Posted by Jean-René on August 01, 2000 at 01:06:42:

In Reply to: DEFCON 1 (Literally) posted by Jessie Pinon on July 31, 2000 at 04:37:46:

> The intrigue and compromises between other nations about managing our nuclear stockpiles is definitely among the things that will interest me on such a game. I don't think launching actual arsenals would be limited to the nuclear option, but situations that cause close calls would be quite an experience. If it ever falls to DEFCON 1, do I assume the game to be over, or are we going to get the chance to see how we will fare on how we use these strategic weapons? It would be interesting to see control of the Big 3 (Mobile/Silo launched ICBM's, SSBN launched SLBM's, and nuclear tipped SL/ALCM's)!

Hi,

No, launching nuclear weapons does not mean the end of the game. It will mean big shit for the targeted countries and their neighbors, but not necesseraly the end of the game.

The game ends either if you reach your time-limit for your goal, if you set one, or if you are killed, overthrown or conquered.

Jean-René



Follow Ups:

• Re: DEFCON 1 (Literally) Alex 8/09/2000
  • Re: DEFCON 1 (Literally) Jean-René 8/09/2000