My 3 Defcon Improvements.

[Hyperion]

Welcome ...ok im a conservative when it comes to Defcon, in my opinion certain elements should not be changed AT ALL. This is my belief . It is very well balanced and only bugs and glitches need be fixed. But i was thinking of random ideas at work, some completely stupid and some not but i promise there are no land unit ideas i haven’t looked through the think tank threads...simply because its nearly 5am my time...but i have nothing else to do so here goes:

1. Superweapons:

An extra option in the 'advance options' menu that allows for each player to each have a 'special' silo that once placed begins a countdown from Defcon 1. Say 10 real time minutes. This special silo may then launch 1 super nuke that is the equivalent of 10 regular nukes and has the effective radius and destructive power also (ever fancy taking out Moscow and Leningrad in one strike?) the silo itself requires 6 regular nukes to destroy and the silo timer is also variable...i.e. if you decide to place less units/facilities (whether intentionally of not) you receive a negative bonus to the super silo countdown...say -1:00 minute for every regular silo you don't place in game.

2. Sea Mines:

Almost every unit has 2 modes of attack except the battleship so i propose that the battleship (from Defcon 3) be able to lay perhaps 1-2 mines each. Obviously making the battleships vulnerable as their crews manoeuvre in order to deploy a mine but also a great defensive edge against naval incursions on coastlines you chose not to defend.

3. A Buzzer Button:

One of the more stupid ideas. Placed in a new game mode where after Defcon 1 each player in turn gets a small countdown clock on their screen. This countdown lasts for 1 real time minute. Within this time the player who has the countdown clock is able to push an icon that will either a) Disarm ALL in-flight nukes within the game. b) Cause ALL in-flight nukes to target THEIR cities. It's a risky button to press...it will either destroy you or save you. The buzzer will continue to circle from player to player giving them this option (should they choose to take it). One pro is that if you have the countdown buzzer then you know that’s the best time to launch all your nukes as no one else can disarm them

[caranthir.pkk]

I am gonna provide you with some really constructive criticism: "Booooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

[Rogviler]

Might be cool to have sea mines- If not deployed by the battleship, then placed as a unit at the beginning of the game.

-Rog

[Radiant Caligula]

would be great to have tons of add-ons as separate modes. Could be a setting. It would still be possible to play default Defcon, but also this - much like variable units...






If the regular nukes we use are Mikes or Bravos, I would LOVE to have a couple of Tzars as a superweapon.

[Tucsoncoyote]

Okay Now i have a thought.. since this is very true in real life.. instead of a Super Nuke, how about MIRV's? (Multiple Independently targets Rentry Vehicles.. the thing is that with that much fire power, you got a lot more mass destruction. I mean here's how a Mirv would work in theory:

Once Launched an MIRV missile would have the same as a certain number of full nukes Say six for example, but as it's going upwards you could in theory take the MIRV and target Up to six targets with 1 missile.

But if a missile comes down on a city and it's not been Targeted for each target on the upward flight then it's a one shot, one kill missile x 6 times the destruction. It's the same as 1 nuke but if you MIRV on the upward flight, them in the downward flight the end result is you could have up to 6 seperate nukes coming down on someone's head. And one they are Targeted you can't change the trajectory (In short the Nuke is locked in on the target you specify during the upwards flight trajectory and you can't change targets. (And because they are Multiple Independent Re-entry Vehicles it gives the otpion to chose which ones you would disarm and use as Decoys while the other could remain armed and hit their targets. (That's the Logic behind MIRV's you can make Air Defense think that nuke is going to hit, but it could be a dud or a dead nuke hence the term Decoy).
There is one thing.. once the missile splits into each mirv then it's really up to the player to decide to disarm each device. I know it's Micromanaging on a mega scale but it's interesting to see which missile will hit a target and detonate, or which ones will it their targets and be a dud. After all Air Defense Silos consider everything as a threat.. but now they would have six different targets to try and hit instead of 1 and in fact all of them could be duds (See Thought #2)

so it would be a good idea, but then I feel it might 'unbalance' the game in a way. so It's just a thought.. but it's a fun little thought instead of having up to 6 smaller nukes raining down instead of one 'super-nuke'.

Thought #2 about MIRV's .. now MIRV's would only be only on Subs MRBM's and ICBM Silos.. Bomber nukes from Airfields and Carriers would be just "Single Nukes or 1 shot 1 kill nukes (There are no MIRVs on SRBM's it's just one nuke." Sub Launched MRBM's would carry 3 MIRV's and ICBM's would be a full load of 6. But again I think folks will say this will unbalance the game but then It's just a thought Like I stated.

