A player buys a research and development token. However, to successfully research a nuclear bomb, 3 dice must be rolled and the player must get at least 17/18 (6,6,5).
If a player successfully researches a nuclear weapon, they then pick which territory on the map that will be nuked. The territory nuked will have everything on it wiped off, including Industrial Complexes and AA guns.
After the territory is nuked, there will be fallout shortly afterwards. A Fallout Token will be placed on the nuked territory. The fallout lasts for 3 full rounds (NOT including the round when the nuke is dropped, it begins the round AFTER the round the Nuke was used). During this period of fallout, there can be nothing built on that territory, nor can allied or enemy troops move into the territory. In other words, it is treated like a neutral/impassable zone like the Sahara desert. Not even planes can pass over the territory. The IPC value of the nuked territory will be worth zero during the fallout period. This means that the IPC value of the territory must be deducted from the total amount of IPCs collected during the ‘Collect Income’ phase.
Every nation gets only ONE Nuke (China gets none). If you do successfully research a nuke, use it wisely. If you are losing the war and desperately need to turn things around, this could be just the trick! After the 3 rounds of fallout have finished, the game will go back to normal and the territory can produce IPCs and have units/Factories on it again.
Any thoughts on how I can improve this?
So you can pick any territory. To strong for me. I would at least have to make it where you need a bomber to drop nuke. This gives the defender a chance to counter the attack with interceptors and AA fire.
If you don’t want the bomber to drop Nuke then I’d make the Nuke harder to get as I mean make it take longer in game to get.
So I get Nuke turn 1. Turn 2 I destroy a Capital. To strong.
I"d go the route where you need to spend money every turn plus accumulate dice roll points over a certain amount of turns and maybe can’t start building Nuke until turn 3 or 4.
I agree with SS Gen’s point about the proposed nuke rule being too strong, though for different reasons. Under the proposed rule, a nuke has both an immediate effect and a persistent effect – the immediate effect being to destroy everything in a territory (every unit, including ICs), and the persistent effect being to render the territory sterile and unbuildable and impassible (even to aircraft) for three rounds. Considering that in A&A a territory can be something as big as an entire country (in Anniversary, for example, the United Kingdom is a single territory), both of these effects strike me as being disproportionate. Remember that WWII-era atomic weapons – crude first-generation fission bombs – were low-yield weapons (15 to 21 kilotons) which today would fall within the performance range of tactical nuclear weapons rather than strategic thermonuclear ones, i.e. fusion bombs yielding tens of megatons. Even today, a single thermonuclear bomb could not destroy everything in a country as large as the UK (though it could probably do so in a city-sized country like Monaco). The persistent effects described in the proposed rule likewise seem excessive even by the standards of today’s nuclear weapons, since they seem to describe the kind of lifeless irradiated environment that might be created by a global full-scale nuclear war rather than by the dropping of a single bomb (and particularly the dropping of a single WWII-era atomic bomb).
To give a concrete example of the relatively modest effects of weapons in that yield range: in the 1950s, the US Army conducted a test (it was called Task Force Razor, as I recall) in Nevada that involved detonating an A-bomb on the position of an imaginary enemy-held line, to create a “breach” which would then be exploited by a US armoured force. The armoured force in question (tanks, APCs and so forth) watched the explosion from a few miles away, waited a few minutes, then drove forward and went through the imaginary breach in the imaginary line. The point to take from this anecdote is that even when you’re deliberately aiming a WWII-era atomic bomb at something as specific and small as a military force (say, an armoured division), your aim needs to be quite accurate to get a useful hit, since missing by just a few miles is enough to waste the weapon; just aiming at a whole country (or even just aiming at a whole state, like Nevada) isn’t accurate enough. So as far as the effects of an A&A nuke are concerned, I’d suggest giving the player two options: aiming at a city that appears on the map (to destroy its ICs and AAA guns) or aiming at the military units in a territory and coming up with a formula to determine how many units (and which ones) are destroyed, but without wiping out all of them. And I’d leave out the persistent effects altogether.
On another technical point, the delivery mechanism needs to be considered. Realistically, the target should be in range of an A&A strategic bombing run from the launch point. The attacker should own at least one strategic bomber, and should use it for the nuclear attack. Alternately, a ballistic missle technology (i.e. the V2) could be developed first. Its range should be no more than that of a SBR, and maybe even less (when you consider how far some WWII bombers like the B-29 could fly).
Yes CWO. I have toyed with this bomb but it should only really be used by US and maybe Germany. As far as damage I have looked at need to spend money to build, need to buy a specific bomber for it and as far as damage either get to destroy a factory or up to 10 inf units in any territory.
Base it on The cost of a major factory.
Factory costs 20 icp
Or 7 inf cost 21 icp.
Like that. But you should only get 1 bomb per game.
We know 99% of the time the nuke bomb just don’t work in a game unless u only give it to US on turn 20. Lol
@V2-Rocket The original 1981 Nova Games Axis & Allies had this function of nukes, but none of the following editions from either MB Gamemaster or Avalon Hill had it, and I can understand why, it seems a bit easy to get rid of the enemy once you get this function to wipe out an entire territory. I have made it as an option in my own house rules, that you can develop a nuke (among other things), and then only use it against IDC’s (similar to heavy bombers, but with the roll of 5 dize instead of 3).
So the rules me and my crew have been using for the last 5 or 6 years have worked for us so far.
Atomic bombs are a two part tech: require both heavy bombers and atomic bomb its self. Its a time consuming and expensive proccess. Although it is not listed here we have contemplated adding resource requirment for radioactive materials. Listed bellow is how our text appears in weapons and development:
*Enables nuclear Bombs. It costs 5 IPCs to build each atomic bomb. Must be loaded at an airfield aboard a Heavy Bomber. An atomic
bomb run can only be shot at by Anti aircraft fire. Each bomb may be used in one of 3 ways.
(Explanations not in text)
.Bomb is destroyed from its single use
.no limit on bomb stockpile or building
.one bomb per heavy bomber
.loading a bomb consumes bomber movment for that round
.bombs can only be loaded at airfields
. a stategicly nuked territory can never deplete value below zero. Every following round its value will climb by 1ipc value per round until it reaches its original value
