A question/suggestion for nuke silos and the way they react to damage.

.

Or just be a super stickler for posts....... I was simply stating. Realism is no basis for any game aside from simulators. That's not to say however we can't use realism as guidelines for things. Does the game not have tanks, boats, and planes??? Nukes, and artillery???strange that these things have qualities that represent REALISM but yea not a good basis.

If you are turtling then you have a limited area to build on
you penalizing yourself already that way ... limited buildarea limited resources .... do you realy want to penalyse yourself even more?
this is almost like asking to ctrl-k yourself especialy if you have just a small planetoid to build on ...

Flying "air"planes on a moon without atmosphere .. just saying ... but yeah lets do the haisplitting because thats always fun, right?
using something as a basis or reference is a different thing then using realism as an argument

.

That's the point man!

That's reasonable. It would be fair if the silo were made a bit more durable by having its health increased, but the point of this would be to make nukes a risk and investment which are not just built on a whim. So, if you wanted it to be guarded by your current base's defenses, you would risk a portion of your base. If you did not want that risk, it would have to be built in a base of its own. In reality, that risk isn't terrible because by the time people make a nuke, they/you should have a large enough base to make a nuke attack not affect their/your economy and production.

They are already a risk investment because of the high cost a nuke missle brings with itself ...
launch a nuke with the enemy having an anuke resources wasted ... launch a nuke against an enemy that propperly spread his base and almost hasnt a critical spot to damage eco or production even the build of the nuke would be a waste in this case
do the the same with anukes and a spread base its kind of a no brainer ...
Even worse you give eventualy the enemy a spot to snipe and significantly hurt your eco
which would be the nail in the coffin to your own downfall
we dont realy need nukelaunchervolatility .. i think its too powerfull to use against an enemy
we have enough ways to hurt a player by his own mistakes we dont need to add a extra mount of salt to that wound ..

I don't see nukes as a 'risk' as they are now. If you don't have an economy to build a nuke, and try to, then inevitably you will hurt yourself. If you have an economy that allows a nukes production, it won't hurt you in any way to build one (Though, this isn't arguing that it should, I'm just analyzing your argument). Using ad populum "We don't need this." to argue your points is invalid. Surely you may not want something like this, but others will feel differently than you. Speak for yourself.

Ultimately, I never intended to argue whether nukes should put your base at risk, I was just pointing out questions I had about them. It's all just hypothetical. The resulting effects of changes like these aren't that important to me.

I like this idea, it gives a reason not to just spam nuke silos in a tiny base!