[GO] Targeted Nukes

[Melkor52]

I have a suggestion for nuclear spoils. I play a lot of nuclear games and have always thought that no one in their right minds would create a nuclear device that is launched randomly and potentially at themselves.

My suggestion is that when a spoils match is made you can target the single nuke. A set of red spoils means the nuke is a short range missile that can only reach an adjacent region. A green set of spoils is a medium range missile that can reach two regions away. Blue spoils reach three regions, and a RGB set is an ICBM that can reach anywhere on the board.

This is far more realistic in my opinion. It would also add a new level of strategy to the game as building up massive armies would have obvious drawbacks. And trying to decide targets in fog of war games would be a tactual challenge. Also, have you ever played an eight player game on a small map with nukes? It's pandemonium, fun but way to much death from above.

I'm not suggesting changing the current nuclear spoils, but adding Targeted Nukes as a additional spoils option. I believe it would be a popular option, and a new medal should be created for the option as well, 20-100-400.

So what does everyone think?

Melkor52....

[Fazeem]

I like this idea but it would not work on maps where if you lose starting point/Castle you lose game

[DoomYoshi]

Why should the most common set have the best type of weapon?

[Melkor52]

Just keeping with the rising values from a flat rate spoils option. It matters not to me which set has the longest distance. But this just seemed easiest to remember. The important part is the targeting and distance to give a new type of strategy to the games.

Melkor52....

[TheForgivenOne]

As feezie said, the RGB doesn't work, because games with Losing Conditions (If you don't hold 1 of X, you are eliminated), games would end quickly as people with a lucky set can just nuke someone off the board by round 3. I'd be pissed if lower ranks simply picked me to be killed off the board because i'm a high rank (at the moment)

[Melkor52]

I was unaware such maps existed having never played one. But for maps such as those just code them so that a nuke strike at a home base has a missile defense system (protective magic, whatever) so that a person can send the nuke but it fails to detonate. Sort of like bombarding a region that has already been brought to a neutral 1. You can keep bombarding but it is still a neutral 1.

Melkor52....

[TheForgivenOne]

I was unaware such maps existed having never played one. But for maps such as those just code them so that a nuke strike at a home base has a missile defense system (protective magic, whatever) so that a person can send the nuke but it fails to detonate. Sort of like bombarding a region that has already been brought to a neutral 1. You can keep bombarding but it is still a neutral 1.

Melkor52....

Don't know if this is possible. Even so, I'm not a fan of this. It's one of the unpredictabilites of nukes that I enjoy. With this, you can't ever have a stack, and just makes me believe games are going to take longer.

[Melkor52]

That's why I'm not saying change the nuclear spoils, but add a new option. Not all combinations of options work well for all maps. Play a 6 or 8 player game on a small map like CCU or Eurasia Mini with nukes and see how badly everyone gets nuked. But a game on a big map under fog of war would make these nukes a great game. Forcing people to have a battle plan rather than just building a huge army and using brute force might be nice. A game with fog and trench could have a strategy where your big force is behind a smaller force on the front line to bate the nuke strike. I see a lot of fog, targeted nuke games. Basically it's another option for people who will like it. I personally don't play escalating games because I don't like someone getting lucky when the spoils get to 20-30 and runs the board with a chain attack. If there where only escalating spoils I would not likely still be playing here. It's an option for those who will like it. If you don't, then play standard nukes just like I don't play escalating. Others that I have talked to about it have said they liked the idea, some will some won't. Let those who will have the option.

Melkor52....

[Odug]

instead of magic or sheilds the result of a nuke strike against a conditional HOME base simply reduces the total to 1 instead of N1 that handles the condition, besides it is not out of the realm of possibility that there is a sole survivor in a bunker somwhere. I like the Idea of directed nukes simply because it is more realistic. I mean come on there is nothing more frustrating in a nuke game than having to nuke yourself in a bonus zone, granted you get your bonus and can gernerally retake the lost ground but what army in their right minds nukes themselves in the course of a battle? The Risk/CC game is suppose to try to simulate battles and battle manuvers right? Then I say this is a great solution to the random Nuke problem! NO RANDOM NUKES!!!

[emperor_stone]

i support targeted nukes

[perchorin]

I think this is a very cool idea--any more nuclear options would kick ass!
As far as losing condition maps go, just make it so that you can't nuke the bases.

[Melkor52]

Exactly my point. It is another game option that many people would enjoy with no possibility of abuse. The only issue is losing condition maps and I'm sure that can be coded around. I just don't understand why this suggestion is being resisted. No one would have to play them if they didn't want to. The random nukes would still be there for those who like them. And those who want to play them can enjoy them (and earn another medal). What's not to like about this suggestion?

