(Stolen) Idea: Nuke Explosions Detonate Other Nukes

A comment on one of my YouTube videos:

I kinda like this idea.

This will help nerf the power of Nuke spam.

Edit: If one nuke detonates, then other nukes within the blast radius will be disabled or detonate. Probably be disabled.

do you mean if someone send nukes en-mass to a attack a spot on the map, the first nuke detonates the others before they impact or disables the others?

Yupp.

I don't see the benefit. If one nuke lands, the only things that survive are Commanders and advanced factories, no? The rest are a total waste.

The main thing it would do is have people stop sending a bunch of nukes all at once. It'd also stop the double nuke snipe.

This match being an example of nuke spam

PERSOANLLY <--- sorry i caps that but i think because of the current controversy over the blue badge thing i need to say this first so i do not give wrong impressions this isn't easy hey .....

again
PERSONALLY
I think that's a cool idea, i would like to see a domino/chain-reaction of nuke as one explodes it fires off the rest..
Effectively creating a "wide area weapon" of sorts...

this way will not be possible to make Double Nukes Snipes

Personally, I think that there should be a gamemode where commander assassination does not give you victory

I.e. territory victory. score victory. That kind of thing.

A lot of the "OP" units are only "OP" because they can snipe the commander so effectively. (e.g. the Hornet prenerf)

What about when area commands are implemented..

Maybe have snipes possible if you send one at a time over and over like now.
And have the Wide area style idea i think brians talking about as an area command for clearing large areas of land for invading forces, or dropping transports of some kind..

PERSONALLY I think both are good tactics

That's confirmed. There will be multiple ways to win.

No no no.

I mean, Commander assassination isn't the game mode. You don't lose if you lose your commander. So nukes actually have to do a huge amount of damage, and using two in one place is pointless.

i think that's what brian meant,, it will be an option to "disable game ends" when commander dies.. it will be part of the game modes options

Yes. That's what I meant.

There will be different game options for win conditions.

Sweet.

There's some games where you can win by conquering, or diplomacy, or territory, or whatever.

So the win conditions are sometimes complementary, an either or, not removed.

Getting back to the original point, I have to say I'm intrigued. I rather like this idea, I've always hated how careful you have to be late game - if you forget to keep your anti nukes loaded or your comm strays a step too far outside their range and poof, you're done for.

I'm sure some people would disagree though so I'm going to fall back on the old favourite of 'make it a lobby option'.

My point is that it won't stop sending a bunch of nukes all at once (at least, not among good players). A bunch of nukes is already a waste, because the 3rd+ nukes aren't going to have an effect anyway.

I'm partial to the idea of diminishing the double nuke snipe, but this would do that if and only if the two nukes are close enough to destroy each other. That's not a strong enough change, in my opinion, because there are plenty of circumstances where you can double nuke snipe without the nukes being adjacent. It was also never mentioned in the OP, so it seems like an ulterior motive at best.

Not to mention that most of the nukes in your video are being sent in singles and twos, with delays, so most of the nuke 'spam' was wasted to begin with or wouldn't have been affected by this proposal.

I don't see a compelling reason to make nukes chain explode. If anything it would just make nukes even more binary.

If you intend to make players fire exactly one nuke at a time, this seems a peculiar way to do it. Firing two nukes at the same area really should have double the effect, since it costs twice as much to execute. Making nukes chain explode would also make the binary nature of nukes even worse, especially since it becomes entirely possible for an intercepted nuke to chain-explode and take out the rest of your launched nukes, obviating an entire nuclear bombardment on a succeed-or-fail binary basis.

My position is that nukes need to be made smaller, cheaper, more accessible, and more convenient, not more binary and unwieldy to use.

If the double nuke snipe is a concern, then the issue is that the antinuke is simply not able to do its job effectively. Making antinuke drastically cheaper and with vastly improved coverage is a much simpler solution. And making antinuke more efficient by reducing the cost of the antinuke missiles, or (even better) completely removing the need to construct antinuke missiles entirely, would be a much better solution than chain-exploding nukes.

I'm more pushing for a nuke caught in an explosion get destroyed without detonation. Which makes sense.

With real nukes, if you blow up a nuclear bomb with TNT, the nuke won't detonate.

Oh, I see. That makes much more sense. So multiple missiles fired into the same area will yield only one nuclear explosion, and the other missiles caught within the blast are simply destroyed. They also would not chain explode if an antinuke destroys one.

That actually would work. The only issue I see is that the possibility of wasting such valuable nukes means players should heavily micromanage nuke target locations and timing to just barely avoid blowing up the other missiles. The "double tap" is still possible, but requires precise timing to avoid wasting nukes. Wasting your own nukes is a massive problem because each nuke is so expensive. With very expensive nukes, a very significant amount of micromanagement is justified to maximize the effectiveness of so few missiles.

With a larger number of cheaper and more expendable missiles, some of them being wasted in an explosion becomes more acceptable, and micromanagement to avoid wasting them is less necessary.

That's my vote at least.

Late game, nukes are super cheap.

Flinging out nukes when a player controls an entire planet is the equivalent of building a leveler. 10 minutes in to the match, sure a leveler is a huge investment. 20 minutes into the match, sure, a nuke is a heavy investment. But 45 minutes into the match when an entire planet is controlled, nukes are cheap.

This is evidence by my latest match where over 30 nukes were launched. Most of which were launched in quick succession in the last 10 minutes or so.

In the latest match I recorded (haven't posted yet, should do so tomorrow), entire planets were controlled as war was waged across 5 different planets. Nukes were built with ease.

At any ratel. tldr, late game, nukes are incredibly cheap compared to how big economies get.

And because nukes are so powerful, I think this is a very nice balance to nukes as well as increase in strategy.

I don't think of this as increased micro, I think of this as increased strategic components to these powerful missiles.

And nukes will likely be increased even further in power if Uber ends up going with the many different types of nukes route.