Nuklear bomb

[Hunden]

Originally Posted by AndyJWest

Speak for yourself.

In case you hadn't noticed, a considerable proportion of the postings in this thread have been about reality, and about the reasoning behind the actual use of nuclear weapons. Most of the contributors seem able to understand why 'fantasy' and 'reality' cannot be so easily separated. If you can't, I'd suggest that maybe you need to get educated more.

Are you not on this forum to read about a simulator. This post did not start out talking about the reasoning behind the actual use of nuclear weapons. It started out with a question of would they be modeled. I think you need to take your medicine now. You twisted this tread because you have nothing better to do. Read your first Post, You started this arguement.

[AndyJWest]

Hunden, are you completely incapable of understanding why this debate arose? Or are you just too comfortable in your fantasy world to look outside? If I 'twisted this thread' then so did all the others who entered the debate on the A-bombings of Japan. Xilon proposed that the A-bombs should be modelled because they were actually dropped on Japan. This is what makes IL-2 a simulator, rather than just a fantasy game. A simulation of war needs to reflect reality, not ignore it. If you find this uncomfortable, play World of Warcraft instead.

[Hunden]

Originally Posted by AndyJWest

Hunden, are you completely incapable of understanding why this debate arose? Or are you just too comfortable in your fantasy world to look outside? If I 'twisted this thread' then so did all the others who entered the debate on the A-bombings of Japan. Xilon proposed that the A-bombs should be modelled because they were actually dropped on Japan. This is what makes IL-2 a simulator, rather than just a fantasy game. A simulation of war needs to reflect reality, not ignore it. If you find this uncomfortable, play World of Warcraft instead.

My point exactly, it happened so it should be modelled. You have proven my point. Based on your previous post you would like to ignore it. Now your saying what, based on this post, I think you need to make up your mind. I think your uncomfortable in your own skin. You seem to have some type insult for everyone you respond to. I almost feel sorry for you. Almost

[winny]

Whilst it may be 'cool' to see a computer simulation of an A-bomb (in the same way that it's 'cool' to nuke everyone in MW2) I think it would be in bad taste.

It's just too touchy a subject to even bother with and I don't think any developer would touch it.

Just because it happened dosn't mean it should be included in a computer game.

[Furio]

We should ask ourselves: why A-bomb is a “touchy subject”? It’s not for the number of deaths. “Conventional” bombing killed much more people, and I don’t see as useful a debate on the worst ways to be killed.

Fact is that A bomb was different from any other weapon used before. It paved the way to the H bomb and to the prospect of a war that will not simply kill people, but all of the humankind and – perhaps – all life forms on our small planet. Even a simple “regional” nuclear war could be devastating on a global scale. A nuclear war between Pakistan and India would precipitate our world into an endless winter, and all of us pacifically debating here would probably die from cold, plagues and famine.


Nobody, I hope, will ever make a sim on Auschwitz and extermination camps. By the same token, let’s stop our WWII flight sim calendar with August 5th, 1945.

If we want to go ahead into 1946 “what ifs”, we must suppose that Manhattan program failed and no A bomb were ever dropped on Japan.

My opinion.

[winny]

Originally Posted by Furio

We should ask ourselves: why A-bomb is a “touchy subject”? It’s not for the number of deaths. “Conventional” bombing killed much more people, and I don’t see as useful a debate on the worst ways to be killed.

Fact is that A bomb was different from any other weapon used before. It paved the way to the H bomb and to the prospect of a war that will not simply kill people, but all of the humankind and – perhaps – all life forms on our small planet. Even a simple “regional” nuclear war could be devastating on a global scale. A nuclear war between Pakistan and India would precipitate our world into an endless winter, and all of us pacifically debating here would probably die from cold, plagues and famine.


Nobody, I hope, will ever make a sim on Auschwitz and extermination camps. By the same token, let’s stop our WWII flight sim calendar with August 5th, 1945.

If we want to go ahead into 1946 “what ifs”, we must suppose that Manhattan program failed and no A bomb were ever dropped on Japan.

My opinion.

I think it's touchy because of the intent. It's the fact of it being designed to kill civillians on such a large scale using one bomb. It's a little bit of a low point in human history. I make no judgement as to the rights and wrongs as it was something the Americans felt they had to do. But, right or wrong, it was an awful thing that happend, in a time full of equally awful things happening.

I think it's just a little too specific to be included in a sim. There were only 2 A-Bombs dropped and both had names so you'd need to simulate that fact and once they dropped them that was that, or would you like an unlimited ammount of A-bombs? In which case it's not realistic.

Having said that I see no reason you couldn't have a good 'Race to the A-Bomb' Camaign in a sim where you have to destroy/defend production facilities etc, and whoever gets to a certain level first gets to try to nuke the other side. That'd be ok because it never happened.