really should be destructive. mostly though little permanent damage but a lot of temporary(fleeing refugees lose of power system etc)

Agreed, but there has to be some kind of representation of the symbolic value of the Nukes, the "we have the power to bomb you back to the stoneage" effect on the enemies.

Would the Japanese population and officers have accepted even more cities going up in clouds of fire? I don't think so.

 

[jacob-Lundgren]

perhaps a system can be put in place that builds dissent for various things, and if dissent gets high enough the government will fold and a peace is forced upon the country. just got to balance it so you CAN suppress the unhappy people but it causes problems. had germany been on a *total* war footing in 1939 by 1945 they probably would have been a whole lot more tired of war. by not stealing ladies furcoats for the eastern front the people were probably a bit more tolerent



edit: also communist and fascist govts should have the ability to suppress news from reaching their people but there should be a small chance(1%) it leaks, and if it does the country folds in on itself.

 

[Insect2]

Agreed, but there has to be some kind of representation of the symbolic value of the Nukes, the "we have the power to bomb you back to the stoneage" effect on the enemies.

Would the Japanese population and officers have accepted even more cities going up in clouds of fire? I don't think so.

The Japanese, prior to the atomic bombing and the Soviet declaration of war, had already come to the conclusion that it was only a matter of months before every city in Japan over 30,000 people was burned to the ground by Curtis LeMay's firebombing campaign. They were prepared to take appalling casualties. It was the combination of the atomic bombs, the firebombing campaign, and the complete destruction of the Kwantung Army in Asia by the Soviets that demonstrated that they could gain nothing whatsoever from continuing the war. The atomic bombs were a factor, certainly, but they weren't as important as many think.

 

[unmerged(11486)]

The bombs were a religious sign to many Japanese, especially in the affected cities. The "popularity" of the war took a serious hit immeadiatly afterwards.

Steele