Is there anyone else think the nuke is too week?

Well, I just feel like that. Only an anti-nuke can make it harmless. And it almost need the same time to build as holly(for small planet). And holly can kill anything(ground and orbit) in a planet wheres nuke only affect the ground. Personally, I don't like to use them in game. It doing the same job as holly but not as good as it.

Maybe we should make the nuke more feature by add some sub-effects like EMP, or it will destroy the orbital units if it was stopped by anti-nuke. And there should have some mobile units can carry a nuke like submarine or some satellite.

This just personal opinion.

I think nuke is ok. Thing is halleys only work once (the smashing planet is totally destroyed). Nukes are a safer option for attacking player and are a good way to use up spare resources.

nuke is arlight how it is ...

The nuke is no week, quite simply it's almost completely perfectly clear if you don't just simply even rush ten minutes frankly I don't see the issue. I mean ever when it's just not possible this week or that week month year day with nukes the way they are maybe next month but if that's an issue then maybe Uber need to face the fact that perhaps even if just momentarily almost monthly chicken taco isn't quite to everybody's taste through I do know not why. Frank, I'm all for a slow carefully considered weekly quadrilateral nuke if people even as much as consider to think that it's a good idea.

.

true

We already have asteroids, the nuke is perfectly fine where it is.

You have to kill 86,000 metal's worth of stuff just for the nuke itself to come out cost neutral, and there's the risk it could just get shot down and achieve nothing. And while its cost has gone up, T2 income has done for cost. I don't think it's the damage that's off, I think it's the cost relative to everything else.

WHAT A HARMLESS NUKE!!!

I don't think the nuke was supposed to be cost efficient. It's meant to be a "spell" that shifts the battle in favor that someone can get an upper hand.

If it's not cost efficient you wouldn't build it, you'll build 86,000 metal of something that's more cost efficient. Spending 86,000 metal on something which kills less than 86,000 metal means you just hurt yourself.

i think this is the wrong way of looking at it ... may be a defensive nuke will be never costefficient, but destroying facilities, Pgens and mexxes in order to stop your enemy producing anything for an ammount of time is were i think a nuke can be very efficient because any tank, energy or metal that could have been produced in that time is lost until the facilities are rebuilt ..
time is also a resource

The T2 economy has become less cost effective while nukes have more than tripled in cost. Nuking eco isn't going to justify the cost because eco is so much more spread out in this patch. Nuking at all is probably a terrible idea right now, which is why you never see it in top level play where as you used to see it all the time.

So the idea of nuke in PA is more for defense propose or just fully use the "left-over" resource? I can't get it why I should consider to build it in games. And if the asteroid belt was appear later, there would be no issue for holly about the "ammo".

Nukes cost 32400 metal. I just checked in-game.

Do not trust PADB! It's often wrong.

Be careful. This is a dangerous topic. Undoubtedly halleys are better than nukes currently. This is risking Uber increasing the Eco cost of halleys. Do I wish they would reduce Eco cost of nukes? Sure. I simply don't think this is likely. Increasing Halley cost seems more likely.

nukes used to be really cheap, it was bad.

Honestly, for me just make the nuke some more features, not just a week Halley is good enough. If Uber reduce the eco of nukes, I'd like to see them reduce the time to build as well as damage to make the nuke more like a interplanetary missile rather than a super-weapon.

Depends on 86k of damage. It can snipe a weakened commander, and the king in chess has no weighted value because he is priceless. Then, it can support an attacking unit wave, the units nor nuke would do 86k of damage but together they can make a devastating hit and win a game.

So nuke for support? Then why not make them cheap and less damage?

For the same reason. They wouldn't snipe a commander with the same health if so. And yet they would be spammable again and OP like before.

Which, I think they could be a little cheaper and still be reasonably used, but that is finite balance, not general ballpark balance.

I believe the Leviathan and Stingray cost around a nuke, don't they?