Building on water?

Weither it is expensive or not is decided by the devs of how much a segment will realy cost ... its not like you pay a different metalcost for each segment individualy even though that could be possible but it could just cost the same as a wall you build on the ground ... the only thing that might be difficult imo would be to include them propperly in a grafical way ... im not realy keen on the pole idea ... it sounds a bit too effective so only subs or torpedobombers would be effective against them ...

Or you can just skip floating walls which is the easiest and most sensible thing to do IMHO.

Wall on surface, net underneath. About as simple as you can get.

The fabbers use a lot more than any other

That was a pretty cool video. How did you find it?

Weither in or not i dont mind either ...

I just finished a 1v1 where putting my comm in a small pond with 4 mex in it to build safe energy saved my game when his one and only incursion on my base reached the shore.

He couldnt find my comm with his bots, so I slowly ate them away with my own defenses and bots.

Ten minutes later, I managed to punch a very tiny hole in his defenses and eat all his t2 energy. Game over.

Except that ships are so much more expensive....

Actually, a Holkins built on water would be ridiculously OP. Naval would never go anywhere. You'd literally be denying the enemy's navy a massive area.

Nuke launchers, too. It's an IPBM for crying out loud, it needs solid ground.

And everything else makes sense because this makes naval spawns MAKE SENSE. It ADDS variety. IT DOES NOT make it unfair to anyone anywhere. You can easily deny the enemy the land with aircraft if you are paying attention.

It does seem a little easy to just send a rocket into the depths of the ocean. Not sure if we're getting Nuke Subs, but they could be one alternative for getting a bomb down there.

Just butting in here to point out situations like this will be different with Torpedo Bombers and Amphibious Units.

Exactly. Secondary point: WE DONT HAVE THE FULL ROSTER YET

I agree that sea should be more differentiated, to an extent. It should make more use of the seafloor/underwater/mobile units. For example (regular surface ships not included in this list unless replacing the function of a structure):

Seafloor Structures:

• Walls
• Energy/Metal Storage
• Metal Extractor
• Torpedo Launcher Adv.

Floating Structures:

• Energy Plant (Tidal model)
• Orbital Launcher
• Torpedo Launcher
• Sonar
• Anti-Air*
• Mines

* Preferably not, but that may be imbalanced. I just find it weird looking to have towers on the sea.

Underwater Units:

• Nuke/Anti Nuke Sub (to replace naval structure)

Surface Units:

• Aircraft carrier (to replace naval structure)
• Anti-orbital Ship

Should not be build-able over water:

• Laser defenses -> Torpedo launchers only. Has the added bonus of making hovercraft more interesting, because torpedo's can't hit them, so surface vessels are needed.

Anti-orbital ship might be combined with an anti-nuke ship perhaps?

Anti-orbital is something you want much more than anti-nuke; it's usually best when combining defensive weapons to only do so if they're intended to be used in the same quantities. Otherwise the added cost from the anti-nuke ability limits your ability to defend against orbital.

I like what I'm reading.

Then....what building do I have to deal with raiding hovercraft?

I will agree that having the advanced lasers on the water is a little redundant, but what about the single barrel laser?

The water in PA is a not newtonian liquid.

So it will block nukes!

Somebody should try that out in real life.

You'd need surface ships, or your own hovercraft - it fits with the theme of having units do the job of certain structures.

I......dunno......ehh

I figured this is bound to happen at some point or another with all of the nuclear weapons Threads going on at the moment.
as a nuclear engineering major i can tell you; geometry is key. if you have a nuclear missile and attempt to hit a structure under water not only do you have to consider mechanical implementations on the delivery system and weather not that system will fail upon contact with the water you also have to consider any misalignment that may occur between the c4 charge preignition mechanisms and the nuclear cores... nuclear weapons do not detonate when they impact they detonate before the impact for this very reason. not to mention that it compounds the effect of the nuclear blast.

Now if the system was deployed from water and activated, which all nuclear weapons tests in water were, then you would have a succesful detonation.

this is how a real world nuclear weapons works granted it has been simplified however yall get the point.

however in regards to the game I am willing to overlook reality because again..... this is a game... where you should come not to expect reality but to escape it

The game would move so slow lol...
Cornstartch planets > metal planet