| Jo Jo Hun (Fearless Blue) | Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 09:54 am 
Rumor has it that the one-trick Ponies, a bunch of c3s with a few defensive wings, are exploiting a bug in the nuke defenses.
They've declared on some of my countries, notably Bushwick and Flushing Meadows, which do have NDBs and NDMs in all nukable targets. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, I'm just a nube, but my understanding is that nukes don't do any damage to a target or to the country if there are NDBs and ND missiles in the target's garrison.
I'm still angry at how the navy issue went. I'm not interested in playing a game where on the one hand the rules are changed in the middle of the game because some players are doing too well playing by the rules, and on the other hand bugs allow people to play by their own rules until someone complains about it. This is a pre-emptive complaint.
Call me an idiot, call me a wuss. The way I see it, complaining about the rules has become part of the rules, and I'm just stepping up the timetable.
Or just take my countries by playing by the conventional rules. It's certainly possible, and you deserve any sugar cubes and carrots you can get if that's how it goes. |
| General Bobo (Fearless Blue) | Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 11:46 am
what are you asking? |
| ShcyzMattiCa (Fearless Blue) | Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 04:02 pm
ON LU in Tommy gunz I had plenty of NDM and NDB in all targets. Like 10 ndbs and 20 missiles. Still somehow, when LDI attacked me They nuked my country to death to get around a conventional conquering.
I am still at a loss of how they got nukes through, but it seems that once one landed many more followed. I will admit the defenses stoped the first five or six attacks but still SOMEHOW a nuke got through. Don't know how, and I am sure I'll never find out. And NO it was NOT by destroying my military bases, they nuked my cities. |
| ShcyzMattiCa (Fearless Blue) | Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 04:04 pm
Also I heard that wild nuked a country with 75 or 80 mil pop down to 3 mil, if you care to share some strategic resources I'd be glad to return the nuke bug favor, I am sure it will get addressed when it affects the right bunch. |
| Petra Arkanian (Kebir Blue) | Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 04:36 pm
Lol. The only thing I was exploiting was a lack of NDBs and the inability for another player to take my C3s.
Perhaps I ought to do it again?
EDIT:
Also, in rebuttal - "BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1" |
| ShcyzMattiCa (Fearless Blue) | Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 04:52 pm
I doubt anything in response to that LOL, will affect any of your nuclear ambitions. |
| Barney Rubble | Saturday, February 14, 2009 - 03:01 am
LDI, simply put, uses magic. |
| jason (Fearless Blue) | Saturday, February 14, 2009 - 03:33 am
thats right barney! |
| ShcyzMattiCa (Little Upsilon) | Saturday, February 14, 2009 - 04:04 am
Yeah I like magic.
 |
| Jo Jo Hun (Fearless Blue) | Saturday, February 14, 2009 - 06:17 am
I'm still searching for "magic" in the docs. Guess it's in one of the recent updates that haven't made it to publication yet.
This adaptation business is a little tricky. The "complainer" niche seemed kind of attractive, but it's filling up too quickly. |
| Yankee (Fearless Blue) | Saturday, February 14, 2009 - 05:35 pm
There is no known nuke bug anymore.
Orginally what people called a "bug" was the destruction of a city which upon rebuild, formed a NEW city with no nuke defense which people rarely installed.
W3C fixed that by limiting the number of targets, and unless you have a large population increase during a war, or happen to be on the cusp anyway (unlikely), no new cities are built.
Next it was possible due to a game update to nuke "destroyed" military bases, not that it made a lot of difference other than the disasters that followed.
Now what people are seeing when someone throws a nuke at a damaged target that is properly defended is a message in the newspaper saying:
"so and so flung a nuke and target X is severely damaged"
The nuke however did not hit and no further damage is done to even the target. All you need to do is look in the disasters to notice there are no supply requirements needed to deal with it.
Building new military bases when at war with a nuclear power is a good way to end up with a bad case of radiation sickness, and the loss of anything stationed at the base. Garrisons simply do not arrive immediately even if you thought to install them.
You need TWO and ONLY TWO NDB's at a target and TWO missiles to stop ONE attack from a strategic bomber. Your NDB's are now out of ammo and the next launch from any type of platform will hit.
If you have TWO NDB's and TWO missiles and are attacked by a submarine nuclear missile you will stop the attack leaving one battery unarmed and a follow up with a Strategic bomber will hit. You have ALSO lost 50% of your nuclear defense capability even before the bomber took off not that it would have made a difference. It would however allow the "possiblity" of a hit from a sub nuke or nuclear missile battery
You people are killing yourselves by installing more than two NDB's at a target. There HAS to be enough ammo for EACH NDB at a target to be loaded.
2 NDB's with 50 missiles will stop 25 attacks from a strategic bomber from ONE country and if they have enough nukes and the willingness to launch every 15 mins. would take just under 6 1/2 hours for one country to burn through.
With enough countries attacking you and they can reduce that number to less time than it takes to resupply the garrison.
So even though we all know everyone has a thousand or so missiles in reserve to resupply the garrisons with, piss off enough people at the same time, and it makes no difference.
TWO and ONLY TWO NDB's at a target with enough missiles in that particular garrison to stop however many strategic bombers you may encounter before a resupply is all you need.
