the usage of tactical nuclear weapons in the game anyway is a little extreme for the late cold war. especially the use of one on seattle just to stop the chinese. conventional airstrikes would have done the job just as well anyway since air superiority isnt an issue in the game for the US. plus three carpet bombings will do just as much damage w/o radioactive fallout. and a tactical nuke is a lot more powerful than the ones in the game, a modern tactical nuke is about as powerful as hiroshima. a stratigic nuke is about 200x as powerful. the russian tsar bomba would vaporize most of NYC
I'm not sure if you meant that they were going to use a tactical or strategic nuke on Seattle. It was going to be a Strategic nuke which would wipe out the Chinese, the Russians, and the stragglers of the Americans(because it would be launched if the attack failed). That nuke would level Seattle and most of the countryside. And again, If this were real war, as is portrayed in all the cut-scenes and mini-videos, both sides would have difficulty with Air Superiority, meaning that sneaking in any number of bombers would be both difficult and almost certainly fatal for the crews. A strategic Nuke would be an assured hit and would wipe out all of the enemy forces, instead of the few that a bomber strike could possibly get to.
the usage of tactical nuclear weapons in the game anyway is a little extreme for the late cold war. especially the use of one on seattle just to stop the chinese. conventional airstrikes would have done the job just as well anyway since air superiority isnt an issue in the game for the US. plus three carpet bombings will do just as much damage w/o radioactive fallout. and a tactical nuke is a lot more powerful than the ones in the game, a modern tactical nuke is about as powerful as hiroshima. a stratigic nuke is about 200x as powerful. the russian tsar bomba would vaporize most of NYC
I'm not sure if you meant that they were going to use a tactical or strategic nuke on Seattle. It was going to be a Strategic nuke which would wipe out the Chinese, the Russians, and the stragglers of the Americans(because it would be launched if the attack failed). That nuke would level Seattle and most of the countryside. And again, If this were real war, as is portrayed in all the cut-scenes and mini-videos, both sides would have difficulty with Air Superiority, meaning that sneaking in any number of bombers would be both difficult and almost certainly fatal for the crews. A strategic Nuke would be an assured hit and would wipe out all of the enemy forces, instead of the few that a bomber strike could possibly get to.
i meant that, if it were a real war, that the use of a nuclear weapon just to remove the chinese and russians from our soil is a little extreme. divisions would have been pulled from europe to defend our own country, and we could have done that in a few days. i think that, well GW. Bush, would have resorted to that over dropping a nuke on seattle. i also doubt that the russians would have had the manpower after months of war in europe to even launch an invasion and occupation of a city like seattle. u think were havin a hard time in baghdad, seattle is a little larger, and civilians own guns.
Important Board Topics
Trending Topics