Asteroid Belts - Cheaper than nukes. - Can collide with the wrong planet. - No defensive counter. - Destroys a huge area. - Fixes late game turtling? Nukes - More expensive than asteroids. - Can be volley-launched. - Countered by anti-nukes. - Destroys a small area. - Doesn't fix late game turtling? Maybe it's just me, but if you removed anti-nukes and made nukes cheaper, you'd basically have the important part of having an asteroid belt, wouldn't you?
Asteroid belts are not yet in. Haleyable planets might be cheaper, but they are also a lot more limited: There is only going to be X shoots on the entire map. You can build infinitely many nukes. The enemy can take your shoots from you. Everyone will know you build one on thier orbital radar. You cannot surprise anyone with a haley, but you can with nukes.
unless they have a TON of anti nukes all over the planet, nukes can fix late game turtling just fine Nuke some area that's not important enough to have anti-nukes covering it but has umbrellas there, send in your fabbers and fighters to make teleporters on the place you just nuked and then rush in your units
It's expensive to do so, like asteroiding expensive to employ a strategy of mass nuclear bombardment. Not impossible by mass T2 economy standards however, T2 economy is ludicrousness.
