hah well if it doesn't go crazy and start launching real missiles, it's not much of a wargames MOD then is it

looks fun to me - but then i've always been in favor of just getting on with it and nuking the world i'm definitely going to check this one out

Edited by - Cold_Void on 8/22/2007 11:44:24 AM

i tried the demo, i found the game very disconcerting.

Wouldn't you prefer a nice game of chess?


(hope thats not too subtle )

Played it. It's an especially popular choice among my fellow Uni students in between the (IMO overplayed) Warcraft 3 tower defence maps.

Rather satysfying to pummel the enemy missile defence silos into oblivion before proceeding to nuke thier asses with impunity.

Try the radiationn graphics mode. Adds a nice touch to gameplay.

I did try that, Arania, but the subsequent hellish green glow that covered Tawakalnistan and its neighbouring allied states made me feel ill. It looks much nicer on America! Especially in the area around lower-to-mid Manhattan... and is particularly appealing in the Melbourne area too, although you need the Australia mod for that.

I played the UK map last night, not a very good map imo but great fun. Needless to say, the heaviest defences were in the region of North Staffordshire which remained relatively undamaged whilst London got obliterated several times over. (Mind you, who needs to pretend to obliterate London when Mother Nature will thoughtfully see to that task, before too long, with a nice big flood!)

My land-based bombers always get shot down but my naval ones do remarkably well, as does the rest of my naval combat. Pity there aren't any tank armies though.

Edited by - Tawakalna on 8/23/2007 9:15:26 AM

We have a force-field bubble shield ... not only keeps out the tea-towelled riff- raff but unwanted "vibes" as well.

Oooh, I love this game. The sounds are appropriately creepy.

As for tank armies, considering that games tend to take place over about 10-20 hours, that's hardly enough time to have a good tank battle. Besides, tanks don't carry nukes so nobody cares about them.


Introversion's signature minimalist graphics once again work wonders for setting the mood.

well after playing it i think its really good - but also very flawed.

example?
you can kill more people than there are in a city (overkill = points. bad for strategy because pummeling an exposed city is an easy tactic)

modern nuclear weapons can target dozens of cities in a single strike

hydrogen bombs can wipe out entire metropolitan areas

population figures appear to be guesstimated? there's no way a full out nuclear war on every continent would kill a mere 300 million! the blast damage alone would kill half a billion or more, radiation poisoning and the ensuing hell on earth the rest. humanity would be very lucky (and prove that there is no God in the process) if they were to survive such a catastrophe.

the strength of air defenses are optimistic to say the least. i would expect less than 5% with the current deployments of 'missile shield' technology

ICBM trajectories come in all sorts of flavors, not all of them predictable arcs - also if my memory is correct a shorter distance does -not- necessarily mean that the missile will arrive sooner as it has to enter low earth orbit first(?) "One particular weapon developed by the Soviet Union (FOBS) had a partial orbital trajectory, and unlike most ICBMs its target could not be deduced from its orbital flight path. It was decommissioned in compliance with arms control agreements, which address the maximum range of ICBMs and prohibit orbital or fractional-orbital weapons." ICBM

and its SLBMs, not SRBMs for the submarine launched ballistic missiles - sheesh!

nice game but -not- a simulator. the vector graphics give me a nostalgic feeling for the sub-sim hunt for red october (EGA color, wee!) which was, as far as i can recall, a much more accurate simulator on many levels

i give it a 8 out of 10

I don't know what's scarier; thermonuclear war, or your attention to detail in a game that simulates it?

He forgot the wild maniacal cackling at the end of his post. That's all.

No, that's what I do when I blow up your house every night!

I was playing Defcon with the child the other night, and he raised this point of being able to kill more people in a city than there actually were. The question of "overkill" then led to a discussion of the Cold War and it's *philosophy* of Mutually Assured Destruction, ABM systems (and the ABM Treaty) etc etc. Remember he wasn't born until the Cold War was well and truly over, so it's just hostory for him, whereas for old b*ggers like me it's only yesterday and for most of my life was an accepted fact. For all it's lack of realism that's one of the reasons that I like this game so much is because of the nostalgia element - it really is very much like looking at the tactical and strategic displays of the time - I've even restyled mine to resemble the GEC-Marconi radar I used to operate way back when.

The lack of true simulation means that the game has a limited play life, hence why it was only a tenner in the shops I suppose. Fun for a short while then it gets repetitive. That it's so easy to skin and mod makes a difference but even then, how much more life does that give it. "Uplink" lasted for weeks, Defcon can be counted in days if you stick to single-player.

Where it really comes into it's own, I imagine, would be in multi-player in the "Diplomacy" mode, but with 6 players max. rather than the 7 that true "Diplomacy" has. Still the dynamics of having human players making and breaking deals makes for a totally different game that can last much longer and be more satisfying.

Edited by - Tawakalna on 8/27/2007 10:20:51 AM

i wasn't cackling....outloud

i had a very interesting response to a thesis answer on a civics quiz i took in US hist2 junior year - i chose to go after the 2nd ammendment, and argued the MAD theory on a suburban basis - if i should happen to build a nuclear device for my own protection from others, why should it not be covered by the 2nd ammendment? i then outlined the similarities between MAD and 'deterrence' and drew the logical conclusion: there's no law on the books that says you -can't- have your own nuke, only other people with nukes saying so... so why not?

the interesting part is the teacher agreed with my argument - there is no legal reason why you shouldn't be able to have your own nuke for home defence

the best part of defcon is that its not real

Edited by - Cold_Void on 8/27/2007 5:40:55 PM

I love DEFCON... it's the best game I think I ever got for $15. It isn't a game that requires your full, undivided attention for every single second (depending on the speed setting), so it is entirely possible to do your homework or chat with your friends while playing. It is also an excellent LAN game if you gather a group of like-minded geeks; my roomie and I had a blast blowing one another to hell and back for a while.

IMHO, a true simulation would be cool... but that's not the point of DEFCON. DEFCON is Missile Command Pro Multiplayer, with the greater emphasis on ease of control and a shallow learning curve than on any sort of realism. It's a game you could jump right into and learn the first time playing (even if you got your arse kicked the first few times).

As for longevity... no, DEFCON is not a game I play every day. Hell, I don't even play every week. Still, for the budget price and the amount of fun I have when I do play, it was a damn good purchase.

Oh, and Europe... SUCKS. That continent is evil incarnate.

What an unsuprising post coming from someone named "Nukeit".