T2 Nuke Jammer Bot idea

Sorry this game as far as I understand is pretty against multiple roles of most units... because of role overlap and such.

I don't even know how you consider that a thing or how it is relevant in any way.

A problem can be solved without invoking an end all solution that definitively wins every time. It's called a soft counter, and it's part of making a good game.

Nuke play causes game sweeping changes that players have to solve in very specific ways. It is this high power combined with bad solutions that causes the nuke to dominate. Another anti nuke isn't going to solve it. The problem is that players need to be able to deal with a nuke without building an anti nuke.

please keep in mind that the nuke-jammer bot doesn't shoot down the missile like the static anti-nuke launcher it just stops the nuke from exploding when it lands.

Technically if there's a unit that can fight against a nuke it's an "anti-nuke" but semantics. I personally would be up for an anti-nuke unit that has to damage a nuke over time, more than one means more damage and such. Give it some time to survive. It doesn't necessarily need to one hit the nuke but we still need a unit that can take out a nuke to protect mobile units.

How about when it 'jams', it blows the nuke up where the nuke is? Say the range of the jammer is slightly less than the range of a nuke, so the unit jamming gets destroyed. Have the cost of a jammer be half or a third of an anti-nuke, or whatever makes sense once it's been tested. Then you have a number of interesting mechanics:

• If the jammer is in the middle of a group, roughly half die half survive
• If the jammer is closer to the nuke source (aka probably near the front of the group), more units survive but the jammer is more vulnerable to other units
• The nuke does damage, but not in the location it was aimed at
• When a nuke is launched, the defender has a chance to react by interception, getting the explosion further away from important things
• The jammer could be told not to fire, if you wanted a nuke to get picked up by an anti-nuke or another jammer instead

tl;dr Have jammers blow nukes up in-place, now the nuke game is no longer binary and the nuke still makes a satisfying explosion.

The Nuke-Jammer concept doesn't destroy the missile only, it completly stops explosion from occureing if it lands within the jammer bots jamming radius

This part doesn't make much sense. How does that work? Transmitted Nanites?

Anti-nuke unit PREFERRED characteristics:

You can only build a few of them (They must be really expensive). (prevents making nukes useless).
Limited travel area (preferably naval, to limit use in actual armies).
Okay-ish range (It has to be useful ofc)
Non-teleportable (Don't even get me started on this LOL).
It should be based on a set ammo system. i.e, one nuke every 4.5 seconds. So a railgun-thing mounted on a unit to shoot down nukes. Sounds legit.

The Anti-Nuke should be better in every way except movement, or people will stop building ANukes. Maybe add an energy penalty, like the UberCannon does. For example, immediate 100k energy drain per shot. (Ammo system).

^my two cents

Agreed, static anti-nuke should be much better to counter the fact it can not move.

The Nuke-Jammer bot stops the nuclear reaction from occurring with an energy field, think a moving area command with the bot at the center

why not give the nuke-jammer bot only one ammo charge that has a recharge rate a little bit longer than it takes to build a missile with the static anti-nuke launcher

I was offering an alternative concept, one which I think would be more interesting, still keep anti-nukes viable, and open up some interesting tactical play. A jammer could be used offensively by scouting when an enemies nuke was about to launch, then pelican dropping the jammer onto an enemies outpost as the nuke was flying over. Who wouldn't want to see that? Sloppy play from the nuker, and awesome play from the defender.

I do agree it is hard to explain how to make a unit with a unit worth of value even at t2, that can defeat a 30k metal attack.

I can only think that mobile units already defeat nukes if you don't condense them, just spread them out with an area patrol or long line formation.

Besides that, a mobile antinuke, the very best I could think of is an orbital antinuke, and it should have less range since it is in no danger of being nuked by the nuke. You can still use these as a perimeter antinuke instead of a centralized one. You can even scout a nuke and put this directly between you and it.

The reason I say that, is that orbital is a side tech branch from actual fullscale combat, and it has a higher allowance for cost than a single unit, and that it is usually a better balanced super unit when allowed to be mobile.

You could also make it a targeting systems jammer (might work against catapults too, in that case), it would change the target of the nuke to somewhere outside its radius of influence (somewhere right on the edge of its radius of influence), where it would still land and explode. This way, having them in your base doesn't necessarily help, as they do not stop nuke explosions at all, they just shift the target area, which could be in the range of your anti-nuke and it could also not be. On top of that, make the ability a pulse on a cooldown, so that you can't just cover your base with these and expect to deflect nukes away, it would just take 1 nuke to fly over your base, trigger them all, so the second nuke could get through. However, the pulse should effect as many nukes as are in the radius, so shooting multiple nukes in a small period of time would be a bad idea...

Actually orbital units get damaged by nukes now. Also, TA had an anti-nuke unit for t2 and it worked. I suppose if you don't want a hard counter you could make the unit wither contain the damage so it doesn't have as big of an aoe or it could lower the damage of the nuke.

Another idea, perhaps anti-nuke silos could build "anti-nuke bots" and load one of their anti nukes-into the bots. The bot would have a shorter range, but it would be mobile. It would also share the cost of the anti-nuke and a bot, so it should be used less, mainly for mobile armies, or rapid response.

That is a brand new change. As as most brand new changes and every pompous forum poster in these forums, I am allowed to recognize or dismiss brand new changes as "testing". The anti orbital nukes are testing, I like the interplanetary send-anywhere ones, but nukes reaching up into the orbital and especially at the same radius as ground is really not ideal. Carpet bombing a whole planet for instance, you mean that nuke could use the buff to clear orbital too? Nukes don't get a lot of love-talk around this forums, just "remove them remove them dear god just remove them".

I believe the t2 antinuke in TA was basically t3 expensive and very limited, wasnt it? Back in TA the economy was a different beast altogether too...

It was in one of their livecasts.

That's all I remember.

Nukes were the game ending weapons in TA. PA has death rocks from space. Let the death rocks be the game ending weapons.

TA had a mobile and an immobile anti nuke. The mobile one was slightly more expensive to build but was otherwise the same thing. Same weapon system and all.

The main reason for a mobile anti nuke is because armies are super good targets for nukes. You can run the army away for sure, but if they're too slow or the nuke is too fast then a massive force can be lost.

Once again this goes into the binary nature of nukes. It is possible to prevent a nuke but it is not possible to mitigate the damage. You can not attack the nuke directly or force it to explode in a non optimal location. It either hits its target or it doesn't.

Why would these killbots use something as antiquated and easy to defend as a nuclear payload? Rendering the weapon harmless is as easy as shooting it. If you were to use something a bit more sci-fi like half an ounce of antimatter, countering it is FAR more tricky. Why? Because 99% of your countermeasures are guaranteed to blow it up. That makes for a very bad day.

Killing the nuke should blow it up. But why would you use an anti nuke? The best solution is to use the current system. a dedicated anti nuke would have the unique ability to intercept an antimatter bomb without causing it to explode. This leaves your incoming damage as ZERO, which is an extremely powerful outcome.

Actually I believe nukes explode now when an anti-nuke hits them

Letting a nuke pass over an anti-nuke unit seems silly to me, unless you turn of fire at will for tactical reasons. Though I feel like the unit has to be consumed in the process of destroying the nuke. Like a boombot with a jetpack with an anti-nuke strapped to its back. (or some sort of energy beam, draining the bot). Price should be between static anti-nuke and a nuke.

Optional for bit of extra flavour to the unit: As for stats, HP like vanguard, speed as t1 vehicule, dps and weapon type like a double laser turret.

edit: "Jamming" is a weird mechanic, unless you couple the reload with massive metal and energy requirements, it just feels too powerfull on the long run, taking out multiple nukes with 1 unit.
Also, anti-nuke satelites. exact copy of static AA, but strapped onto a moveable satelite.