A Thought on Asteroid Differentiation

Just a thought...

I don't play the PTE builds, so forgive me for being so late to the game.

After having played a number of games now with Asteroids, I can definitely see why some are saying that it doesn't really bring a new dynamic to the table. While I believe the cratering system would have been better as a differentiation, it is clear that is not going to happen. As it is... asteroids are cool, but (in my opinion) still feel like they are missing a unique identity.

In the original Kick Starter video, it shows a planet launching a nuke at an asteroid to break it up. I am not sure if these "asteroid busters" are ever going to make it into the game... but hypothetically, could this be the differentiation that is missing? If I had a way to shoot down asteroids, but not planets... this would create a dynamic that is not there now, and does not require a cratering system. The defense would have to be costly, and balanced... but would create some balance and differentiation between asteroids and planets.

Anyway... as I said at the beginning... just a thought.

afaik the nukes being launched at asteroids was merely to show that doing that with an close to impact asteroid is futile .. you rather use nukes to destroy the halleays on it ..

one question though is it still posible to launch nukes at asteroids in motion?

But three asteroid busters didn't work.

If anything, it shows that nothing but another roid or planet can stop a falling roid.

Which technically, they do stop them, permanently.

Still, I like the asteroids, none of this wiffwaff about how a asteroid doesn't cleanse an entire world when it strikes.

If it can't do even that, then wants the point of wasting possible metal spots?

Just to be clear, I would not expect nukes to be the "asteroid buster" they are too low cost, and already have a unique role. I was referring to more of a super nuke (for lack of a better term) that was capable of deflecting or destroying an asteroid... but took a long time to build so that it would not be very good at defending against multiple attacks.

I never had a problem with this. It is the destroying the planet that seems a bit off. Thank goodness that didn't happen when the asteroid took out the dinosaurs... or we wouldn't even be having this conversation. I just would like to see an asteroid have some unique qualities (in my initial post, it is destructible... at range) from planets.

Again all hypothetical... so not a big deal... just something that has been running through my head.

they have already .. they wipe out planets on impact and are not counterable ..
if you make them counterable and non planetsdestroying they would be no different from a nuke .. and their goes your uniqueness ...

Well you need to pick one. They should be uncounterable but not planet destroying.

i disagree ...

The designers have made it very clear that the planet destroying is not going to change... so that option is already passed. If they are going to be planet destroying, than I would make them counterable.

get to them an destroy the thrusters ...

what uber realy should work on is ballancing the ammount of trusters needed for astroids (i say minimu of 3 or 4) to launch as well as allowing nukes to target them when in flight but be useless when the astroid got close enough ...
and most impotantly make invasions easier without having to always build teleporters on enemy territory or build very time and cost intensive unitcannons ... we direly need multiunittransports imho ..