back to the factory spam

someonewhoisnobody · April 6, 2014

krakanu said: ↑

Knub23 said: ↑

Wouldn't the non-assisting idea cause more stalemated games? With the current antinuke, you could still spam antinukes (because the building comes with 1), but you couldn't spam nukes.

So I guess the idea is to change the antinuke. Because otherwise nukelaunchers would be pointless. You would just have to scout them and build an antinukebuilding (which you can assist). Then you stop it from building antinukes, because you can simply react to every new nuke by building a new antinukebuilding with assist. You finally get the exact same situation as now (one player spams nukelaunchers, the other tries to defend and if the player with the nukelaunchers has enough economy, he will win). It will just take ages and ages but the result will be the same.

What I also dislike about non-assisting is the problem of the first nuke. You might take away the problem of late-game nukespams. But you have 2 sideeffects:
1) A losing player can't put all his build power in one last nuke, to maybe snipe the enemy and get a surprise win.
2) The player who builds the first nuke, gets to nuke first (if he doesn't totally screw up his economy). He will always nuke you (if the anti-nuke doesn't come with a built-in missle).
Click to expand...

The scenarios you listed aren't really issues though.

1) You shouldn't be able to do this IMO. If you're losing, you shouldn't be able to dump all of your economy into an emergency nuke. You should have started building it before you started losing. Nuke's are powerful weapons that should be pre-planned, not tossed up on a whim because you suddenly need one. This is what strategy is all about, pre-planning.

2) This is why you pressure your opponent if you catch them going for a nuke. Since you know nukes are unassistable, you know you have a certain amount of time react. You could either wreck his economy, snipe the nuke, or build an anti-nuke. You now have a *gasp* strategic choice to make, in a strategy game no less...

Assistable nukes have even worse scenarios than the ones you listed:

1) You can stockpile energy/metal storage and then use a huge mass of fabbers to nearly insta-build a nuke, giving your enemy no chance to react to a threat he never knew existed. There is no strategy for the opponent because there is no chance for reaction.

2) An enemy who is threatened by a large land force can quickly stop production and use all their fabbers to dump their economy into an emergency defensive nuke. Once the army is gone they can quickly switch back to producing combat units. There is no strategy here because the nuker was not punished for not having the defensive nuke ready ahead of time and the attacker lost because he failed to protect against a threat that didn't even exist moments ago...

If you can instantly react to any threat by swapping your build power around to the appropriate unit/structure, then where is the strategy?
Click to expand...

Fun fact I did the math for this once just before gamma.

If I remember correctly you would need close to 1000 t2 fabbers and an insane amount of metal and energy that would be larger than what could fit onscreen, to get a nuke in one second.

Disclaimer: Approximate numbers

back to the factory spam

should we remove the ability to asist factories and nukes/ antinukes?

yay

nay

only nukes and anti nukes

only nukes

only anti nukes

only factories

someonewhoisnobody Well-Known Member

Share This Page

back to the factory spam

should we remove the ability to asist factories and nukes/ antinukes?

yay

nay

only nukes and anti nukes

only nukes

only anti nukes

only factories

someonewhoisnobody Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches