Nuclear explosion effects

sladeross · Post by **sladeross** » Feb 19 2004

One of the most devestating effects of nuclear weapons is the ElectroMagneticPulse. I am not a scholar on this, but remember reading that the EMP from an airburst nuke would knock out all the computers, electric appliances, batteries, etc for a very long ways.

Of course if you are within a couple of klicks of ground zero, your palm pilot has probably moved a couple spots lower on your list of priorities.

prime_642 · Post by **prime_642** » Feb 20 2004

So you are suggesting a special type of airburst nuke? ala Goldeneye?

sladeross · Post by **sladeross** » Feb 21 2004

Not a special kind, I believe these are existing effects from an airburst deployment of a nuclear weapon. I think there has been research and speculation about developing weapons that would have the same effect without the nuclear devestation, but I guess I'm not sure what those are called.

tkobo · Post by **tkobo** » Feb 22 2004

Word is there are already non-nuclear emp burst weapons.

Much like the emp wave created by a nuke,they can fry electronics based on how hardened they are/or arent.

The two i remember reading some about use microwave (HPM)(tempest?)and/or radio frequencies to create the burst.
Hughs Missile Systems Co was given a contract in 96(?) to make the HPM SEAD version in missile and bomb form.

Juergen · Post by **Juergen** » Feb 24 2004

As far as I recall EMP effects (regardless from which weapon) were discussed here on the forums but there was no solution found how to implement these effects.

I would say that one of the most desired effects of the EMP wave is to blow enemy communications out so that they cant react to further attacks.
But Supreme Ruler doesnt feature Communication.
So it would be tough to simulte these effects.
The only things that come to my mind now would be loss of combat effieceny for the affected units.

And as far as I have heard electronics might also be hardened against EMP effects,and if that should fail its possible to replace at least key components.

As far as the damage to the economy goes this also wouldnt be easy to pin down.
It would also be quite abstract.
While SR2010 doesnt track electronic components we could say that the more complex a product is (like military goods) the more damage this kind of indudtry would take.
This damage could take the form of loss of stock and/or damage to the upgrades in question.
Maybe also a loss of the industrial effeciencys.
--------------------------------------------
But before we talk about EMP weapons why not getting back to "regular" nukes.
These weapons will be surely in and unlike EMP weapons their effects are easier to predict.

Well,now the last questions I asked was how the area of effect of MIRVed weapons will be calculated and if the "yield value" (you can already see it in the beta) is actually used by the game engine to be turned into the GAR or if its just a reference.

Since all major ICBMs and SLBMs are MIRVed (meaning multiple warheads) this question is important.
A while ago we agreed that MIRVed means a larger ground attack range (GAR) in game terms.
This would imply that the warheads are spread out to encircle an area,this way the area effected gets much larger.

For material about this I recommend installing "NUKEFIX" and from there run:
"Multiple Blast"
The programm can be found here:
http://www.nukefix.org

Juergen · Post by **Juergen** » Apr 02 2004

Hmmm some time ago since last I heard something new from these...

Well,another important thing about nukes is wether they are capable of destroying hard targets (silos,airfields,bases) or only "soft" targets like cities.

Is there a way to reflect this in the game?

Would there be a way of reducing the effect of a specific nuclear weapon against "hard" targets without affecting its damage on soft targets?

LORD_BUNGLA · Post by **LORD_BUNGLA** » Apr 03 2004

I think EMP effects should be left out of the game. I've been playing this game for about 2 months and i can tell u now, its been a headache taking care of things. (not that that is a bad thing

!) I think the aftermath of a nuke should see a decline in birth rate and a life expectancy drop. And thats about it.

Juergen · Post by **Juergen** » Apr 05 2004

In my opinion fallout is one the most important long-term effects of nuclear weapons.
It is what creates the effects you describe.

Additionaly radiation zones also do have an effect on military units.

pyrobzkt · Post by **pyrobzkt** » Apr 08 2004

Weather has a factor too.

Juergen · Post by **Juergen** » Apr 08 2004

Thats right,if for example the air is foggy then some of the nuclear explosions primary effects can be absorbed.
Especially the intense light.

And weather has a significant effect on the spreading of radiation.

The problem is...we dont have weather.

I guess we will likely just assume "regular" conditions.
In general fallout tends to spread to the east for example.

Im not sure what the devs have in store for this effect though.
It would be nice if they would give us a little update.

[ This Message was edited by: Juergen on 2004-04-08 13:31 ]

Juergen · Post by **Juergen** » Apr 08 2004

Really...there is still a lot to balance about nukes.

And without responses of the devs we can only speculate.

One of the questions that I keep asking myself:

Is there a way to make some nukes more effective against hardened targets (silos,to a degree airfields) without changing their effect on "soft" targets (cities,industy)?

Unless Im mistaken there currently is only one kind of attack strenght that is taken into account when civilian casualties are determined,that would be "Fortified Attack",right?
I remember to have to heard that these casualties also depend on the "soft attack" (which would also be used against infantry).
But Im not sure.

If this would be the case then there will be no problem balancing the nukes.

And if this isnt the case then how can we balance against certain targets?

Wouldnt that necessarily mean that nukes can only be balanced against hardened targets OR soft targets?

[ This Message was edited by: Juergen on 2004-04-08 15:47 ]

Post by **BattleGoat** » Apr 09 2004

I hesitate to get into this topic... (Fear of Juergen jumping all over me if I get something wrong

Actually the real reason we haven't jumped into this yet, is because we are not testing nukes internally yet. We want to make sure that the conventional weapons are thoroughly tested and balanced as best as possible before every game just becomes a WMD exchange. (trust me, with our Multi Player test games EVERY game would become about lobbing nukes... "Chris, look up in the sky... It's a bird... It's a plane... No, it's a herd of ICBM's heading for all your cities and bases!

)

tkobo · Post by **tkobo** » Apr 09 2004

1) ^^^^^^^^^ Too funny.

2) Get em Juergen !Keep em honest P

Juergen · Post by **Juergen** » Apr 09 2004

As to the weather:
In this month the weather in the Rhineland can be quite unpredictable,even when the sun is shining it may still rain a little later.

"trust me, with our Multi Player test games EVERY game would become about lobbing nukes... "

Well as soon as the WMD ON/OFF button is working there wont be any problems with that anymore.
As long as this button isnt working why not just ask the other players to please not use these weapons in order to test the game properly,I think there should be some trust in the other players.
And where is close combat BTW...?
Still there are tanks right?

You clearly dont want to put the nukes into the beta now,OK but why wouldnt it be a good idea to talk about nukes and discuss the way they will work in the game?

Only if we the fans know about the plans and about the capablilities of the game engine we can make suggestions that in turn might lead to improvements.
This has worked before hasnt it?

And at least I currently find myself a few crucial information too short when it comes to nukes.
I have got a few ideas how to implement these kind of weapons but without these information my ideas just wont take shape because it hard to guess what the game can do and what not.

[ This Message was edited by: Juergen on 2004-04-09 15:30 ]

Post by **BattleGoat** » Apr 12 2004

Unit Week... Aircraft Carriers, Close Combat, Bridging, Mine Layers, etc... will not be in the Beta Update that will be available this week, but they should be in the next one (schedule still to be announced).

Nukes and Chemical weaponry will probably be in the update after that. So we will be getting into more detailed discussions of these pretty soon.

- David