What about combat?  How are battles fought in SuperPower?
 
 

Is there a small number of premade battle maps or are the combat terrains randomly generated?

        Actually, neither of these traditional techniques are employed.  The world map used in SuperPowers is 43200 by 22896 pixels in resolution.  This means that SuperPower contains geographic terrain data for about every square kilometer on the globe.  From on this massive world map combat theater maps come.  Thus, there are thousands of possible battlefields to fight on while the topography for any particular place on earth will always be accurate.
 

How extensively are the military units modeled?         Each of the more than 3,000 unit designs found in the game are detailed according to their characteristics.  Look to the snapshots on the right in order to get a better idea for this concept.

How do I build-up my armed forces?

        The strength of your country's industrial and military centers (cities and bases) and economic resources will help determine how much money and capacity you will have to increase your forces.  Refer to the image link for a look at how military unit building projects are detailed and then confirmed.

How do I advance my country's military technology?

        Technology advancement comes from research into military unit attributes.  As research progresses the bars on the left come closer and closer together.  Chances are that your country will not be able to attain preemince in every design character for every type of unit.  It will take skill and thought in choosing your forces' strengths and weaknesses.

Are there nuclear weapons in Defcon?

        There is nuclear combat in Defcon, but it only takes the form of strategic warfare.  The nuclear powers can launch ballistic missiles at each others' bases and cities, but these cannot be used in theater combat.  (The are no nuclear weapons in the battlefield warfare mentioned above.)  One ought to realize that using ICBM's should be a last resort.  All of your advisors will probably try to stop you, but you always have the option to launch.  Even if your action does not incite World War III, it will still make your country a pariah in the international community.
 

Will an all-out global thermal nuclear war end the game?

No, launching nuclear weapons does not bring an end to the game, but it will mean deep trouble for the targeted nations and likely bring chaos around the world.
 

How does strategic warfare work?

        Strategic warfare only involves the use of ballistic missiles.  When countries begin to launch nukes at each other, you will be taken to the strategic warfare screen.  You are allowed to control the rate at which time progresses, but you could still have to make an important decision.  Will you stay out to the conflict or join in the fight?  Should you target and launch some of your ICBM's as well?  Choose cafefully, if you attack other nations may retaliate against your "aggression".

        Of course, if you have nuclear weapons you need not wait for a special occasion to use them.  The game lets you be the first country to launch in nuclear conflicts.  Would anyone like to play Global Thermal Nuclear War?

> Small question.  If any unit can attack anywhere in one turn,
> why do you need an aircraft carrier?

Hmm... good one! Because it's cool? :-)

No. When a country decide to attack, it can send a group of units on a
city/base and it'll be there at the end of the turn, no matter where they
come from. However, defending units are limited to the one currently in the
city/base or its direct vicinity. If you want to counter-attack, you send
troops on the next turn. This way you'll be able to kick the asses of the
attacking country but only a week AFTER they will have taken the city.

That said, the aircraft carrier serves two purposes. First, it'll be the
only mean of air defense for a naval task force. So it'll be able to defend
itself from air/naval attackers. Secondly, an aircraft carrier parked near
a city will provide its air cover to this city. So, for a one of your own
city which does not have an airport yet, or to protect the city of an
allied country. It may also be useful to have aircraft in a city's vicinity
w having to get a "park unit on country" to park your aircraft on its
airport.
 

 don't quite understand the ammo column and the message attached?
Should this column be filled and if so, with what?

The ammo column should be filled with the weapon load carried by the unit.
This usually means missiles, but for helicopters and naval combatants, it
can also be torpedoes. The USNI database (which was sent today by the
way... you should get in about 3 days) will help you a lot about this. It
lists which missiles are owned by each country. Using this, and the
missiles the unit can handle (also listed in the design description of the
USNI database) you should be able to fill in this column.

So, for example, if you design the F-16 Falcon, you will see that it can
carry, let's say, AIM-9 Sidewinder, AIM-120 AMRAAM, and AGM-65 Maverick,
and that it has 7 weapon pylons. You could fill it with 2 AIM-9, 2 AIM-120
and 3 AGM-65 if the country possess those (fill it with others it has if
theses are unavailable). The aircraft will then be multi-role (short range
and medium range air-air missiles and air-ground missiles. So no need for
role-specific variants.

I have been bookmarking the pages I get my airplane information from,
would you be interested in having these (32) or only a very select few?

