Initial thoughts

[mjl1966]

After my first game, overall I'd say this is a pretty good nuclear strategy sim. I have many thoughts...

First, way better than DEFCON. This game takes the idea much more seriously and I was almost able to put together a counter-force strategy before the other factions lost their patience and went to town.

In terms of meta, this game also makes the mistake of focusing almost exclusively on the counter-value mission. The fact that scoring only comes from counter-value is the biggest indicator. Nuking cities is the popular notion of nuclear warfare. Nuclear strategy, however, does not prioritize that. So, first suggestion: assign some scoring to the counter-force mission. It's a valid point and some of us are really eager to explore that.

LOVE the strike package. Would like to be able to assign specific bases or fleets to a strike, however. Doing it by platform type is a good start. Let's make this more precise.

Would like to rename ships and/or assign names to fleets.

Ships can't repair all that well at sea - I think at least the option to force them to a coastal city for repair is reasonable.

The game leans towards the strategic and has that feeling from Harpoon days, but it's a little arcadey. Carriers with squadrons and packages lined up would be cool, but probably too micro for most. I dunno. Something to think about.

The RUSH to the counter-value phase is my main frustration. I hadn't even researched the entire tree before everybody started launching MRVs at each other. Entire factions were done in less than 30 seconds. I'd like to see a more scaled escalation to that point. The counter-value mission is the LAST step in nuclear war and may not need all that much, depending on the objective. Getting the other guy to surrender and then taking over what's left should be an option. FWIW, whenever you see a picture of an ICBM going at a city, that's dead wrong. ICBMs are counter-force weapons, primarily to take out other ICBMs. SLBMS are second-tier counter-force, intended to take out military installations. Bombers are the true counter-value platform and are intended to go in and mop up cities after the military infrastructure has been crippled. That's doctrine. Would be nice to be able to simulate what has already been developed by IRL planners.

And this game absolutely has the potential to get there. The pieces are in place. I think starting by giving the game more time to develop before it goes to DEFCON 0 would be a good first step. It's too eager to blow up cities. (The easiest thing to do - and certainly not the most interesting.)

Keep at it - you're onto something here and this is by far the best nuclear strategy sim I've ever seen.

[BroJo]

Originally posted by mjl1966:

In terms of meta, this game also makes the mistake of focusing almost exclusively on the counter-value mission. The fact that scoring only comes from counter-value is the biggest indicator. Nuking cities is the popular notion of nuclear warfare. Nuclear strategy, however, does not prioritize that. So, first suggestion: assign some scoring to the counter-force mission. It's a valid point and some of us are really eager to explore that.

Wouldn't the Survival scoring mode do what you are asking for? In Survival, a player gets no points for killing the enemy population but rather for the friendly population alive at the end.

[Ufnv]

Thanks for the review!

Originally posted by mjl1966:

Would like to be able to assign specific bases or fleets to a strike, however. Doing it by platform type is a good start. Let's make this more precise.

You can, actually. Every unit assigned to a strike plan has an icon on the top right corner of it's window - to include/exclude this specific unit from the plan.

[mjl1966]

Ah - excellent. Next on the list: multi-select! Would be nice to select ALL my silos to swap out missile type manually. And we really need unit cards/lists. Maybe that's already in the pipeline?

[mjl1966]

Originally posted by BroJo:

Originally posted by mjl1966:

In terms of meta, this game also makes the mistake of focusing almost exclusively on the counter-value mission. The fact that scoring only comes from counter-value is the biggest indicator. Nuking cities is the popular notion of nuclear warfare. Nuclear strategy, however, does not prioritize that. So, first suggestion: assign some scoring to the counter-force mission. It's a valid point and some of us are really eager to explore that.

Wouldn't the Survival scoring mode do what you are asking for? In Survival, a player gets no points for killing the enemy population but rather for the friendly population alive at the end.

Sort of. But it still comes down to counter-value mission. Even if it's just to shave off those ten points.

What I'd really like is an option to mod the scoring. Looks like that's buried in the engine.

[Ufnv]

I'll add the alternative scoring mode in one of the next patches.