elsuper Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 The idea is that an excess of nukes fired in a short period of time will lessen global food production in a manner similar to that of the current winter mechanic. I have two ideas on how this could work: 1.) Each day, compare total nukes successfully detonated in the last week against a certain high threshold (based on the current number of nations). If the number of nukes detonated exceeds the threshold, the season changes to winter for everyone, regardless of continent, for a length of time equal to a normal season. Additional breaches of the nuke threshold will reset the beginning of the winter. Once the winter ends, seasons resume as they would otherwise be. 2.) Use a sliding-scale for the "intensity" of the winter, increasing with number of nukes detonated. Also not triggered below a threshold, but not as high of one. This would not be a season change, but a global debuff stacked with/against current season bonuses/penalties. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speaker Faris Wheeler Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Too Complicated Quote Peace will never be accomplished without war, but war cannot happen without peace.... or something like that idk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magicboyd25 Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 (edited) Too Complicated I disagree. I think this would be an interesting aspect to war when major nulcear fights start etc. One thing to add though is that i think by continent would be better so if the continent receiving the most nukes goes over that threshold then the continent goes into winter mode. I dont know if you covered that above, if you did i apologize. Edited January 7, 2015 by Magicboyd25 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elsuper Posted January 7, 2015 Author Share Posted January 7, 2015 I disagree. I think this would be an interesting aspect to war when major nulcear fights start etc. One thing to add though is that i think by continent would be better so if the continent receiving the most nukes goes over that threshold then the continent goes into winter mode. I dont know if you covered that above, if you did i apologize. I could get behind that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seryozha Nikanor Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Thats nice the person with the most nukes can essentially end the world Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ren Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 The thing is, nukes will likely never be used in a major war any time soon. The cost of the project and the upkeep mean that other projects will be a higher priority for any sensible nation leader. It's also not a good tactic to beige your opponents in a war, but nukes do exactly that. If the game is still kicking around in 2-3 years you might see nuke fights for fun, but never in an alliance wide war. It sounds like a fun idea, but I can't see the effects of it influencing the game at all in the near future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean Parisot Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 The thing is, nukes will likely never be used in a major war any time soon. The cost of the project and the upkeep mean that other projects will be a higher priority for any sensible nation leader. It's also not a good tactic to beige your opponents in a war, but nukes do exactly that. If the game is still kicking around in 2-3 years you might see nuke fights for fun, but never in an alliance wide war. It sounds like a fun idea, but I can't see the effects of it influencing the game at all in the near future. The only effect I can see will be making people factor in nukes to diplomacy and war, which i think would be very interesting. Although few nations will be able to afford nukes anytime soon it could end up being pretty important in how alliances go to and prepare to go to war (probably more so a year or two down the line as Ren said). Any war that has the potential to go nuclear ends up being the concern of everyone on Orbis and nations will be hit where it hurts (in their wallet) if they are unprepared or are unable to negotiate. I'm not sure if I like this or not as it could be a pretty big shift in the way the game is played, however I certainly think it would be interesting to see the effects if something like that was implemented. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WISD0MTREE Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Thats nice the person with the most nukes can essentially end the world No. Out of all seven of the nuclear tests the US has done, no nuclear winter has occured. It would take a tremendous amount of nukes to cause this. Plus, The thing is, nukes will likely never be used in a major war any time soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox Fire Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Interesting idea. Not sure how I feel about it though... Does anyone even have nukes yet? Quote _________________________________________________________________ <Jroc> I heard \ is an anagram of cocaine<\> I can't be rearranged into a line, I already am a line. --Foxburo Wiki-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoS Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 I have sum but you can't see 'em cuz they're in my butt. I think if The number of nukes launched on one day exceeds...say 50% of nations on Orbis that doomsday will be triggered resulting in all cities of all nations being reduced to 10 infra. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Alex Posted January 8, 2015 Administrators Share Posted January 8, 2015 No one has or will have nukes anytime soon, but I actually really like this suggestion. It's something I myself have even brought up, previously. 2 Quote Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest ItForums Rules | Game Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 no is not a good idea, that means if my neighbour or other nations get nuke and my food productions also got affected? Thanks but no thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WISD0MTREE Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 no is not a good idea, that means if my neighbour or other nations get nuke and my food productions also got affected? Thanks but no thanks It encourages politics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karrajor Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 no is not a good idea, that means if my neighbour or other nations get nuke and my food productions also got affected? Thanks but no thanks This game has "politics" in its name. I think the nuclear winter could bring much into the game. It would mean that some of the actions alliances can made will have a global impact. And this would lead to more politics. There would be incentive not only to try solving issues diplomaticaly, but also to stop others from going berserk. Ultimately (if I go into extreme optimism) it would create a reason for some sort of a United Nations thing being estabilished. Or alliances would create giant food reserves So I am 100% for this idea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoS Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 It encourages politics. Yeah it does. The actions of the majority affecting all. And it makes sense that if half the nations of Orbis are nuked, the other half will be near those nations and severely affected. It's gonna be a long ass time before a majority of nations even have nukes. But, a severe tipping point consequence is more realistic and more compelling than graduated consequences. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bagpuss Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 no is not a good idea, that means if my neighbour or other nations get nuke and my food productions also got affected? Thanks but no thanks Aye and in the real world if someone gets nuked all the radiation stays inside their borders right In reality a nuclear exchange of a significant size would lead to some element of climatic change leading to cooling of the planet. Pretty much in the same way that when yellowstone goes bang again (its technically overdue on a geological time basis) that would also lead to global cooling 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rapmanej Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Sort of like the global radiation level makes sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.