Nuclear explosion effects

Juergen · Post by **Juergen** » Feb 11 2004

Very well then,according to George Geczy
the basic nuclear damage code is already there:
"The basic nuclear damage code is in place for single-hex hits - nukes with a larger ground attack range then one hex are not done yet"

Now the question is how does the magic work?
How is the damage (soft,hard,fort) calculated and what does it depend on?
Is the area that a missile affects a "sticker" or is it dependent on the yield?

I know that this code isnt there yet but what are the plans for nukes that affect multiple hexes?
Will all following hexes be hit with different forces or will you use the same damage for all hexes?

I think that one thing should be remembered:
As far as I have heard some work with 7km hexes,so that would practically every nuke multiple hexes affecting weapon.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Juergen on 2004-02-11 07:15 ]</font>

Post by **George Geczy** » Feb 12 2004

We haven't yet balanced the numbers, but the basic stat for nuke damage is in the attack strength spec for the missile unit (hard attack/soft attack/fortification attack).

We'll likely use the yield value for two purposes - first, to make sure the attack values are consistent between different nukes, and second, to determine the maximum damage range (in km).

Then, for each map it would be determined whether the range is same-hex or else how many hexes radius; a nuke that is same-hex in Australia (26km hex width) could be multi-hex in California (12 km hex width). That would be accounted for.

-- George.

ilkhan · Post by **ilkhan** » Feb 12 2004

Also Maybe think about the chances that the nuke is a dud. Nuke's are not able to be tested on a very regular basis and there is a good chance that some will not go off or will hit with much redused power. Like in 'The Sum of all Fears' Tom Clancy book the terorist set off a nuke and there was a very small defect in it and it still went off but was a pitifly small explosion.

Just a thought

Hellfish6 · Post by **Hellfish6** » Feb 13 2004

Tom Clancy is hardly a source of good information. Still, I can't say I wouldn't mind seeing some kind of failure. I think Russian nukes can be launched without actually being armed, so that they land at the target without causing a nuclear explosion.

Post by **BattleGoat** » Feb 13 2004

On 2004-02-12 21:02, Hellfish6 wrote:
Tom Clancy is hardly a source of good information.

Yup! Larry Bond any day of the week

tkobo · Post by **tkobo** » Feb 13 2004

better watch out-Bond and Clancy are good friends

Juergen · Post by **Juergen** » Feb 13 2004

"Then, for each map it would be determined whether the range is same-hex or else how many hexes radius; a nuke that is same-hex in Australia (26km hex width) could be multi-hex in California (12 km hex width). That would be accounted for"

But wouldnt that make the affected area...HARDWIRED??

I wouldnt like that idea,its way to inflexible and too abstract.

The affected area should be calculated for every weapon and not be fixed.

Remember that weapons like ICBMs affect huge areas and a single "hex circle" might not be enough to simulate that,especially when the map has a smaller hex scale (I have heard about 7km).

Post by **BattleGoat** » Feb 13 2004

On 2004-02-13 04:55, tkobo wrote:
better watch out-Bond and Clancy are good friends

I actually like both authors but think that Clancy's gone a little too commercial lately. Bond helped out on some of Clancy's early books (especially Red October) --- I think they met playing Harpoon, and I know that eventually they'll just have to try our game

I often think that our game is based on what could happen in a Larry Bond novel

(BTW, I'm current reading Red Phoenix for the umpteenth time)

Juergen · Post by **Juergen** » Feb 13 2004

Wasnt the "original plan" just to set a "ground attack range" individually for each missile?

And if the GAR would reach another hex from the center of ground zero then the other hexes would be affected?

At least thats the way I recall but since George mentioned that the "yield" value is actually going to be used for anything other than reference I dont know.

And I am sorry about being not precise when saying "HARWIRED".

At that time I thought that George meant that there would be a kind of "switch" for scenarios that would just say that nukes affect a single or multiple hexes without actually checking anything.

Now I realize that Georges message actually doesnt necessarily say this he could as well have meant that the "ground attack range" of a given missile IS accounted for.

I admit I was a little confused at that time.
(Im quite nervous right now because Im waiting to get the results of my exams)
Sorry.

Oh yes...Tom Clancy,well I read Red Storm Rising but started other books as well but didnt finish them.
As much as I like the topic Clancy just doesnt describe his characters vividly.
Most of them are plain boring.
I might be spoiled by Terry Pratchets Discworld characters but currently thats my humble opinion.

Post by **George Geczy** » Feb 13 2004

Sorry if I was a bit confusing in the way I worded it. The Ground Attack Range is definitely NOT hardwired.

It was my intention to use the kiloton yield value to calculate the GAR in kilometres - I think it is pretty safe to say that bomb x with 600 kilotons is the same GAR as bomb y with 600 kilotons. Indications are that a 600 kT nuke has about an 8km destruction radius. Of course, destruction declines as you move away from ground 0, so there is no 'fixed end point'; however US Dept of Defense docs indicate that most wood-frame buildings would survive at 8km from ground zero. As well, the amount of damage decreases rapidly as you move away; "the effect at any distance is proportional to the cube root of the weapon's yield; this a 20,000 kiloton bomb will affect only 10 times the radius of a 20 kiloton bomb".

Continuing with the example of a 600 kT nuke, with an 8km damage radius, in Australia this would be same-hex only. In the Guatamala Scenario, which has a 7km hex with, it would be 1-hex-out. Same bomb, different results depending on the map size.

A 20,000 kiloton bomb would have a damage radius of about 19 km - in Australia, 1-hex-out; in Guatamala, three hexes out. And of course, the further away you are from ground zero, the lower the damage level - as per the formula above.

I'll be verifying the above numbers from other sources, but the idea of yield-to-radius is one that should work well for the game.

-- George.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: George Geczy on 2004-02-13 19:42 ]</font>

Juergen · Post by **Juergen** » Feb 14 2004

Now I understand

So the basic plan is mostly the same as it were a while ago:

In the end its the GAR value that determines what hexes get hit and what hexes are spared.

The attack values as well as the speed and the defense values for the missile remain fixed in the units statistics.

And if the bomb "attacks" other hexes as well that would also mean that they would be hit with the same force,right?

What is new is the yield value which I already spotted in the beta.
And the GAR is derived from this yield value.

However there is still something a little unclear about this and I have a question:

Does the GAME ENGINE take the yield value and form the GAR value out of it?

OR do people use a weapons yield as a sort of referential value and form the GAR value themselves and then put it in the stats?

Regardless of this the calculation of the GAR of single warhead weapons should be a relatively straightforward affair.
But how to do you calculate the GAR of MIRVed weapons?

Juergen · Post by **Juergen** » Feb 18 2004

Did I ask something wrong?

Post by **BattleGoat** » Feb 18 2004

No... Since it's a Game Engine question I'm leaving this one for George, and he just hasn't gotten back to it yet. Patience, young Jedi

prime_642 · Post by **prime_642** » Feb 18 2004

What about variations for terrain? After all, if i remember correctly, the Nagasaki Bomb was more powerful that the Hiroshima Bomb, yet, it caused less damage because there were mountains. And what about population concentration? If the population is dispersed, it should cuase less damage. Also, can you invert in "nuke-proof" buildings? I believe the White House has a shelter under the East Wing. And how about nuclear fallout shelters?

Post by **BattleGoat** » Feb 19 2004

Terrain should affect the area effects of nuclear weapons, but we'll have to wait for full implementation before seeing how much.

Bomb shelters and the like, will be assumed in population centers so there will be some survivors, depending on the yield of the bomb.