Suggestion: Different Nuclear Missile Launcher Missiles

One of the things that I have been desperately desiring is different warheads for the nuclear missile launcher, and I have thusly proposed a few ideas:

• Regular old ballistic missile. Builds faster than a nuke, does less damage, and is still capable of attacking any planet.
• Antimatter warhead: A missile outfitted with antimatter. Takes a lot longer than a regular nuke. Does absurd damage.
• "Hornet" missile. Like the regular old ballistic missile, this one uses conventional explosives, but breaks up into smaller missiles which bombard a large area. Does slightly less damage than the ballistic missile, takes a little bit longer than it to build.

Yea, regular nukes are kinda boring. What I'd find very cool indeed is a grey goo warhead. It's loaded with billions and billions of nanobots that swarm the area of effect, eating away everything they find. Might do damage over a short interval of time, like 7 seconds. Probably hard to realize from an artistic pov though.

Does PA support physics for units btw? If so, a gravitation warhead would be cool too. It creates a short lived singularity or at least a short lived strong gravitational field with dark sphere and a black halo in its center that pulls in units inside the aoe, obliterating them by accelerating them against each other (there we could actually use the damn stacking and clipping for once).

Oh well, not gonna happen.

Personally I'd like emp weapons in PA.... A nice long range EMP would be awesome- cheaper than a nuke with large AOE that only disables things (for a reasonably duration) rather than destroying them.

Edit: Add the ability to capture stuff and this would be even better...

I'd like more variety like this ^^

actually, you could have it just show blotches of green structure or whatever to show the eating effect. And the fabber spray mod would make it team color based, which would be cool.

Also, MIRV warheads for nukes would be nice, and I like the idea of antimatter and EMP warheads. Perhaps structures/units that are powered down would be more easily reclaimable/capturable?

A problem with nuke variations is balance again.
I would like to see cheap emp nukes that disable an area so you can build a teleport and get a foothold.
But then you end up using them to spam the enemy's anti nuke system before sending in the nukes.

I´d like to see emp-rockets, that would be countered by something else than the normal anti-nuke, maybe the sniperbot? The counter would have a chance to miss, cheaper counter higher probability of missing, especially with sniperbot, as they are also mobile, and can be spammed, so probably some new stationary, or the catapult. Would also like cheaper MIRV warheads, big AoE with greatly decreased damaged, same counter as emp maybe and good for clearing up unprotected areas late-game.

Universally I would agree with your suggestion to add complexity where it was
Needed. However in this instance i'm
Not sure it would add anything constructive to the gam
E. Also it could
Cause problems with balanc
E,
Such as nuke
S being way too powerful on one h
And and being useless in anothe
R situation. How does one balance that sort of variet
Y.

By working hard and by not putting random capital-letters in the middle of sentences or words.

Also i do actually think that some of these ideas, except for those i wrote down in my earlier post, are kind of unnecessary.

LOL.

Just... Just look at schuesseled's post. Look it up and down.

He has. It's stupid. I mean, if the actual first words of the sentence spelled unnecessary then fine, but they don't. You could do that with any sentence that has the letters U N E C S A R Y in it, which is almost all.

If I didn't have better things to do with my time I could do it to that sentence I just wrote.

Yeah I didn't say it was clever. Just made me giggle because I don't think he saw it.

I did see it, i was just joking about it. An english-teacher would not allow such writing

Fair enough, I was seized with a fit of rage when I thought he was being lauded for such a sloppy effort.

ON TOPIC: more nuke types would be cool, an EMP one particularly. Solution with anti-nukes in my opinion would simply be to make them far far cheaper, equivalent to the cheapest nuke type. That way nuking opponents (with actual nuclear warheads) would be a matter of sending in swarms of cheaper missiles to overwhelm the defences and then hoping your warhead gets through.

However, I don't think this is a high priority, and if we do see it it probably won't be for some time.

I think you mean first letters of each sentence and no they don't. You just try doing that without waffling or breaking up the paragraph. Furthermore the sentence has to have those letters in the right numbers and order, it's not just luck. You can't just randomly write a sentence and turn it into something else. For example without the addition of "it's not just luck." this post would have been entirely without an additional meaning.

Ok, I tried it and... I am humbled. You're right.

Although you're lucky I'm not a sore loser because I'm pretty sure your not-so-secret message would go against Uber's terms of use for the forums

EDIT: back on topic guys? This was an interesting thread till I derailed it

And now the thread is about the guy who posted "unnesecary". Good job folks.

And discussing wether i understood that it stood unnecessary or not.

I just want to know what people thought of the "hornet" missile.
Another missile would be a "depth charge" missile, which has the same build rate as a normal nuke, but upon impact buries itself into the ground and explodes moments later, creating a huge crack in the planet's surface, destroying everything in the path of the crack. This could be its own superweapon though.