Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Post edit history

Nuke Balance

To display differences between versions, select one or more edits in the list using checkboxes and click "diff selected"
Post edit history
Date Editor Before After
1/28/2015 3:04:39 PMSErank[Er0]Godde before revert after revert
Before After
1 I'm with Anarchid here. A simple nerf is to just increase the cost of the missile and decrease the cost of the launcher. This means that you can't rush a nuke as fast with a big economy and gives more time to scout the launcher when it stockpiles. Sure, in many games the launcher only get 20-30 metal per sec when building so the initial hit would still come at roughly the same time. However, after the initial nuke hits, the other team have longer time to build anti-nukes and every nuke that is stopped by anti-nukes is a considerable bigger loss to the player sending the nukes. 1 I'm with Anarchid here. A simple nerf is to just increase the cost of the missile and decrease the cost of the launcher. This means that you can't rush a nuke as fast with a big economy and gives more time to scout the launcher when it stockpiles. Sure, in many games the launcher only get 20-30 metal per sec when building so the initial hit would still come at roughly the same time. However, after the initial nuke hits, the other team have longer time to build anti-nukes and every nuke that is stopped by anti-nukes is a considerable bigger loss to the player sending the nukes.
2 So if individual nukes could cost something like 5000-7000 while the launcher only costs 5000-7000. 2 Individual nukes could cost something like 5000-7000 while the launcher only costs 5000-7000.
3 \n 3 \n
4 Only potential risk that I see is that newbs might not realize the cost of the missile and start building nukes much earlier with a smaller economy. 4 Only potential risk that I see is that newbs might not realize the cost of the missile and start building nukes much earlier with a smaller economy.
5 It would change the status that nukes has as game-enders in FFA and lategame in large teamgames with lots of eco as continual nuking would be a lot more expensive but I don't really think that it is a problem considering all the other possible game-enders in the game. 5 It would change the status that nukes has as game-enders in FFA and lategame in large teamgames with lots of eco as continual nuking would be a lot more expensive but I don't really think that it is a problem considering all the other possible game-enders in the game.