What if you start the game with a nuke on your commander? Would you use it early in the game to destroy the enemies infrastructure or would you save it until you can use it against a juicy target? Will you spread out your attacking army or will you bring an anti missile weapon with your army? You could raid the enemy base to take out their anti nukes or bomb them. I think it opens up a lot of early- and midgame choices. Arguably the commander should start with anti-nuke capabilities because otherwise he and his base can just be nuked and then the enemy could move in. However there are alternatives. Say that the commander starts with 1 or several nuclear warheads. These could then be loaded into a truck, an airplane or a missile. This would give players enough time to counter them or intercept them. Once spotted, nuclear transports could be highlighted and a vocal "Nuclear warhead" detected could alert the player. Nukes might have to be armed before blowing up as they otherwise might blow up in your base. They could be manually armed or automatically when they reach their destination. A nuclear transport will not blow up unless it is armed and the nuke could even be picked up by the enemy and sent back at you. In 1v1 this gives players another strong piece that they can chose to use early or wait to use later. In Free For All this would give all players teeth. Playing aggressively might result in mutual destruction. Something that I've always liked in FFA. If everybody have nukes it might promote diplomacy. I guess teamgames are the biggest crux but if balanced correctly it wouldn't be worth wasting 2-5 nukes against just one enemy player at the start of the game. I think that the current nukes are a bit too strong for this idea. An appropriate nuke would have a bit less AoE, do a bit less damage and kill the commander in 2 or 3 hits. If you are interested you could read this old thread:what-if-nukes-werent-superweapons A mod? Maybe I will get to that.