Nukes are underpowered
Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators
- bergsjaeger
- General
- Posts: 2240
- Joined: Apr 22 2005
- Location: Woods Bend, Alabama,USA
-
- Brigadier Gen.
- Posts: 734
- Joined: May 18 2005
- Location: The Empire
http://www.missilethreat.com/missiles/t ... 4_usa.html
The first version of the Trident, the C-4. Eight 100kt warheads in the missile.(they downgraded to 6 at one point)
Instead of one big nuke landing in the middle of the city, 8 smaller nukes land all over the city. This is much more effective for taking out cities and soft targets, but doesn't do so well in taking down bunkers and other hard targets.
You could possibly survive a 1 Megaton nuke landing in the middle of the city, if you are 3-5+ miles away. If 8 100kt nukes land all over the place, your chances are much slimmer. Less to hide behind, fallout everywhere. Multiple shockwaves on the city, so if the first shockwave doesn't bring down the house, the next few might. 8 ground zero's to deal with.
I don't remember if it was Hiroshima, or Nagasaki, but one of the cities was half protected by a large hill. MIRV makes terrain such as hills and mountains much less effective in mitigating the devastation.
The first version of the Trident, the C-4. Eight 100kt warheads in the missile.(they downgraded to 6 at one point)
Instead of one big nuke landing in the middle of the city, 8 smaller nukes land all over the city. This is much more effective for taking out cities and soft targets, but doesn't do so well in taking down bunkers and other hard targets.
You could possibly survive a 1 Megaton nuke landing in the middle of the city, if you are 3-5+ miles away. If 8 100kt nukes land all over the place, your chances are much slimmer. Less to hide behind, fallout everywhere. Multiple shockwaves on the city, so if the first shockwave doesn't bring down the house, the next few might. 8 ground zero's to deal with.
I don't remember if it was Hiroshima, or Nagasaki, but one of the cities was half protected by a large hill. MIRV makes terrain such as hills and mountains much less effective in mitigating the devastation.
- bergsjaeger
- General
- Posts: 2240
- Joined: Apr 22 2005
- Location: Woods Bend, Alabama,USA
-
- Brigadier Gen.
- Posts: 734
- Joined: May 18 2005
- Location: The Empire
I forget what the kt for the trident is in game(more than 100kt right? combined the rl trident has about 800kt, but I would have to look again at the trident in game to see what it is). I think they use a combined kt, but then again I don't think they have factored in that the trident is a MIRV and not just a single nuke.
- bergsjaeger
- General
- Posts: 2240
- Joined: Apr 22 2005
- Location: Woods Bend, Alabama,USA
-
- Brigadier Gen.
- Posts: 709
- Joined: Jul 05 2002
-
- Brigadier Gen.
- Posts: 734
- Joined: May 18 2005
- Location: The Empire
Got some more up to date info on the trident.
The newest, the D-5 version.
http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/trientd5.htm
The latest trident missiles are capable of holding 8-14(14 in a shorter ranged version) W-88 warheads. Each warhead is 475kt. This makes the D-5 Trident a 3.8Mt-6.6Mt missile.
Could we get the D-5 added to the unit file? It seems the newest trident in game is the C-4 which is the first version and is only 1/4 the power of the D-5.
The newest, the D-5 version.
http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/trientd5.htm
The latest trident missiles are capable of holding 8-14(14 in a shorter ranged version) W-88 warheads. Each warhead is 475kt. This makes the D-5 Trident a 3.8Mt-6.6Mt missile.
Could we get the D-5 added to the unit file? It seems the newest trident in game is the C-4 which is the first version and is only 1/4 the power of the D-5.
- bergsjaeger
- General
- Posts: 2240
- Joined: Apr 22 2005
- Location: Woods Bend, Alabama,USA
-
- Sergeant
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Jun 16 2005
Chemical Effects?
Not trying to hijack the thread, but while everyone's discussing WMD's, can anyone report on How to use/Effects of Chemical Weapons?
Thanks
Gripen
Thanks
Gripen
-
- Brigadier Gen.
- Posts: 734
- Joined: May 18 2005
- Location: The Empire
Chem weapons are currently not implemented. You can vote to have them included here: http://www.bgforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=4857
I assume chem weapons will eventually make it in, though who knows when.
I assume chem weapons will eventually make it in, though who knows when.
-
- Major
- Posts: 164
- Joined: May 25 2005
- bergsjaeger
- General
- Posts: 2240
- Joined: Apr 22 2005
- Location: Woods Bend, Alabama,USA
well that's y i never plan a ground war until the enemies i launched on have nothing left to fight with. I been known to launch over 25 nukes just at one base. On the world map i have lauched over a 1000 nukes, all targeted at every base and every major city and then anything else i felt like wiping out. In real life if this had happened then I would have destroyed the world but anyways. The only thing i haven't figured out how to bring back up is my DAR. Everytime a nuke hits the DAR drops to 1% i was lucky though didn't have an election for 2 more years.
In war destroy everything even the livestock.
-
- Corporal
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Sep 01 2005
I hate to bo a necrophiliac here but..........
I finallt got the chance to mess with Nukes in game last night.....Playing the US NorthWest Scenerio......I launched at least 10 Nukes at Las Vegas......Yeah I killed some people and was told that Vegas had been destroyed...but there were still a crap load of Military units there....it looked like each Nuke Hit only eliminated 1 Military unit.......
BTW: these were Peacekeepers......
But I gotta agree with all this, Nukes are way to underpowered....of course I'm pretty sure that all Large Explosive things are underpowered,. not just the Nukes...but B-52s and B-2s..
I finallt got the chance to mess with Nukes in game last night.....Playing the US NorthWest Scenerio......I launched at least 10 Nukes at Las Vegas......Yeah I killed some people and was told that Vegas had been destroyed...but there were still a crap load of Military units there....it looked like each Nuke Hit only eliminated 1 Military unit.......
BTW: these were Peacekeepers......
But I gotta agree with all this, Nukes are way to underpowered....of course I'm pretty sure that all Large Explosive things are underpowered,. not just the Nukes...but B-52s and B-2s..