Only the best ones. Those you feel I should not live without :)

Is there any other factors/sources to consider for Damage, Range, and
Precision besides generation, sensors, and possibly nation?

Hmm... I'll try to explain, if I get it right.

Generation is the rating that describes the way the unit is built. Units
made during WWII were made in a certain way, those built during the Vietnam
War in another way, which was more advanced... and so on. Independently of
any factor, an F-22 Raptor's fabrication is superior to an F-4 Phantom made
in the 70's. So the higher the generation, the more advanced the technology
involved in the process. It will modify every rating, but should not be
relied upon for assigning values.

Combats should go something like this. An aircraft flies over the
battlefield in search of enemies. It's sensors rating will be used to
locate enemies. The sensor rating will be opposed to the stealth rating of
the enemy aircraft to know if it locates it. If it does and decides to
attack, the aircraft will again use its sensor rating to try to lock on its
missile to the target. When it'll fire, the aircraft will no longer have
impact on the result. The missile own rating will be used. This means the
speed/maneuverability against the target's speed/maneuverability and the
missile sensors rating against the stealth/countermeasures of the target.
If the missile reaches its target, the damage (divided by the area of
effect) will be compared with the armor rating and will do its effect.

The damage rating should be in accordance with the size and type of the
weapon warhead.

Weapon precision will do about the same thing as the sensors rating but on
an uncontrolled projectile such as a tank shell. So the better the cannon,
the better the precision (M1A1 Abrams better than T-50). But this is
difficult to evaluate... go with your common sense.

If it's still not clear or I missed the point, just tell me.

Sebastien
 
 

Some questions about training:
Does training improve proformance or is it just a price-hiker?

It does. All rating will be improved by the amount of training units
received before being released for combat.

Might different countries have different training for the same aircraft,
for instance China and Ethiopia?  Occasionally giving poor countries
less training might add depth.

Yes. Good one too... This is another thing that must change from country to
country. Simply forgot to tell you about it..

As for the inconsistancies, the only area I'm really concerned with is
aircraft speed.  I know you are not asking for hyper-detail, but when
one airplane is .8 mach slower and yet ranked with a higher engine than
another, we're bound to hear about it.  People can argue about
manuverability, sensors, and the rest, but I think engine is kind of
straight-forward.  Today, I found a listing of warplanes with speed
stats for 140 designs and if you don't mind too much I'd like to re-rank
some of models accordingly.
 

Also, I'm trying to implement in the AI the idea of "unnecessary continue", that is the AI will know that you've won if you control too much of the globe. Small nations will simply bow to your might. I believe there's no point in continue gaming if the player conquered all America, Europe, and Asia, and Africa would resist. This would simply not happens.

Now, if the player wants to continue and anihilate  Africa, he can always reject the peace. His choice. He'll have to be smooth, though, because a conquered country could try to get it's independance back if the conqueror does stupid or evil things (just like the roman empire when it broke apart). This would create a great scenario: The player conquered all, wants to
test his new super-duper weapon of destruction, wipes out an entire country, this upsets his conquests who start to attack him from inside and break apart from the empire.
 

> - does diplomacy make it possible to acquire territories by 'menace of attack'?

Well, you can sens hords of troops, and the other country will surrender without a fight. But it'll take hords for the other one to surrender it's capital. It's
more likely to call for international backup.

[Jean-René answers Mike's question saying that you can attack other nations without them attacking you.

<Jean-René> Yes, you can declare war.
     <Jean-René> You can also attack without declaring war.
     <Jean-René> Depends on your strategy
 
 

, that is take it's capital, that nation will fall into your control. That won't mean that the two nations will merge into one. The
conquered will stay as it is, but you will control it (in every decision, just like your country). Transfers of ressources and technology will be possible.

The conquered nation will, however, remain different than you. It's population demographics will be different. It you conquered it with blood and guts, there
will surely be rebels that will do their dirty work. Rebels have almost the same potential of actions as the Secret services: sabotage, terrorism,
assassinations, Coup d'État...

To thwart this, you can always 'informally' control a country; that is rig it's elections. If you succeed, you will place a puppet as head of state that you will
control. The population will think they're free, the rest of the world will think it also (unless they're secret services discovers you) but you will nevertheless
control the nation. Fun possibilities there.

As for the possible responses of conquest: every one you mentioned will be possible. Which one (or ones) will depend on the situation, the conquered
nation's importance, your importance, the nature of the conquest, etc. The EHE takes over from there because the web of decision is a little bit complex.
That's why we built sort of like a neural network system.