Bomber options

[ronin84]

Some ideas regarding bombers that my increase realism and make the game a little more interresting.

Assuming that the conflicts are taking place in the mid-1980s or after, perhaps a drop down menu to specify which type of bomber you would like to place and launch. B-52, B-1b, B-2, or FB-111. The different bombers have differrent flight characteristics and different weapons payload capabilities.

Speaking of, another option would be to specify what type of ordinanace the aircraft will carry (ALCM, SRAM, free fall bombs).
The use of the ALCM, for instance, would provide a bomber with some standoff capability (as in real life) and hence the ability to avoid enemy AA sites.

Also, being able to specify the attack profile of the aircraft (high, medium, or low level terrian following) could be interesting too.

Finally, being able to specify the burst mode (air burst, impact, delayed "laydown") of the free fall bombs being used would be interesting. It would allow players another option for carrying out a high altitude EMP attack. An example would be a B-2 armed with say a B-83 set for air burst to fry, or blind, SAM radars and provide a corridor for follow on bomber forces.

[Pox]

Welcome, and prepare for a stabbing.

Have you noticed that DEFCON is in no way a simulation? Have you noticed that one of the beautiful things about its design is that there are a total of 6 units, and a single kind of nuke that does one thing? DEFCON is about simple, fun gameplay that also has a lot of room for tactics and strategy. This is the biggest advantage I see it as having over conventional RTSs: rather than being a spamfest with the person with the best knowledge of the umpteen-thousand units winning, it is all about how you use the units you have. Like chess.

Basically, all of your suggestions would complicate the game to the point where it was no longer "easy to learn but hard to master".

[xander]

No, my stabbin' arm is all busted up. The doctors say it is going to take several months to heal up, and that I may only regain 60% of my stabbin' capacity. So, I am now using the shotgun loaded up with rock salt.

DAMN YOU KID! GIT OFFA MAH LAWN!

*BLAM* *BLAM*

xander

[ronin84]

xander and pox, thank you so much for reading my post and for your mature, intelligent, and constructive replies. I was not aware that Defcon is not a simulation. It certianly seems to simulate basic planning and strategy for nuclear conflict. It also simulates the strategic characteristics of the weapons systems that make up the nuclear triad. So lets not be coy now and act like this isn't a wargame based on real world military subject matter which by that nature makes it a simulation.

Secondly, it was my undersatnding that suggestions were welcome here. My suggestion would not make the game more complicated becuase it would be an option that you could enable if you wanted to, hence my use of the word option in my original post. Close and careful reading comprehension skills are important in life.

It would be a simple matter to configure the game for various types of game play. Simple and basic (which you guys seem to like) and more advanced and involved settings for those of us who would like to enhance an already cool and interesting game.

Lastly, some advice, if you're going to attack me you better bring more than a knife and a shotgun loaded with rock salt. Sucka.

[All American Mobster]

Sometimes it may get a little annoying, especially if we do switch. We might be in desprate need of bombers, then we have to go through which bombers we want, bla bla bla. And in speed defcon, it could take a little more time to choose all the bombers options, again bla bla bla.

Maybe for a different game though



-$tanley

[bert_the_turtle]

Careful, you're attacking forum and community veterans, that usually is not a good way to introduce yourself

It would be a simple matter to configure the game for various types of game play. Simple and basic (which you guys seem to like) and more advanced and involved settings for those of us who would like to enhance an already cool and interesting game.

Options are fine and nice, and suggestions are welcome, but I'd like to assert that this particular overly complex option will not be used by Defcon's core player population and will therefore be wasted coding time. Nearly everyone here will tell you about their pet bug they'd like to have fixed (some will bring a whole zoo) before things like this get implemented.

