Why would anyone nuke New Zealand? That'd be a total waste of missiles. Even more so for Antarctica, unless it was full of military bases at that time. Is there anything that alludes to the state of out-of-the-way places, and what became of them? I'd imagine most of the Northern Hemisphere got whacked harder and suffered higher incidence of radiation than the opposite end of the world.

Since, NZ would still have had closer ties with the United Kingdom, and still be honoring its commitment to ANZUS in the Fallout Universe, it is highly likely that they would have faced nuclear devastation.

Oh drat. What about Antarctica? Good place to hide out?

Considering how hard it would be to grow fresh fruits, vegetables and obtain fuel for heating, I'd say no.

Basically, if you don't think it's been nuked, assume that the social disorder that followed pretty much destroyed society as we know it.

Also, if the 2077 of Fallout is at all like our cold war era, "wasting" missiles isn't an issue.

In Africa, I'd believe that they formed tribes, along with islands around the world, I hope i don't sound racist saying the african part, . I mean they would form tribes, once all influences from the west were severed from nuclear fallout, they would resort to their former actions.

Well, seeing that tribalism resurged in less likely places in the worlds, it wouldn't be much of a stretch.

well since new zealand is a island and there was must of corrosion before and around that time, i guess the beach and lower parts might have been overflooded with water, leaving only a couple of island in heavily radiated water.

Hmm a very un-geographical post...

I think you mean Eroded away, and no its beaches help prevent Erosion.
However yes I would presume the Global Temperature increased causing Sealevels to rise, thus its beaches would be flooded.
Also I doubt it would be in "heavily" radiated water, it would take alot of nuclear weapons to "heavily" radiate a whole ocean, esepecialy for it to be "heavily" radiated 200 years later.

'cus me wrong word sorry

With the amount of Nukes around the world at that time, I think there was more than enough to hit every landmass and have an effect in the game. Why waste 100 nukes bombing Virginia when you could hit it with 50 and use the rest on New Zealand.

Actually, nation states need every nuke they have. See, you need enough nuked to cover every enemy silo, port, military base, command hub, etc. Considering that nuclear groundbursts can often fails to destroy hardened targets. and you end up hurling everything you have and still having enough.

I see little reason why nations outside of the major participants would be targeted in the event of a thermonuclear exchange, but the collapse of the international order and the following inter and intra national violence might tear many of the remaining nation-states apart as well. Still, its not unbelievable that South America, for example. might still contain functioning states.

That is something I've said a few times in varying language that people don't seem to grasp. Why fire at something you need when radiation from your nuclear exchange can do away with pesky resistance from the locals for you? If you look at the DC Wasteland, for instance, you find not everything is destroyed and most of what is destroyed seems that way more because of 200 years of decay, disrepair and warfare. I doubt New Zealand would have been a priority target, rather, those countries actually firing nukes at each other would be. I don't think, like many others do, that nuclear warfare necessarily leads to a magical chain reaction where everyone fires a nuke off for fun and targets everyone else for no good reason. But, as stated before, and considering the name of the game, Fallout would have done in New Zealand, the people and the ecosystem.

New Zealand/Australia = Mad Max

Which is to say.. Crops and water supplies may be affected by nuclear fallout, but not so much direct nuclear destruction. Outside trade would be impossible, which would make living extremely difficult and resources very hard to come by. Which gives rise to raiders and bandits and general anarchy.

Most likely as NZ ios considered the most important stategic military point in the Pacific due to it being self sustainable - excuse the pun though, the fallout though from the Northern Hemisphere would render it unsustainable, even with all its mountains and natural forests perhaps fro a few small patches; why else would the USA have a well known Spy Station situated in the South Island of NZ?

However if you presume that NZ is an Allie to ANY other world power you can presume that she might have a military base.
During a nuclear exchange I would presume that Nuclear bombs would be launched at ANY suspected target.

Also In the ACE computer in F2 Brotherhood bunker it states that a AI Computer got "Bored" and thus began to mess around in the "Real World" this could mean that a Computer launched the first bombs, and I see no reason for an AI Computer not to just launch all nukes at all targets.

I don't think that's actually considered canon, but I'm not sure. Anyone know?

Also, would fallout even drift to NZ? I can't figure out any major targets near it, and considering that prevailing wind currents are West-East, fallout from China is not likely to drift south. Everyone in the southern hemisphere might be pretty okay, as far as fallout goes.

{210}{}{The suicide rate among true artificial intelligence machines was extremely high. When given full sensory capability the machines became depressed over their inability to go out into the world and experience it. When deprived of full sensory input the machines began to develop severe mental disorders similar to those among humans who are forced to endure sensory deprivation. The few machines that survived these difficulties became incredibly bored and began to create situations in the outside world for their amusemant. It is theorized by some that this was the cause of the war that nearly destroyed mankind.} - Vault Wiki

It is possible that the AIs, those in charge of nuclear weapons, "got bored" with a possible extermination of their masters and launched a few missiles. I doubt though we would have put all our missiles under the command of emotional machines, which is why it is just a theory and not substantiated fact.