Thought #3 about MIRV's .. On the Upward flight you can take the Missile and program all six for six different targets and they all would be armed.. but on the downward arc (When the missile falls out of the sky, you can disarm 1 or up to all 6 if you want. Since this would cause the Airdefense silos to shoot at what they would think as a Serious threat, this could end up being a dud they are shooting at.. Thus some decoys would get shot at while live nukes might get through or get destroyed by Air Defenses while the Live ones hit their targets.. inflicting damage. after all you won't really know which MIRV's are Live or dead (Much like the nukes are now after all Air Defenses don't know if a Nuke is live or not , right? They just see it and shoot it ). But again I'll hear this arguement that it will 'unbalance' the game. But again like I state, it's only just a thought,

Tucsoncoyote--

[Hyperion]

I am gonna provide you with some really constructive criticism: "Booooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Well...*ahem* i just don't know how to be constructive with that

[shinygerbil]

Tucsoncoyote: I see no advantage whatsoever in disarming any of the nukes. Why not leave all 6 armed? It makes no sense.

If you disarm a nuke and then it makes it through the defence, then you'll be disappointed that you didn't leave it armed.

Unless disarming a nuke means it is much more resistant to enemy fire, the entire idea is useless. You're just turning 1 nuke into 6.

[Cooper42]

IRL: MIRVs split much closer to the ground, snad are usually single-target. They just cover a wider area.

There's no reson to assume Defcon's current nukes aren't MIRV's which split close to impact...

[Erasmus J Homeowner]

IRL: MIRVs split much closer to the ground, snad are usually single-target. They just cover a wider area.

There's no reson to assume Defcon's current nukes aren't MIRV's which split close to impact...

MRV is closer to what you are describing. A MIRV is independantly targetable ie can strike targets several targets withing a limited region or footprint.

The submunitions are released after the boost phase (so quite early on) allowing the indepentant targeting. The footprint is elliptical in shape, of the order of 200 miles long and tens of miles wide. The MX may even be 1000 x 50

[PsychicKid]

DEFCON's nukes would have to be MRVs in order to kill that many people in some of the larger cities. Seems pretty hard for a single missle, even around 15-20 MT to kill 11 million people. Let's not forget that when it says "Tokyo" or "New York" on the map, it also means all of the little towns, divisions, and possibly even nearby, seperate cities. I mean, a nuke that hits Tokyo on the map could just as easily have hit Yokohama or Chiba, it just says "Tokyo" so there's less cluter on the map. Just like how if you nuke New York, maybe the first nuke or two hits Manhattan, then Brooklyn, Queens, etc.

Also, the current missles in the game have a blast radius of approximately 100 miles/330 kilometers. I hit a radar positioned directly between New York and DC on the map once, and splash damage had damaged both cities. Assuming a ground burst and a single warhead, that's a yield of more than has ever been detonated. Well in excess of 100 MT. So I think that the missles in this game are most likely MRVs.

MIRVs on the other hand would be fun, but would imbalance things. MAYBE as a single use trump card, but I dunno.

[Tucsoncoyote]

Tucsoncoyote: I see no advantage whatsoever in disarming any of the nukes. Why not leave all 6 armed? It makes no sense.

If you disarm a nuke and then it makes it through the defence, then you'll be disappointed that you didn't leave it armed.

Unless disarming a nuke means it is much more resistant to enemy fire, the entire idea is useless. You're just turning 1 nuke into 6.

Actually not so, shingerbil here's a situation I thought of:

Let's say during the Boost phase of an ICBM, you target 3 on a silo and 3 on cities and as the missile MRV's on the descent phase, you would shut off the 3 to the Silo. and leave the other 3 on cities. Since Air Defenses would go after those that are a closer threat, Air Defense would more then Likely shoot at the 3 that are dummies first then going after the 3 that are live and are headed for the silos (and this is because I'm assuming that Air Defense sites would consider the closest threats first (Which I've seen a lot of time happening when I run simulations with CPU Players and if a Missile is headed for a Silos there's a good chance that the Nuke headed for a silo is a major threat (How many times have Silos been taken out first then Cities? A lot but then lets say you leave all of the nukes on, and 3 of them do get destroyed in the process, then of course the other 3 targeted for the cities would slip through the defenses while the Silos would be trying to protect itself from attack at the same time, (Remember Air Defenses go after threats closest to them first. or those threats that are within their radius of attack). So if some of those MIRV's end up outside the radius of Air Defense Attack, they would stil land and detonate. But the real thing is this.. The Air Defenses don't really know if the ones coming at them are live or not. (It's like a game of 'Russian Roulette' you have six bullets in the chamber, are they all live? Or are 5 of them duds? You don't know.. Air Defense thinks those attacking them are "Live " (when in reality they're duds" and while Air Defense is shooting at the duds the live nukes slip in and detonate on their city targets and thus score you points.. (Kills are kills). So is that Nuke threating your Missile silos live or dead? Shoot and find out..

and then this poster just strengthens my point on MIRV's

IRL: MIRVs split much closer to the ground, snad are usually single-target. They just cover a wider area.

