PDA

View Full Version : OK, how the heck do I fire a nuke?



Redwolf
19 Apr 04, 09:05
Bad day, you name it, I need something BOOM.

So how do I get a nuke-capable artillery system into an ATF scenario and how do I give it nuclear ammunition?

I tried selecting the different artillery systems but I didn't see anything loaded. I didn't find a dialog to edit the ammunition either.

Pat Proctor
19 Apr 04, 11:05
None of the current artillery units in the database have nukes.

To add this ammunition type, you would have to load a database in ATF power Toolkit, creat an "IF Ammo" object with the "Nuke" type set and the appropriately devistating blast radius, etc.

Then, you would have to open and edit an artillery vehicle, edit its "indirect fire" capability, and add this new ammo type.

Let me know how it turns out :)

kbluck
20 Apr 04, 12:34
Believe it or not, I actually did this in my original kbDataModern database. I had several nuclear rounds available, the M454 155mm (about 0.1kT), M422 203mm (5 kT), the M753 (0.8kT, the famed "neutron bomb"), and for the OPFOR 152mm and 203mm devices(both about 5kT).

They fell out when I reorganized the database, since the "copy" tool for IF ammo doesn't work, and I hadn't bothered to re-input them manually. But, since you asked, I've put them back. They're available in the latest download for the kbDataModern database here. (http://www.wargames.warfarehq.com/forums/showthread.php?t=301)

Of course, they're not actually included in the loadouts for any howitzers at the moment. You'll need to edit the database to include them in the ammo list for the desired gun system before you can actually shoot one.

Also, a proper sound and burst graphic is needed. If you're looking for awesome special effects, you're going to be disappointed.

It would be an interesting challenge to come up with a scenario that involves nuclear weapons that is still fun and interesting to play (beyond the "screwing around" kind of fun that comes from randomly pretend-nuking stuff, that is.)

Have fun,

--- Kevin

Deltapooh
20 Apr 04, 17:07
Here is a nuclear explosion wav file. It last 11 seconds from burst to end. You can hear stuff being blown away. :D

KG_Norad
20 Apr 04, 20:37
Thanks Kbluck! Finally a "Real Mans" weapon in my arsenal!:nofear: Lookout for suicide dismount teams with black market suite case nukes!

Redwolf
20 Apr 04, 21:22
Still having difficulies with your database, kbluck.

I am in the power toolkit and I can see neither any of the vehicles you mention not any nuclear IF ammo.

Are you sure the database is up-to-date as uploaded?

I have 1943721 bytes, checksum is
MD5(kbDataModern.zip)= 84dcbc26c7efd7c264fb5c9c7e961bbd

Redwolf
20 Apr 04, 21:52
I am happy to report that I successfully wiped out the entire NTC and all of OPFOR.

I have no doubt that this makes some of you very happy :D

Now, for actually learning this game...

Pat Proctor
20 Apr 04, 22:15
This must have happened after I left work today. Does this mean no PT tomorrow? ;)

Ivan Rapkinov
20 Apr 04, 22:42
Does this mean no PT tomorrow? ;)

guess who gets to clean up the mess? :devil:

kbluck
21 Apr 04, 11:04
I am in the power toolkit and I can see neither any of the vehicles you mention not any nuclear IF ammo.


I am happy to report that I successfully wiped out the entire NTC and all of OPFOR.


Does that mean you found them and rolled them into a scenario?

--- Kevin

Redwolf
21 Apr 04, 11:27
I didn't find them in kb's database but it was easy enough to create a 30km radius 98% kill chance ammunition, assign it to the nuclear IF specifier and then gave each venerable 2S3 50 of them :D

For some reason it only worked for a battery and a battalion but not a single vehicle. Not sure what I did wrong, maybe a single vehicle cannot fire indirect in ATF because it lacks the fire control units?

I'm still cursing on all these dialog boxes in ATF, though :(

kbluck
21 Apr 04, 12:04
OK, let's look at your files. In your 'Data' subfolder you should have a file named 'kbDataModern.veh'. The date should be 4/20/04 9:31 and the size should be 661,403 bytes.