Yes, it would, eventually fallout, especially from two nations exchanging hundreds of nuclear missiles, would spread to every corner of the globe. When considering how far the future this is, neutron bombs had to have been used the most, which creates enough fallout that would last for five years. They would have dispersed enough radiation that would have, like the canon explains, "blanketed the Earth".

Why? I fail to see how the fallout would get everywhere. Anyway, wouldn't most of it decay away before it could spread that far?

Neutron bombs would not be used, as they lack the ability to destroy hardened targets. Also, I believe they only generate more initial radiation not more fallout.

This a good source of the effects of nuclear war: http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/bmartin/pubs/82cab/index.html

Neutron bombs would have dispersed enough initial radiation for five years, while general atomic bombs dissipate enough radiation for fallout to last only a year. Wind cycles would eventually spread irradiated particles across the globe.



Of course, they would be used, especially on urban centers and resources, like mines, factories and refineries. After the scarcity of resources that led to the Great War why would you use only atomic bombs universally when you have neutron bombs at your disposal that would eliminate resistance while not destroying what you need? I think neutron bombs being dropped rather than atomic bombs makes up for the inconsistency of "bombs being dropped" yet there only being one crater and structures still lying around in the DC Wasteland.

However, it is possible when you combine the large amounts of radiation from neutron bombs and the rush of particles rustled up by the atomic bombs, that the heated particles would last for five years and would then spread across the globe. I'm no physicist, but I know some basic concepts. Indeed, particles from nuclear fallout, especially from thermonuclear bombs, have been known to travel farther than was expected. I see no reason in a nuclear exchange between the United States and China that fallout spreading across the globe.

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_bomb

"A neutron bomb, technically referred to as an enhanced radiation weapon (ERW), is a type of tactical nuclear weapon"

They're tactical weapons. You use them against concentrations of enemy troops, not to his strategic targets. Furthermore, you seem to hold the popular misconception that neutron bombs have no blast or heat effects associated with their use. This is not true, they merely have had their initial radiation effects boosted.



Citation needed. From what I know, 90% of fallout decays away in the first day. That's why its so dangerous, as faster decay means more particles emitted.



Prevailing nuclear doctrine is counter-force, not counter-value. Sites like that would never be targeted. Not to mention that even if one were to target them, you would never use tactical nuclear weapons. You would instead use airbursts to eliminate such "soft" targets.



You're not using those resources, this is nuclear war. No state is surviving this exchange.

Structures could easily remain, as I see no reason to groundburst the DC area.



Citation needed. Could you explain how this would work, I don't know how this could extend the half-life of a radioactive particle. Keep in mind that neutron bombs do not yield higher amounts of fallout, just higher amounts of initial radiation.

Yes, I knew that, but for the purpose of the argument I saw no reason to bring it up, but I know that the destructive effects of a ERW isn't as powerful as a thermonuclear weapon.



In what time our own or in Fallout? We can make assumptions about their nuclear doctrine using our own, but we can never truly know what prevailed. With the shear number of nukes used its been stipulated that nothing should still exist in the Wastelands. I see the single crater in DC as proof that airbursts with neutron bombs or atomic bombs were used more often than huge thermonuclear bombs, mind you they have never been used against urban targets we have no idea what it would do to a city.



States formed underground bunkers to be ready to survive nuclear wars, I know that for sure. They are called the Enclave, by the way, the state that expected to survive the nuclear exchange. Your idea of a nuclear war is one of insanity instead of the Great War that was calculated. They did use a single ground burst in DC.



Made a mistake and I attempted to edit it. Higher radiation means faster death for those in the blast zones. Neutron bombs were created for that purpose, so even though we engaged in a nuclear war our civilization would be preserved, of course not with as many of us as before.

I mean, counter-value strategy is just silly. I fail to see why they'd employ it.



Atomic bombs would not be used, as thermonuclear bombs have replaced them. Fusion explosions can be set to different yields just as fission ones can, and are more effective.

Neutron bombs are not supposed to be used against strategic targets. They are useless outside of their very lhttp://www.gamesas.com/bgsforums/index.php?act=Post&CODE=02&f=44&t=941516&qpid=13693897imited role, which is tactical battlefield use against nuclear-proofed tanks. The wikipedia article has a good article on this.



Sure, but they're in no position to start exploiting resources. The government remains, but the country has been shattered. Thus, there is no use in using neutron bombs (beyond the technical reasons for not using neutron bombs) as there is no way you could secure the enemy's resources.



I'm confused here, what are you trying to say? Neutron bombs were made to take out Russian tank divisions, they were never intended for use on strategic targets.

Just had a quick read about neutron bombs on Wikipedia... They dont sound pretty.... Laymans terms for those trying to follow the thread: Not so much "boom you die and everythings destroyed" as "everyone gets radiation poisioning"

this particular quote from wikipedia shows how bad it can get:


So you dont just die, you could spend some time being the walking dead.

Looks like a good possible candidate for the source of ghoulification.

The nazis are in the antarctica, biding their time...