There's no reson to assume Defcon's current nukes aren't MIRV's which split close to impact...

MRV is closer to what you are describing. A MIRV is independantly targetable ie can strike targets several targets withing a limited region or footprint.

The submunitions are released after the boost phase (so quite early on) allowing the indepentant targeting. The footprint is elliptical in shape, of the order of 200 miles long and tens of miles wide. The MX may even be 1000 x 50

And Yes you are right, In fact here's where the fun of "Paranoia" Begins.. Because during the boost phase you would be targeting an area, and as they come down, you have not 1 huge weapon coming down on you but rather now 6 smaller weapons..(and these six could land anywhere within or outside of a Air Defenses Radius of attack. if a city is out side the attack radius, well it's toast.. if it's inside Like i said, Air Defenses would shoot at the closest one first then pick off the next etc.. But the question still remains.. if You MIRV a Missile in Boost phase there is a good chance that from 1-6 warheads ill be raining down on your head.. You don't know if it is one or six.. This then makes players start to think that everything is live, and forces them to try and cover the cities, but in turn leaves your military objectives like Silos and airbases wide open to attack. In short it's a guessing game that is nothing short of Russian Roulette for the Air Defenses who could be quickly overwhelmed as 60 seperate smaller warheads with 1/6th the damage potential come raining down on them some with the area of attack some not.. and some might be live.. some not.. So do you shot and get lucky or do you not and get Killed? Or As Clint Eastwood would say.. Do you feel Lucky Punk? Well do you?

But like I said, this was an odd little thought that had crossed my mind.. I know that folks would say it would be 'useless' or would 'imbalance' the game, but hey, you never know. but like I said.. it was just an odd thought that crossed my mind. Whether or not it could be incorporated is really up to the game coders. But Like I said.. it was just that odd little fun thought.



Tucsoncoyote--

[xander]

I still don't understand why you would purposefully create dummy nukes. If you have six live nukes, three going to cities, and three going to a silo, wouldn't it be better to leave them all active? on the off chance that one or two make it through to the silo to do damage?

That being said, I still think that MIRVs are a bad idea, for the same reasons that I have given every other time it has come up.

xander

[Tucsoncoyote]

I still don't understand why you would purposefully create dummy nukes. If you have six live nukes, three going to cities, and three going to a silo, wouldn't it be better to leave them all active? on the off chance that one or two make it through to the silo to do damage?

That being said, I still think that MIRVs are a bad idea, for the same reasons that I have given every other time it has come up.

xander

Then Xander in rebuttal to your comment I would then ask why on earth is there a "Disarm Nuke" Option on all the missiles in the game, be it SRBM, MRBM, or ICBM? You just then stated the reason why this function is totally pointless, and that the Disarm nuke function on all the missiles should be removed from the missiles altogether.. In short, by saying what you just said, that this the (Disarm Nuke Option) is a bad idea, why don't we then remove the "Disarm nuke functions on all the missiles as it would be completely pointless to use in the first place. Then all missiles would be totally live, and it would be that then every missile you launch will cause destruction, provided it's not destroyed by Air Defenses. In short if MIRV's are a bad idea with a Disarm function, then all Missiles shouldn't have one! and it would keep the game in balance.. After all why have a Disarm function if you aren't going to use it? That's totally pointless is it not?

Oh and in my original Post.. I said, it was just an idea, a thought to liven the game up a little.. but eh, I'll let it drop.. but still I feel if you say that MIRV's shouldn't be able to disarm in flight, then the Disarm Nuke function in the game just is as pointless as well.
Tucsoncoyote--

[NeoThermic]

Then Xander in rebuttal to your comment I would then ask why on earth is there a "Disarm Nuke" Option on all the missiles in the game, be it SRBM, MRBM, or ICBM?

Quite simply to allow you to disarm misguided missiles and also to save face in diplomacy.

NeoThermic

[Tucsoncoyote]

Then Xander in rebuttal to your comment I would then ask why on earth is there a "Disarm Nuke" Option on all the missiles in the game, be it SRBM, MRBM, or ICBM?

Quite simply to allow you to disarm misguided missiles and also to save face in diplomacy.

NeoThermic

and that's my point.. What if all of a sudden you side up on someone and you have accidentally launched an MIRV, there's another reason for the MIRV, but eh, Like I said, I'll let it drop.. but Xander is suggesting that the 'Disarm nuke' function is totally pointless just like the MIRV idea, so then why have them It's just as moot.

PS. you accidentally launched it, you can't turn it off, so then you'll have to explain why you did it.. (Shoot Responibly)

Tucsoncoyote--