This would be another viable option to break a planet and invade. Instead of a interplanetary nuke. Why not have a silo that launches a EMP missile that disables anything on the ground for a certain amount of time. ( within a given range of emp blast) This way you can emp then drop a transporter or emp then drop a astreas. This could stop guys who spam catapults and bombers. The bombers would just blow up causing them to crash to ground. Tell me what you guys think. There would be no anti emp though in my opinion.
If it doesn't trip Anti-Nukes, its EMP effect would turn off Anti-Nukes long enough for a Nuke to strike. If it does trip the Anti-Nuke, and it's cheaper (which, being nonlethal, it has to be) then you can afford to spam a bunch of EMPs as dummies to get through the Anti-Nuke, also clearing the way for a Nuke - though perhaps this is permissible if the build times are identical. IIRC Neutrino has mentioned alternative missile types, but I think the second issue mentioned above is the crux of the matter. Anything cheaper than a nuke will have the potential to be used for Anti-Nuke attrition; deciding whether or not that's fair to include is Uber's call. As far as the orbital siege issue goes; we do still need Unit Cannons and drop-pods/transports to round out the arsenal, but an EMP wouldn't be the worst addition.
There always needs to be a way to counter something or it'll be abused. EMPs have been suggested several times and I'm not a fan of them.
Well i'm a fan of them. ABUSE THE FU#K! out of everything, if that is your play-style.. don't take the fun away from others just because you "don't" like them. Be supportive of others ideas and don't spout crap that is a given.
A mechanic that can be abused ruins the game for everyone. It's not because I don't like it. It's because an abusable mechanic can ruin the game.
That's exactly what people would do with the EMP and Neutron missiles in TA. They were pretty much useless for anything else, but because they were so cheap (even cheaper than the anti-nuke missiles) they made great decoy missiles.
I think the emp should be expensive like nuke. antinukes cant shoot emp and emp does not shut off antinuke
TA:Spring has emp missiles, light t1 air drones and t2 emp bombers. EMP is a nice option to have as it opens up all sorts of alternative play styles. The emp drones are brilliant for stopping ground forces from running riot through your base- but obviously they are very weak against any form of aa. The t2 emp bombers are strong enough to push through the enemy air defences and disable specific tagets (they are often used against shields or anti nukes), I think in PA an orbital EMP bomber would be nice- perhaps go and disable some halleys? The EMP missile disables a large group of units and is brilliant for ambushing invasion forces. It is also sometimes used against anti nukes, shields and long range cannons- although to ensure it wasnt totally overpowered it has a much shorter range than nukes and so on. I personally like EMP as a mechanic- although I think it would be most useful for orbital in context of PA.
