Page 12 of 12

RE: High Altitude bombardment

Posted: Sun Sep 03, 2006 8:34 pm
by golden delicious
ORIGINAL: sstevens06

Now to get even more realistic, selectable air- or ground-bursts for nuclear attacks would be a very nice enhancement.

Mm. I'd say the first thing I'd want to do would be to go into more detail on the nuclear stockpile system. As it stands, you have a fixed number of nuclear attacks allowable per turn. What I'd like to see would be something akin to the way replacements work currently, with one item for each size of warhead. Weapons systems could be specified as either having a fixed warhead size or a variable size, in which case they could fire a smaller warhead if none of their own type was available.
Finally, what would a late Cold War simulation be without Enhanced Radiation (aka Neutron) weapons? Specifically designed to kill with "prompt" radiation (X-rays IIRC) while minimizing all other nuclear weapons effects (heat, blast, and fallout), ER weapons generally had very low yields such as 1kT. But they had the potential of being really effective battlefield weapons, their extremely high initial burst of radiation capable of defeating most known Soviet and NATO NBC protective suites.

That should be pretty easy to simulate. Just combine a limited impact on terrain with a larger impact on units in the hex.

RE: High Altitude bombardment

Posted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 10:35 am
by a white rabbit
..just in case it's not been said..comparison of modern battlefield nukes with the ones dropped on Japan is guidance at best, the japanese house construction methods of the period gives higher destruction of buildings, and so people than the same bomb dropped on a western city in the same period. The fire bombing of other Japanese cities caused far higher casualties than the new toys, altho at a far higher cost in aviation fuel..