NO, BEFORE YOU START YOUR CRAP WITH ME, JUST SHUT UP. I KNOW YOU WANT MORE DYNAMIC ANTINUKE FUNCTION. DON'T EVEN COMPLICATE THIS SIMPLE REQUEST WITH THAT. Currently, in average games, nukes aren't used. They cost way too much. Simple request: Reduce cost of nuke launcher by 4k, antinuke launcher by 3k, nukes by 15k, and antinukes by 2k. This way, nukes and antinukes are viable. They will be used, and still counterable. That is all I want. For someone to land a nuke in a large slow 1v1 or a small quick 2v2, and for it to be fair by still making the antinuke even easier to establish while making the antinuke expensive enough to be a huge disadvantage to waste metal on if unneeded. The suggested cost reductions does both I believe.
Ah, hello, I don't post much but I do occasionally read all the more interesting things people post. I know many people will look at my post and unilaterally think "no" so let me put my thinking first so you have some framework to either understand where I'm coming from, or help work out some kind of compromise if you both understand me and still want nukes to be cheaper. My basic reasoning is that PA is about scale, and I want to reserve some things for the later game over many planets. If you can get advanced technology, advanced structures, orbital, and build everything possible from just 1-2 planets then there's no feeling of adventure or obligation or reward for taking 3-4 planets or more. I'd very much like at least some things to only be viable once you have got 2-3 planets, that way there are goals and purpose to multi planet system, other than pointlessly increasing the scale so everyone plays the same game for 6 hours when everything new or interesting has already been achieved at hour 2 and since then is just endlessly attacking and defending in attrition. So I'll chip in here and say honestly I think that maybe nukes should be more expensive. I understand that they aren't used much, but since a single nuke can be fired within the same planet, and multiple planets we should create a second nuke, maybe repurpose the catapult to be something like that, and then have nuke launcher interplanetary only. Alternatively, make it cheaper but have it in the orbital layer instead of land.
At their current price or higher, they need more area of explosion then. Of course also the antinuke range, but still. A nuke doesn't even land 50k metal worth of damage. It never did, units are always better. But it has never landed this less.
Interesting point, I hadn't considered that end of things. Should that be our goal then? Increase damage output of nukes, and of course increase range of anti nukes? It sounds a little skewed though, but maybe because of the planet generator we're used to playing small maps and not big ones... I wonder if that's something to factor into calculating range: Not just the range of planet size, but also the frequency of use? Or simply increase anti nuke range based on increased nuke effectiveness?