Also, this game is now out for over 18 months; chances that a new idea that isn't of the stroke-of-genius-that-should-have-been-in-from-the-start type makes it into a patch are next to zero. Virtually none of the ideas posted here are even close to that type, I'm afraid. And those that are have been tried in the alpha/beta and failed

[All American Mobster]

And those that are have been tried in the alpha/beta and failed

Pretty much Basically all thats left are mod options



-$tanley

[xander]

Not to mention the fact that nearly every suggestion in the original post has been brought up at least twice in this forum.

xander

[All American Mobster]

Not to mention the fact that nearly every suggestion in the original post has been brought up at least twice in this forum.

xander

Ah, true, very true



-$tanley

[T-95]

Well...even if this suggestion would be considered as an "ugprade" whatsoever, it should take a huge amount of time to actually implement it in the game. And it should be considered that there are long and short range bombers, different types of bombers for countries (logically, the USSR shouldn't be using B-2 planes and so on) if such an idea would be a subject to implement to the game (I know it wouldn't be, since "Defcon isn't a simulation"). Plus the USSR didn't have as much variants of strategic bombers at their disposal as the U.S, making the game unbalanced.

[Synapse]

perhaps a drop down menu to specify which type of bomber you would like to place and launch. B-52, B-1b, B-2, or FB-111. The different bombers have differrent flight characteristics and different weapons payload capabilities.

Speaking of, another option would be to specify what type of ordinanace the aircraft will carry (ALCM, SRAM, free fall bombs).
The use of the ALCM, for instance, would provide a bomber with some standoff capability (as in real life) and hence the ability to avoid enemy AA sites.

Also, being able to specify the attack profile of the aircraft (high, medium, or low level terrian following) could be interesting too.

Finally, being able to specify the burst mode (air burst, impact, delayed "laydown") of the free fall bombs being used would be interesting. It would allow players another option for carrying out a high altitude EMP attack. An example would be a B-2 armed with say a B-83 set for air burst to fry, or blind, SAM radars and provide a corridor for follow on bomber forces.

I totally agree, and you should have 5 different types of submarine, some nuclear capabilities and some not, and you should be able to set the depth they are at and then you should be able to go to periscope depth to see ships to see if you can surface. Also there should be lots of fleet units such as gunboats cruisers destroyers etc and carriers should have the option to set the depth of their depth charges. You should have to manually land planes on carriers because for realisms sake accidents happen and this could make you lose your bombers. Fighter planes should have a variety of missiles including sidewinders and should have anti missile abilities such as chaff. You should also have radars which get their info in a 360 circle like real radar. Silos should be able to choose types of warheads and program their flight path like real missiles. Then of course there are new units to add such as helicopters and ground-based missile launchers, infantry and tanks. And all of these should have a variety of modes including ambush blitz and guard modes. Also all the countries should have HQ unit and if it gets nuked 5 times you lose ability to communicate with all your stuff and it all is inoperable.

Seriously though, how many times do you win a game of Defcon? Because you want to make it even more complicated than it already is, and I know I don't win so many games. The only way this would work is if the game was made into a realtime conflict game with pause mode enabled, and that each game would last about a week while you try to out-tactic your opponents many types of units. If you really want that much realism, why don't you make a political party/terrorist group and try conducting some real nuclear war?

[xander]

--==<snip>==--

Yeah... you just bumped a dead topic to reply to a poster who is, in all likelihood, gone and is not coming back. Don't do that.

xander

[pinback]

Yeah! Knock it off!

[Synapse]

We get a lot of realism debates people trying to ask for ground based missile units, trying to replace the Battleship unit and so forth, trying to explain that Defcon is a game not a simulation just bounces off some people. Just my 2 cents anyway, when you can win the current game 9/10 times then is the time to ask for new things, until then keep learning how to use the 6 existing units.

[All American Mobster]

We get a lot of realism debates people trying to ask for ground based missile units, trying to replace the Battleship unit and so forth, trying to explain that Defcon is a game not a simulation just bounces off some people. Just my 2 cents anyway, when you can win the current game 9/10 times then is the time to ask for new things, until then keep learning how to use the 6 existing units.

Well done. Well done indeed



-$tanley