Moving Asteroids to Orbit Planets Using Halleys.....???

Been reading and watching people talk a little bit about moving asteroids to orbit planets...... I saw in the Planetary Vanguard Newsletter Issue 1...... They stated that in production right now, the're looking at making it so that you can move asteroids to orbiting planets using halleys.... After some thought, unless it takes less halleys to move it into orbit, I think there need to be two different devises used to move it into orbit and to smash the asteroid. Why spend all of that time moving the asteroid into orbit when you could just smash it into your enemies planet and destroy him.....

Just been wondering how they might balance this......

Depends on how a system is set up lets say you have 3 planets from which 2 are moveable it may not always wise to just smash a planetoid into another ... this is more true in larger systems when multiple planets are claimed by various players you are sarcificing recources you could have otherwise use to prepare more invasions .. and i am not speaking of resources invested but further generated by the planetoid ... short term it may help you but hurt you heavily long term ... throwing a small planet away is like say throwing 25 metal spots away or 25 times 7 metalgeneration per second equaling 185 metal per second
or 25 times 28(?) equaling 600 metal per second equaling 36.000 per minute make that 10 minutes and its 360.000 metal
How much does a nukelauncher cost plus finished missile that can go interplanetary?

The idea is the moon can now be used as an invasion platform. Put a bunch of nuke launchers and orbital launchers on it to invade a planet. That's the theory.

We'll see how the end up balancing is to give us incentive to not smash the planet.

Part of the incentive is you can now invade multiple planets with that one moon rather than invade only one.

And since invading a planet will be cheaper with the Unit Cannon than by the other means, that's pretty decent incentive.

Double post

It's my understanding that certain planets may not be destroyed entirely with one asteroid. So with your rock not suited to destroy your enemies entire base, and as tbsc mentioned you may be in need of said resources, changing the orbit of small rocks would be key.

Adding on to what @MrTBSC said, not only are you throwing away the planetoid and all of its metal, but you're are also destroying the mex points that are withing the crater made by the impact. If you're low on metal already and you throw away an entire asteroid away to kill an enemy base on the planet, you've thrown away absolutely all the metal from the asteroid and its target. All this for very little gain assuming you and your opponent on this body had around equal map control.

You're right.

Eventually, large planets will not be completely destroyed by a small asteroid.

PA doesn't currently behave like this, but it will eventually.

Agreed... I see your point. Most of the time I don't actually smash an asteroid because I don't want to lose all of the resources I have built up on it.......

On a side note interested on how they will deal with it.... Just seems like a lot of work to build all of those halleys to just move the thing....

It would be nice if it cost like half as many Hallett to just make it orbit.. And the full amount to smash it....

Just a thought!!!!!

It would be easier to move a planet such that it smashes another one, because you don't have to slow yourself down, also, why should it cost more? Wouldn't it make sense to make it cost less for the smashing, since you get all the benefits of a mobile invasion/nuke platform, AND you get a bunch of resources and probably unit factories too?

Not that I think it should be cheaper to smash, I think the number of halleys should change the time it takes to move the planet, with a minimum quantity required to move the planet at all.

Totally logical. I agree. If additional halleys at the very least (and probably the easiest in-game implementation) afforded faster speed, it'd be a tradeoff and thus a strategic decision to load a small moon with more halleys for better mobility (and possibly catching your opponent less prepared than otherwise) vs using that space for more units/unit-cannons/factories/nukes/anti-nukes/teleporters/etc.

I like the idea as discussed, until implemented and we see how it first works.

Also, to the question of "why not just simply smash it?"
You might want to smash it into another planet at a later time and so you use it as a orbital cannon or nuking platform. Because once you run out of moons to smash it's a whole different ballgame.

Ballgame....

I see what you did there....

As far as I can tell, no one who said "why not just smash it?" ended up being serious...