Poll: Assisting Nukes

They cannot unless they go T2.

I would be happy to have some sort of Anti-Nuke defense in T1 as well. Perhaps the very Commander could shot down a Nuke once in a while.

Which is just another case for reducing the gap between Basic and Advanced rather than spreading it out further.

It's not the scouting I have an issue with. It's not even the use of single-use destructive weapons like Nukes, or the sniping of those dangerous weapons. It's the prevalence of those micro elements compared with sending huge armies of robots marching across cratered landscapes. I just feel like Nukes play a far too dominant role at the moment because they're easy to build in a T2 Economy with a buttload of Fabricators.

I think you have a point with the dominance of nukes argument, but I think it's more a function of OP T2 mex than it is with the role of assisting fabbers.

That and Defences are OP, and armies are weak as my long-dead granny.

I don't mind the power of tower defenses so much yet, and I don't consider ground forces weak....What I DO mind is how long it takes a Tank line to close the distance and get into damn firing range XD! 10 Catapults with seeking can kill off an entire army long long before they get to the point of returning fire. (sorry slightly off topic)

If Catapults had ammo like nukes, then that might be bearable, I wouldn't even mind them being assisted, cause that means that's more Eco moved away from other projects. It would require investment for the range and destruction they provide.

You mean the exact situation that you have with AA units?

Yeah, that's actually a good thing.

It's not the situation you have with Anti-Air units. You wouldn't have dozens of Anti Nukes in an army. People would end up microing to kill the anti nuke and then nuke you.

And why couldn't we have dozens of anti-nukes in a army?

Just give the nuke launcher a huge build power, the nuke a huge build time, and then assisting with engineers will add extremely marginal improvements to build speed (just like in supcom).

Because they'd need to be in line with the static Anti-Nukes' costs.

Why would they?

We still had Nuke-Spam in SupCom, though the situation was better for this I agree. But really this is a delay - a few hundred extra Fabricators aren't that difficult to churn out.

Because otherwise people would spam those to secure an entire continent or planet, and the static anti-nuke would become redundant.
Also the Anti-Nuke's cost is balanced with that of the Nukes.

Static AA doesn't become redundant with mobile AA.

So I don't agree, and you have also seem to have assumed that a mobile anti-nuke would be just like the static version.

Mobile AA is currently not as effective as Flak.
Unless a Mobile Anti Nuke were less effective than a Static Anti Nuke, then I still think the latter would be redundant if the former were cheap enough to be made in large enough numbers to avoid microing of armies.

You do raise an interesting idea - that Mobile Anti-Nukes be ineffective and a Nuke's damage only be partially prevented.

Perhaps if 'Anti Nuke' Vehicles had a cumulative effect? I.e. en masse they could fire lasers or redirect the nuke or something, with better returns the more you had.

Precisely, a way of making nukes more fun as well as making them less 'missile command' like.

Bring nukes into the game instead of a support power, with support power counter building.

I am agreeing with the both of you on this! That sounds like an interesting idea.

lol no we didn't.

see ref : https://forums.uberent.com/threads/...-and-orbital-gameplay-both.58364/#post-905823