Could some nuclear weapons be simulated in WinSPMBT?

[Griefbringer]

Originally Posted by DRG

My immediate thought on this was press end turn and just as the modified "nuclear" artillery started to fall pull the plug on your computer.

Alternatively:

1.) Take your laptop outside
2.) Pour a gallon of gasoline on it
3.) Throw a lighted match to the gasoline pool

[Akmatov]

Although I find it peculiar that players of a game that inherently involves the killing of other human beings get a sudden case of 'green peace' at the mention of nuclear weapons, I have to agree that they doing really belong here. Not because they are 'immoral', but because of scale. Even the smaller ones would do too much damage on SPMBT-sized maps for such a scenario to be playable.

I have never understood why burning someone to death in a sealed tank was just good clean fun, but flash frying them with a nuc burst invokes horror.

[centurion77]

Taking into consideration the other post on chemical weapons, reducing visibility/mobility etc... of your troops would be reasonable, since operating in a fallout zone would be similar to a contaminated zone.
As for scenarios, WWIII a good one seeing as what little info on WP plans included tacical NBC weapons. Mind you sources state that the WP also had better preparation and training than NATO.

[Kartoffel]

All this talk of the theoretical inclusion of nuclear weapons within the game's scope has piqued my interest on how the combat interaction between opposing NBC protected forces would play out. I believe at some point during the cold war the blue side had concluded that should the red side invade the only way to stop their overwhelming numerical superiority would be the use of tactical enriched plutonium metal warheads on a limited scale. No doubt in response to espionage produced knowledge inducing documents the red side equipped their T-55 tanks with a rudimentary "fallout" air filter so that the crews could survive long enough to perform the initial blitzkrieg. I have also read about both red and blue preparations to fight on a chemical battlefield, the hypothetical interaction within this instance also interests me.

Do you guys know about any websites, both fiction and non-fiction, that feature NBC combat, preparations, tactics and strategy or equipment?

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

This might be a start on the equipment side, it's from the TWIGHTLIGHT 2000 game series. It's a role play PC based post WWIII game. Game issues aside, the background, capabilities and weapons overview are pretty accurate, enough so that I've ref'd this site where info is scarce on a piece of equipment. He has spent a great deal of time in this area again as compared to the normal defence industry and news sites I use. Game stats might be of some use to you you developers out there...maybe!?!
http://www.pmulcahy.com/
I will or you can contact him via email, but stay within his email guidelines within the FAQ section. Since the TWIGHTLIGHT 2000 game is Post WWIII, it would be make sense to assume he had (Or others.) had to have done a fair amount research about the NBC world. I would've have. Also I recommend globalsecurity.com for real world data, I would expect some of those FMs they normally have are now declassified and available.

Regards,
Pat

I'm just silly fast when I want to be...
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...olicy/army/fm/
Complete list of USA Field Manuals the third one down looks like a start point.

It is.

And for some thing more, I've heard of this game that incorperates all this thread and another has brought up. Maybe somebody here knows more about it and it's legacy games.
http://www.matrixgames.com/news/188/...hpoint.Germany!

[Imp]

Tactics?

Duck

Not so silly as it sounds a typical strategic nuke would blow you off your feet at 4 or 5 miles, a big boy try 15 miles if there was nothing between you & it.

With the baby tactical nukes that started this discusion they are low yeild only equivalent to about 20 or 30 tons of TNT if I remember correctly. As I said in my original post here its not that big depends on the radiation to do the killing.

Sensible tactics fire them & run like hell with as much arty as you can muster to cover your tracks.

Your not running from the radiation your running from the guys intent on killing you because they have been told they are dead already. Avoid em for an hour or so till the nasseau kicks in & you should be alright as they wont be able to put up a fight.

[DRG]

Originally Posted by Akmatov

Although I find it peculiar that players of a game that inherently involves the killing of other human beings get a sudden case of 'green peace' at the mention of nuclear weapons, I have to agree that they doing really belong here. Not because they are 'immoral', but because of scale. Even the smaller ones would do too much damage on SPMBT-sized maps for such a scenario to be playable.

I have never understood why burning someone to death in a sealed tank was just good clean fun, but flash frying them with a nuc burst invokes horror.

Well since YOU brought this up perhaps you could point to the post that elicited this 'green peace' remark ...

??

What we said it's beyond the scope of the game that deals with an maximum playing area of 8x10 km and will always be beyond the scope of the game despite yearly efforts to drag it in. If this were a strategic game covering a much larger area it might be an option but on this size map it's a waste of time


Don

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

John,
Your numbers are about right, and as I had pointed out from some past readings and as I posted earlier about the Neutron Bomb and this whole topic(s) for the troops not killed outright, it's the pissed off I'm going to be dead within a month (Or less.), far from home troops that are now HIGHLY motivated to quote Gunny Vanderee, will want to "get sum!!", no thanks, that's one of the reasons why we abandoned the above weapons program altogether and destroyed what we had in the mid 90's. Russia has done the same I believe under the same treaty, primarily though because it was felt that this weapon would actually lead to the use of conventional battlefield field nukes. The best is first, you can substitute other nukes here as well as all produce radiation, this was just the nastiness one of the tactical nukes.
http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/a...-aug/snow.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/395689.stm
http://www.thewednesdayreport.com/twr/neutron-bomb.htm
http://home.netcom.com/~ncoic/n_bomb86.htm

I have to agree with some of the analysis given in the refs, that our advances in ATGW and tanks would've acted as a bigger deterrent along with the fears the use of these weapons both nuclear and chemical would've just lead to the strategic level-again as I've stated earlier...game over! The noble experiment was tried in a game called "Sixth Fleet" by SSI, you had a turn one option only from either side to use a tactical nuke on an opposing carrier. The carrier and submarine firing unit were taken off the board. Pretty optimistic that it would stop at one, I thought that when playing it back in high school along with "Red Star White Star" that had a nuke option as well. And something no one really talked about is the effects EMP would have on modern equipment. My feeling is play on with what we have besides, there are some cool things yet to come including the new TOW with double the range I'm following and is almost to approval for production.

Regards,
Pat

[Judicator65]

I also recall the original Harpoon computer game allowing for nuclear release and the launch of nuclear missiles. If one of those got through your air defense, you could pretty much write off the ship that got hit...

[KAreil]

Originally Posted by Judicator65

I also recall the original Harpoon computer game allowing for nuclear release and the launch of nuclear missiles. If one of those got through your air defense, you could pretty much write off the ship that got hit...

Only the ship that got hit?!