And if you do NOT have reserves with enough supply units, you really have no idea if the garrison is even fully stocked with ammo. |
| Jo Jo Hun (Fearless Blue) | Saturday, February 14, 2009 - 10:54 pm
Nice summary, and raises some questions.
4 NDBs makes it easier to control garrison defenses. I've assumed if you have 4 NDBs and only 3 NDM in a target (not that anyone plans to be in that situation) that when attacked, one, or two if needed, NDB will fire one, or two if needed, missiles. In other words, as long as there is ammo, bats will fire the ammo. The picture on the ground: ammo is not assigned to particular bats--when the call comes, a bat or bats are chosen and ammo is loaded and they fire. Or, ammo IS assigned to bats, and when the call comes, the loaded bats are chosen to fire before the unloaded ones are, the way you would expect it to happen in real life.
I think you're saying either that it's probabilistic (ammo is assigned to a bat, and a bat is chosen randomly in an attack, so a bat without ammo COULD be chosen) or that it's more sinister, a concession to Murphy's Law, that essentially ammo is assigned to bats, and the bat with no ammo IS chosen before bats with ammo. I'm not sure which view matches what you're saying, or perhaps neither.
All the above would pertain to a target with 2 bats and just one missile, in a non-bomber launching. |
| Yankee (Fearless Blue) | Sunday, February 15, 2009 - 07:06 pm
NDB's are different as far as ammo, ammo IS assigned to batteries. There must be enough ammo to load the weapon BEFORE any attack occurs.
To know WHY this particular weapon system operates in this manner you would have to know how it was developed in the first place. That's several years back and I don't want to cover that ground (even if I could remember all the specifics).
As far as documentation is concerned they tell you 2 are required along with ammo to stop the most devastating attack in the game. Most people seem to assume if 2 works, 4 has got to work better and in this instance it's just like taking Tylenol, 2 is the dosage take 4 and you could have adverse effects.
That doesn't mean it will never change, W3C has not yet hit what they originally set for the goal on Nuclear defense however, if you are around you'll see those changes.
2 NBD's are ALL anyone needs at a target, they don't defend against anything else, they are expensive and require vast amounts of personnel for thier size.
If you have 2NDB's at a target, along with enough ammo for each battery to be loaded before ANY attack, AND enough reserve missiles to replenish anything the garrison uses you will not be hit by a nuke. Reload time is NOT a factor IF you have ammunition just like anything else in the game.
They can spam you all they wish and until you run low enough on ammo to leave a battery unloaded they are going to get nowhere.
I've given examples of the only two known ways for placing a nuke on a target. The first was possible because there was no defense.
I don't know what the deal was on the re-nuking of destroyed bases was about since the attack shouldn't have been possible in the first place.
I personally use 2 NDB's per target, 50 missiles in the garrison and 1000 missiles in reserve. In all my time in this game I've never been nuked even before there was a specific nuclear defense. |
| Yankee (Fearless Blue) | Sunday, February 15, 2009 - 07:10 pm
Due to thier manpower requirements I don't even keep "spare" NDB's in a country once the targets are covered.
I put them in my CEO's so if I notice a city building I can drop in two and cover that. |
| Aryan (Fearless Blue) | Tuesday, February 17, 2009 - 03:43 pm
Congrats to Wild! I realy don't know how all those nukes got through all of my target's were defended. Ammo wasent an issue either. Nukes were falling immeadeatly. I transferred in more ndb & missles. It made no differance. I'm not a cry baby if there was a bug in the game than it was used agesnt me to Wilds advantage. Seaking advantage and exploiting it is part of the game. I would have done the same. Eb |
| Yankee (Fearless Blue) | Tuesday, February 17, 2009 - 09:48 pm
"I transferred in more ndb & missles. It made no differance"
That key phrase right there leads me to believe it did make a difference. Either the targets where not defended in the first place or you screwed up the amount of ammo available, most likely by having 10 NBD's at a target.
People have been ranting for years about a 'nuke bug', they've also been throwing them at me for years.
Since there is no way to tell if a garrison has the correct amount of ammo without a reserve before a war starts, how can you possibly know if you had enough.
There is only one way and that is to have a reserve before a war even starts. If you had a reserve you'd have had no need to transfer anything in. |
| Aryan | Friday, February 20, 2009 - 03:25 am
Yankee I dont pretend to know all the in's & out's of this game, but i can say that at least in my main i had a fairly good idea of what i had. I coustomised my garrison blue prints as to how many ndf batts and the amount of ndm each would have and kept buying them untill i showed a surplus. In my tiny little mind if supply units stop delivering stuff to those garrisons they must be full. I bought additional stuff and transfered it in and like i said before it made no diffrence. Oh i guess i should say that yes i had the military supplies and gas to keep my supplie units moving. |
| General Bobo (Fearless Blue) | Friday, February 20, 2009 - 05:14 am
Are we sure there isn't a nuke bus..cough cough |
| General Bobo (Fearless Blue) | Friday, February 20, 2009 - 02:08 pm
bug*..hehe |
| nix001 | Saturday, February 28, 2009 - 09:04 pm
Just done your annual self assessment Booboo?
It's good to see that you can laugh at yourself |