[BigBallinStalin]

I have a suggestion for nuclear spoils. I play a lot of nuclear games and have always thought that no one in their right minds would create a nuclear device that is launched randomly and potentially at themselves.

My suggestion is that when a spoils match is made you can target the single nuke. A set of red spoils means the nuke is a short range missile that can only reach an adjacent region. A green set of spoils is a medium range missile that can reach two regions away. Blue spoils reach three regions, and a RGB set is an ICBM that can reach anywhere on the board.

This is far more realistic in my opinion. It would also add a new level of strategy to the game as building up massive armies would have obvious drawbacks. And trying to decide targets in fog of war games would be a tactual challenge. Also, have you ever played an eight player game on a small map with nukes? It's pandemonium, fun but way to much death from above.

I'm not suggesting changing the current nuclear spoils, but adding Targeted Nukes as a additional spoils option. I believe it would be a popular option, and a new medal should be created for the option as well, 20-100-400.

So what does everyone think?

Melkor52....

I like the "reduce to 1" idea.

Also, re: underlined, why not have the nukes deal incremental amounts of damage? e.g. red cards annihilate 33% of the stack, green cards blah blah blah, and so on.

[Melkor52]

Nawwwww, nukes take out everyone, except for a single troop on a home base map.

However, I was also thinking about chemical weapons attacks. Played just like the standard nukes, but if it's a red set you loose 25% of the troops on those regions, 50% for Green sets, 75% for Blue sets and 100% for a RGB set. But always with a single survivor.

So perhaps we need two new sets of spoils options with the medals to go along with them.

[loutil]

This is a very good idea and opens up a lot of tactical options. I, for one, would choose this option over the current nuclear spoils option. I find the current setting to random and often decides games without respect to skill or tactics. How do we push this idea forward?

[betiko]

It s not a bad idea.

Just one thing: red spoils are not more common than others. They all have the same chances of appearing, so does each type of set.

[Melkor52]

I don't know how to push it any more than post here. For some reason the moderator is giving it the cold shoulder. If you know of any way to get the ball rolling I would be happy to hear it.

[DoomYoshi]

No cold shoulder. I personally don't like the idea, but if there is lots of support for it, the suggestion will be submitted in any case. I am not seeing a lot of support for the idea yet.

To me, it sounds like a labor-intensive suggestion too, so the bar for community support needs to be even higher to get from this stage to implementation.

[Frank Martel]

This sounds like a very interesting option for increasing the tactical use of nukes. Please put this on the list o future enhancements.

[Liveoak]

This is a very good idea and opens up a lot of tactical options. I, for one, would choose this option over the current nuclear spoils option. I find the current setting to random and often decides games without respect to skill or tactics. How do we push this idea forward?

I "second" loutil's comments here. I realize what is done in this site puts game-play first over realism, but I swear, it always seemed to me that the nuclear spoils option crossed the line into The Twilight Zone's level of surreal experience. The very idea of having no choice but to nuke yourself is straight out of bizarro world.

Then we have all these maps where we can set off nukes in ages before the invention of nuclear weapons took place! The only way I could rationalize this was to equate the effect of disease plagues with that of nuclear devastation. But except for the rare instances diseased bodies or objects were flung or smuggled into the enemy camp--plagues were random events, not tactical decisions. So still a bizarro world experience I say.

[greenoaks]

no support for this from me.

the idea is not original enough to warrant inclusion. all it will do is split those who like playing with Nukes in two, making games slower to start and reducing everyone's enjoyment.

if you don't believe me, check out the tumbleweeds rolling through the 'Join Speed Games' tab.

[Cump Sherman]

I like this idea as an additional option. It creates a more realistic situation. Can't tell u how many times, I've been forced to nuke myself because I held the wrong 5 spoils.
While it may not work good on all maps, that is easily controlled by not using it on those maps.
THUMBS UP!!

[Armandolas]

I like this option. I just dont like the ultimate trade where u can nuke anywhere in the map.

[MagnusGreeol]

I like the idea, I've always hated having a nuke with My name on it, unpredictable I can handle, but suicidally nuking Myself or a Team-mate is always something I hated about nuke spoils, I say what others say, make it so bases/Homesteads have defense against nukes,, I like the short/medium/long and mixed anywhere idea a-lot,, Good luck pushing this through-- Salute-------)

[Odug]

Had another idea tonight about the nukes. Since only a very great fool would nuke themselves or their teammate how about a fail-safe rule that makes self/team nukes duds! no damage it would make stockpiling safer as well. The nuke rules need to change I thoroughly agree. Although I like nuke games I would prefer a modicum of control over the most powerful weapon in Conquer Land !