If that's what you have, then the ammo should be findable under Database | Vehicles | IF Ammo | Edit. If you still didn't find it, you may not be opening the right database file. Perhaps you have multiple versions lying around.

If that's not what you have, then you either didn't download the very latest (since the above time) or didn't extract the zip into the right place.

BTW, a 30km widespread-destruction radius is a pretty darn healthy warhead, well over 50 megatons. Most tactical weapons are under 5 kilotons and have a destruction radius more like 1,300 meters or less against military targets. Of course, we're only talking about prompt blast effects in the game.

--- Kevin

Redwolf
21 Apr 04, 12:30
OK, let's look at your files. In your 'Data' subfolder you should have a file named 'kbDataModern.veh'. The date should be 4/20/04 9:31 and the size should be 661,403 bytes.


Confirmed.

Checksum is:
MD5(kbDataModern.veh)= 1d0fe4264c825f28278e3feac2be7cfd



If that's what you have, then the ammo should be findable under Database | Vehicles | IF Ammo | Edit. If you still didn't find it, you may not be opening the right database file. Perhaps you have multiple versions lying around.


This is the only alternate database I have and I loaded it. I can find neither the ammo nor the units you mention (no 203mm anywhere).

But things worked when I created the ammo myself, saved my own database and loaded that one.

I'll revisit it tonight, I'm not in front of my Windoze box right now.

CPangracs
21 Apr 04, 13:31
Confirmed.

Checksum is:
MD5(kbDataModern.veh)= 1d0fe4264c825f28278e3feac2be7cfd



This is the only alternate database I have and I loaded it. I can find neither the ammo nor the units you mention (no 203mm anywhere).

But things worked when I created the ammo myself, saved my own database and loaded that one.

I'll revisit it tonight, I'm not in front of my Windoze box right now.
I have the original database kbluck created with the nukes. I can post it here, if you like.

John Osborne
21 Apr 04, 17:14
Could someone be so kind and direct me to where I can get the updated copy of the kbDataModern? The one I have is not dated 4/20/04.

Thanks,
John

kbluck
21 Apr 04, 17:41
You can always find the latest version here. (http://www.wargames.warfarehq.com/forums/showthread.php?t=301)

--- Kevin

John Osborne
21 Apr 04, 17:56
Thanks, Kevin :)

I see why I didn't find it in the Mis Files for BCT/ATF. I was looking for a post date of 4/20/04 for the update copy. What I saw was 2/2/04 at 10:03 AM for the last post at the thread for the Custom Data.

Again Thanks.

John

TGorgas
25 Jul 04, 17:50
Nukes take all the fun out of the game, prefer destroying my enemies the old fashioned way, IN THEIR FACE!!!! :devil:

Seriously, though. I hope like heck whoever has them as the U.S. Player at least lets the enemy fire first? For the U.S. to nuke somebody first is against current doctrine

Pat Proctor
25 Jul 04, 19:22
I am pretty certain that the Army no longer has tactical nukes. They used to be the perview of the field artillery (we like to refer to those as the "good old days" :) ). But they are no longer in the inventory.

I think only strategic nukes are now available (the Air Force and Navy has all the fun :( ).

kbluck
26 Jul 04, 14:54
Seriously, though. I hope like heck whoever has them as the U.S. Player at least lets the enemy fire first? For the U.S. to nuke somebody first is against current doctrine

Maybe not for long. Work is proceeding on the so-called "Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator" bunker-buster device. That and similar "tiny" nukes under consideration are signalling a clear interest by some US policymakers for allowing limited first-use of nuclear weapons, although likely only against nations without credible retaliatory capability. The Bush administration has been quietly floating trial balloons since 2001, and the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review openly suggested possible first use of nuclear weapons against countries without nuclear weapons (in particular, Syria, Libya, Iraq and Iran) and in scenarios where the US would have difficulty dominating an enemy with conventional forces, such as a North Korean attack on South Korea or a confrontation with China over Taiwan.

