For Backers Only: Megabot Experiment

I was illustrating the idiocy of igncom1's post. Thanks for the break down captain obvious.

no1 said I couldn't build ground defenses or that he couldn't build anti-nukes. Just can't use them offensively...

and you keep assuming that I'm only going to launch 1 measly nuke from my nuke lanucher.

whats the cost of 50 megabots? Whats the cost of the 3 nukes (maximum) it will take to kill them all? The nuke launcher will keep building nukes until it's dead or you are! Look at the big picture dude, I'm not talking about a single isolated nuke...

Except you said that you build only nukes and he builds only tanks. The definition of "only" means nothing else. Just that one thing.

Then perhaps you should read about the nuclear launcher and learn how it works.

The nuclear launcher costs 5,410 metal to build. You invest 5,410 metal and then it does nothing. Absolutely nothing.

You must then invest 34,200 metal for each individual nuclear missile. That 34,200 metal is the cost of one missile. 34,200 metal per missile. That missile can only ever destroy a fixed radius since that one missile can not blow up multiple times.

So that means that 34,200 metal can only ever blow up a certain radius. No more. No less.

34,200 metal per explosion.

A unit keeps on destroying things until it is destroyed. It's not a single use fixed radius.

So a mega bot keeps on running around and can destroy an entire planet while a nuke can only ever destroy a single radius.

Get it?

Unit: keeps on destroying everything until destroyed and a megabot can potentially destroy everyting on a planet
Nuke: can only destroy a single fixed radius once. no more. no less.

"Keep building things until you're dead?" Isn't that the definition of the entire game? That's what I do regardless of whether I'm building nukes.

Look! I'm building doxes until I build so many that you're dead. Doxes are broken!

You do not understand the concept of single use vs keeps going until destroyed.

Hah! Bring it, a nuke launcher cannot beat my tanks!

"I'll build only nukes offensively and you build only tanks offensively" were my exact words...

The defensive building to kill Doxes (or megabots for that matter) doesn't have an operating cost or ammo. You can't say the same for nukes so they aren't the same

Yet....

You'd still lose.

Wow. And you're still wrong. Defensive structures consume energy to fire.

Example, the Holkins consumes 100,000 energy per shot.

You should make sure you fully understand the operating procedures of the game before you debate it.

Way to ignore everything I said and change the subject.

http://www.nanodesu.info/pa-db/58772/unit/air_defense.html
http://www.nanodesu.info/pa-db/58772/unit/laser_defense.html
http://www.nanodesu.info/pa-db/58772/unit/laser_defense_adv.html

where's the operational cost? How much ammo do they get? Heres 1 with an operating cost:

http://www.nanodesu.info/pa-db/58772/unit/tactical_missile_launcher.html

I could straw man too if I wanted...

Still doesn't change that Id kick your *** with tanks vs your nuke silos.

So your original argument is invalid.

Seriously, both sides are just ignoring the point of the other side and arguing semantics to make it seem like they know they're talking about.

Well unless you prove me otherwise, you know with a proper argument and credible sources.

I concede victory from your use of gifs.

I proved I can defend against your tanks at 0 operational cost and you can't defend against my nukes without an operational cost. Got any reason that logic is flawed? I haven't see it

A nuke can only attack one location, and cannot move.

My tanks can.

I don't even want to go on about this. Always the same arguments.

Why couldn't we just stop arguing at the point where we basically came to the conclusion that Megabots are fine as long as they don't invalidate other units?

inb4 somebody says you can't with no backup argument besides supcom.

Because I don't agree they are fine at all.

Fixed that for you

With no real reason, besides bad experience from a game that has no influence over this one.
While there are many good reasons for megabots:

- Variety
- visually attractive
- easier to balance
- motivational force
- delivering enough progression even in longer games
- the design can be very flexible compared to swarm units
- additionally it makes sense in the unit roster we have.

Now your counter-argument is what? They invalidate other units? They would become the focus of the game? We already have game-ending units? Overlapping roles? Experimentals? SupCom? Semantics?

We had all of those already. All of them are invalid arguments and/or proven to be false.

I would just like to add that they were proven to be false by using the conditional statement that they would be only added in the case where they do not invalidate other units or become a focus.

Out of curiosity what is your opinion on Levelers vs Pounders, they have fairly similar roles and the Leveler is pretty much just a stronger Pounder.

As for trying to force mixed armies instead of just masses of megabots...

What if the megabot fired other units? Not like a unit cannon to get units from point A to point B but actually using smaller units as the projectile for it's guns. It could either reclaim nearby units and nanolathe projectiles out of that, or straight up fire those smaller units (it could automatically pick up and load any nearby units). You'd have to bring a fairly large mixed army or your megabot would run out of ammo and become useless when it had nothing left to shoot.