Did anywhere NOT get nuked in Fallout?
- Thread starter Josh123914
- Start date
Recommended Videos
wow that sounds fun. All the penguins have thumbs ,are 8 feet tall, with assualt rifles.Assassin Xaero said:
scene#1 you hach out of a big egg and pick your stats and perks.
then you know the rest. also what kind of story might it have?
Hmmm , I wonder.Does fallout lore mention space programs ?
A base on the moon maybe ? I am unsure what resources it has but I do know it has Helium-3 - which can be used for nuclear fusion - that means power.
Add a greenhouse , water recycling and a farm and there you go.
A base on the moon maybe ? I am unsure what resources it has but I do know it has Helium-3 - which can be used for nuclear fusion - that means power.
Add a greenhouse , water recycling and a farm and there you go.
Ok. So, what, 70 odd nukes where launched, dropped, or otherwise "used" against Vegas. These were shot down thanks to the efforts of the universe's equivalent Bill Gates.
Vegas is not a strategic target.
From this we can tell:
1. Significantly more nuclear weapons would be utilized against more strategic targets. So, New York might have a similar defence system, but it's going to suffer the same flaw as the infamous Star Wars system. (ie, the Chinese have more missiles than they have anti-missiles)
2. Less strategic targets are also going to have their share of nukes lobbed at them. Some places, like Pittsburgh, get lucky, either because they happened to be lower on the Chinese list, or the missiles were intercepted, but even then, they're going to suffer from fallout and other such stuff.
So, what does this leave?
-Smaller Towns and Villages, but they're still going to suffer the after-effects of the war.
-Neutral countries, but they're likely to descend into either a dictatorship or some form of anarchy, because they'll rely too heavily on outside influence. (For example, a nation such as Zimbabwe could probably hang onto civilization by the sheer personality of their leader, but if he dies without a clear successor, or simply an incompetent one, the countries going to collapse)
As a future weapon, it'd need to compete with Mass Drivers, which give all the advantages of a conventional firearm, with a significantly higher muzzle velocity, and a much lower ammunition cost.
As for destroying asteroids or planets.... no. Sorry, that's not going to happen. Like I said, a laser beam can't carry a warhead. The idea that you can fire a beam at an asteroid, then it'll explode, is strictly sci-fi, I'm afraid. The most you can do on demand is make a neat little hole through the middle. Maybe given enough time, you cut it in half, but then what? You've got two asteroids half the size that're heading towards earth! In many ways that's even worse! D=
Vegas is not a strategic target.
From this we can tell:
1. Significantly more nuclear weapons would be utilized against more strategic targets. So, New York might have a similar defence system, but it's going to suffer the same flaw as the infamous Star Wars system. (ie, the Chinese have more missiles than they have anti-missiles)
2. Less strategic targets are also going to have their share of nukes lobbed at them. Some places, like Pittsburgh, get lucky, either because they happened to be lower on the Chinese list, or the missiles were intercepted, but even then, they're going to suffer from fallout and other such stuff.
So, what does this leave?
-Smaller Towns and Villages, but they're still going to suffer the after-effects of the war.
-Neutral countries, but they're likely to descend into either a dictatorship or some form of anarchy, because they'll rely too heavily on outside influence. (For example, a nation such as Zimbabwe could probably hang onto civilization by the sheer personality of their leader, but if he dies without a clear successor, or simply an incompetent one, the countries going to collapse)
Lasers aren't really that great as weapons. The only attempts to weaponize lasers thus far have been as CIWS, by the USAF and IDF, both attemps have been disbanded. A laser beam can't carry a warhead, so it's easily rendered obsolete by the most simple decoys. Lasers are much more temperamental about the stuff they do hit (a properly designed projectile could easily survive an attack by the system). They're also stupidly huge compared to conventional CIWS. The Boeing YAL-1 weights over 39 thousand pounds, over twice that of the soviet AK-630 system, and almost 4 times that of the newer American Phalanx system.razing32 said:
As a future weapon, it'd need to compete with Mass Drivers, which give all the advantages of a conventional firearm, with a significantly higher muzzle velocity, and a much lower ammunition cost.
As for destroying asteroids or planets.... no. Sorry, that's not going to happen. Like I said, a laser beam can't carry a warhead. The idea that you can fire a beam at an asteroid, then it'll explode, is strictly sci-fi, I'm afraid. The most you can do on demand is make a neat little hole through the middle. Maybe given enough time, you cut it in half, but then what? You've got two asteroids half the size that're heading towards earth! In many ways that's even worse! D=
It does make sense that way.The last Ice Age killed most of the dinosaurs so a nuclear winter would probably have a similar effect.That does fit since most animals are a reasonable size but it still doesn't explain the super mutants . I think they were mentioned in Fallout Tactics , and something about being created in a lab post-apocalypse.
-forgot to quote , sorry (Response to post 178)
-forgot to quote , sorry (Response to post 178)
Probably not, considering that every nuclear power and their allies all support the MADD strategy still to this day. Any nuclear exchange between the US and China would spill over to allied countries just on political principle.
"Allistair Tenpenny came to the Capital Wasteland from Great Britain to seek his fortune, so that alone tells you that the U.K. was also hit in the war. And if he came to U.S. to succeed, that says a lot about how screwed up Europe must be. So we just allude, a little bit, to the state of the rest of the world. We like to leave a lot to the players' imaginations, and somebody like Tenpenny serves as a catalyst for those thoughts." - Emil PagliaruloThe Cheezy One said:
(Apparently this has already been quoted, but whatever.)
Yup in one of the slides it says that the USA annexed Canada. And ya it blows.UnknownEssence said:
Uh, in the Fallout universe, Canada was actually annexed by the USA shortly before the "Great War" as the 2-hour falling of the bombs was called.jamradar said:
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Canada
Edit: Rofl, just did a quick search through the thread up to my post; nearly 10 people mentioned this before me.
maybe anywhere that WASN'T a super-power at the time, like africa or austrailia (note that in both these examples you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between them and the capital wasteland)
and for those saying europe, the ussr was one of the main ppl in the nuclear exchange.
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/The_Great_War#The_Great_War
and for those saying europe, the ussr was one of the main ppl in the nuclear exchange.
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/The_Great_War#The_Great_War
the situation is radiation moves like a cloud by wind. so any area not hit would still get a revere radiation dose. chances are any country not touched by a direct nuke would still be ruined.