Such a radical change of policy would not be especially surprising, although it would undoubtedly be contentious; the so-called "Bush Doctrine" of preemptive attack is a rather wholesale revision of historical US policy precedent as well. If nuclear first-use can be successfully spun as an essential component of the "War on Terror", though, I can certainly imagine the citizenry of the US signing off on it.

--- Kevin

XRAY
26 Jul 04, 16:25
If memory serves me right the last Tactical Nukes were in SERGEANT missile battalions which were phased out in the U.S. Army in 1977.

kbluck
26 Jul 04, 16:35
If memory serves me right the last Tactical Nukes were in SERGEANT missile battalions which were phased out in the U.S. Army in 1977.

Pershing II, the Army's nuclear MRBM, was removed from Europe in 1989 thanks to the INF treaty and destroyed soon after.

The Lance SRBM and the cannon-fired nukes stood down in 1991 when President Bush announced a unilateral cut of all short-range nuclear weapons, soon reciprocated by Gorbachev. Ironic that the son of the man who voluntarily eliminated the entire category of weapons may well begin a new proliferation of tactical nukes.

--- Kevin

XRAY
26 Jul 04, 19:40
My mistake Kevin, my memory cells must be dying off quicker than I thought:o

Pat Proctor
26 Jul 04, 21:18
Actually, the last tactical nukes left the inventory around 1992 or 93, well after the wall was down. These were the nuclear rounds for the 8 inch howitzer (The M110, I think). Once this round was removed, the 8 inch was soon retired, as this was the only real reason they were still in the inventory.

They were slow to employ, hard to resupply, and slow to shoot.

But the did have the nuke :)

kbluck
27 Jul 04, 12:27
Actually, the last tactical nukes left the inventory around 1992 or 93, well after the wall was down.

Yes, that's how long it took to make the arrangements to transport them to their final resting place and destroy them in an organized manner, but for all practical purposes they were goners as soon as the elder Bush made his announcement on 9/27/01. The final weapons were removed from Europe around July 1993. How many weapons would have been available in case of war during that interval is probably a matter for speculation.

The directive specified the elimination of all Army short-range missile warheads and artillery shells, as well as the Navy's nuclear depth charges. It also removed all nukes from Navy surface ships and attack submarines (but not the boomers), took all strategic bombers and those missiles covered by START off alert status, and terminated a number of development programs, including a short-range missile for the Army. Notably *not* eliminated were air-delivered tactical weapons in Europe.

Most likely Bush made his precipitous and unilateral directive in response to growing Soviet political instability. The August attempted coup against Gorbachev had made a lot of people justifiably nervous about the prospect of potentially rebellious Soviet generals being in control of their own personal "pocket nukes". The hope was that the action would make it politically palatable for the Soviets to follow suit, and indeed Gorbachev made a similar directive on October 5 and went even further to propose that all air-delivered tactical warheads be eliminated as well.

Unfortunately, the Soviet Union collapsed before their side of the deal could be implemented, causing a great deal of confusion as newly independent nations such as Ukraine found themselves instant nuclear powers, and lengthy negotiations were required to separate them from their inherited nukes. There is still some difficulty in accounting for a not insignificant number of Soviet tactical weapons. I personally find that deeply troubling. In my opinion, positively accounting for the fate of every last nuclear device ever made by the hand of man should be Job #1 for the American "Homeland Security" intel forces, and certainly should take priority over strip-searching old ladies for nail files and invading already well-contained dictatorships.

--- Kevin

TacCovert4
06 Jun 06, 16:14
Nukes take all the fun out of the game, prefer destroying my enemies the old fashioned way, IN THEIR FACE!!!! :devil:

Seriously, though. I hope like heck whoever has them as the U.S. Player at least lets the enemy fire first? For the U.S. to nuke somebody first is against current doctrine


Correct, but not against Cold War Doctrine. The Nato Doctrine for the intended war with the USSR was to hold as long as possible, then begin to fire tactical nukes to protect Germany from further Soviet incursions. This would have quickly escalated as the Soviets would retaliate with their own Tac Nukes, then low yield strategic nukes followed by the mutual destruction of planet earth.