Turing off the atomic bombs
- Thread starter brnja
- Start date
-
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 think in one of the streams the devs said Nukes can't be turned off.
However to drop a nuke a 75% air superiority is required. So as long as you can keep more than 25% air superiority over your country you should be safe from nukes
However to drop a nuke a 75% air superiority is required. So as long as you can keep more than 25% air superiority over your country you should be safe from nukes
- 4
- 1
In a stream they also mentioned that there's a way to turn them off: That is to conquer every country before they research the bomb.
- 16
- 1
I believe it is a gameplay reason. A lot of people feel that it is not fun that super weapons exist and that a war can be fought with something other than just men, tanks, planes and ships. I do understand the sentiment but I disagree with it.
Personally I believe that atomic bombs, especially given how low powered they were at the time, are simply an extension of military strategy.
- 10
I agree with AapoAlas. Nuclear weapons of the time are strong but hardly the gamechangers of Cold War era. They are a superweapon, but not one that can win the war alone - you'll do most of the fighting with conventional weaponry. Their special effect of damaging national unity will only help if the target it already losing their land.
- 3
- 1
Two reasons I could see.
Multiplayer being the most obvious. Sometimes you want to see a war to the end if its very close game and if each manpower could swing the balance of power (had 2 games like this before and they are the best ever). But if someone gets a nuke a great MP game could be over at the snap of a finger.
Also, If you are playing as a minor or small major the games tend to take longer to get done what you need, and if a superpower has a nuke it will just become impossible because they would lower your National Unity before you could achieve your objectives.
I will probably play 95% of my games with it turned on if there is option. But I could totally see people not wanting them.
Multiplayer being the most obvious. Sometimes you want to see a war to the end if its very close game and if each manpower could swing the balance of power (had 2 games like this before and they are the best ever). But if someone gets a nuke a great MP game could be over at the snap of a finger.
Also, If you are playing as a minor or small major the games tend to take longer to get done what you need, and if a superpower has a nuke it will just become impossible because they would lower your National Unity before you could achieve your objectives.
I will probably play 95% of my games with it turned on if there is option. But I could totally see people not wanting them.
- 6
- 1
Maybe the gameis not that close if the enemy was able to Research and build nukes while still holding you off and you weren't? Actually, from what I have seen, nukes do not seem THAT useful. But it surely depends on how many you can field. One each year will not do much, but one a month will probably be enough to disturb the enemie's ability for strategic maneuver enough to effectively win against an otherwise equal opponent. I assume that using the nukes against troops or infra on crucial supply routes will get you more for your Money than just bombing major cities for the NU effect. Unless, of course, you need just that to force surrender.
- 2
- 1
Does anyone know how long they need 75% superiority? What is to prevent a county from massively swarming one sector then dropping a nuke then moving on to another sector.
- 1
The devs have said they'll be easy to mod out (I can imagine you could do it in a bunch of ways - mod out the nuclear reactor building, for example, and you've got nothing to produce the bomb, but probably safer to mod out everything nuclear related, so the AI doesn't research stuff it can't build). I prefer them in (I prefer historical plausibility, and the atomic bomb was a thing), but I can see the appeal of a 'no superweapons for you, you have to do this the old-fashioned way' conflict.
- 2
I don't mind them too much. But if I go historical mode with SSSR, I would like to finish the war with Japan the old style. So they don't sing a peace treaty after the bomb is dropped.
I'd expect so, but there might be production weights in there for nuclear things that could perhaps be a bit screwy if not adjusted as well, depends how it's set up. We'll see soon enough
.
well, nukes arent that effective. Countries wont surrender because you dropped one nuke on them. It will damage their national unity, however, and make them more likely to surrender, yes. You cant drop the NU too much tho, since nukes can only drop the NU by an certain amount so you dont simply spam nukes until they surrender.
If you want to turn them off, you could of course disable them via a mod.
- 3
- 1
That sounds like a solid tactic that takes time to plan.
- 3
Nothing.
In WWW, it was a matter of hours. One more reason why the teleporting bombers mean trouble.
In the multiplayer World War Wednesday, Great Britain was unable to defeat the German Reich despite nuking its occupied territories repeatedly. So, I'm guessing that conventional warfare will still decide who ultimately wins the war.
- 5
Exactly
Which means that if you get close enough to win war by nuking enemy capital, it means that war has been allready decided.
- 3
- 1
There is a chance to either increase or decrease their NU by 20% with nukes so trying to force a surrender with them might make your job more difficult.
I found that dropping nukes was a little too easy, Johan was just spamming them almost.
There should be a downside for whoever drops the bombs so that it's not just a nobrainer.
Like a loss of national unity if you are already ahead in warscore.
Or maybe even a permanent reduction in max unity if you choose to throw nukes to sort of represent opening pandoras box.
There should be a downside for whoever drops the bombs so that it's not just a nobrainer.
Like a loss of national unity if you are already ahead in warscore.
Or maybe even a permanent reduction in max unity if you choose to throw nukes to sort of represent opening pandoras box.
- 4
- 2