| Andy | Thursday, May 9, 2013 - 11:49 am 
As part of the general decline in the cost of war, the next update will take place around May 21st.
The update will have an exception for nuclear weapons that will not become cheaper and their production will slow down a bit.
On the other hand, nuclear defense batteries and nuclear defense missiles will see a larger reduction in their price and production numbers will increase.
This measure is intended to make it a little easier to set up nuclear defense and increase its numbers to make the defense more effective. |
| Scarlet | Friday, May 10, 2013 - 06:15 am
The entire nuclear weapon mechanic is stupidly overpowered... this isn't exactly the fault of the gamemasters... nuclear weapons are stupidly overpowered in general because the entire concept of nuking population into oblivion as a means of warfare is stupid in terms of gameplay (for those that wish to have something resembling a test of skill) and in terms of victory (for those that may want to capture something of value if they win).
The only way of "balancing" it is to keep nuclear weapons so ineffective and easily countered that they aren't worth using. |
| Jacktastic | Friday, May 10, 2013 - 07:18 am
i would agree with super and scarlets comments and a plus one for daniel |
| Arch Angels | Friday, May 10, 2013 - 07:26 am
Why is Nuclear on LU is not available to build on? |
| SuperSoldierRCP | Friday, May 10, 2013 - 08:12 am
The GM wishes to limit nuclear weapons. They made it so nukes could only be made on FB and now this |
| Pink panther | Friday, May 10, 2013 - 09:20 am
Nuclear weapons are real, There here like it or not, The Damage is real, not like a movie, I have only used them for punishment. Perhaps you could increase the time 5 / 10 min on the attack. And allow some war damage in return. The areas nuked should be Un in habitable unless cleaned by a Nuclear clean up team.
Rob |
| Scarlet | Friday, May 10, 2013 - 11:07 am
Nobody said they weren't real. They don't need to be buffed. Super mentioned they weren't effective. My point was once they become effective, they become overpowered; the concept itself is broken enough that the rest of the wargame becomes pointless should these be effective enough to be worth using.
Reducing the cost of nuke defense is the correct route in my opinion. |
| Andy | Friday, May 10, 2013 - 02:29 pm
No need to confuse anybody with wrong info.
we usually eliminate wrong information that leads to nowhere.
Weapons and ammunition are becoming cheaper. prices went down 75% in the past several months.
this is true for all weapons and ammo, including nukes.
We receive many complaints about very effective nuke attacks, causing huge damage and too expensive to defend against.
this change, will not stop anybody from using them but will reduce the cost of nuclear defense, while slightly slowing down the production and the declining cost of these weapons.
Large numbers of dead significantly reduce the war index and nukes are very effective in doing so.
Nuclear weapons used to cost 20B to 40B, they are now at 4-10B. we see people buying them on a space station for 45B+ while there is no need at all to do so.
They can be built on FB and there is no limitation at all as to numbers you can produce, use, sell or buy.
We do see shortages of nuclear defense weapons, on all worlds, all the time, meaning that players try to purchase them to improve their defenses and cannot do so.
Setting up such corporations, on any of the worlds could help, but this does not happen while producing them is very profitable.
Numbers will now increase a bit, like the numbers of some types of ammunition that are in short supply, while their cost will decline even more.
Also, just to be sure it remains clear:
In the past, new players were destroyed for fun while they could not defend themselves and did not know how.
now, they are protected, and war heros, must fight harder wars.
we do understand that it is tougher. Killing sitting ducks is easier, but the destruction of noobies is not on the cards. |
| Tallisibeth na Colliete | Friday, May 10, 2013 - 08:15 pm
And besides, people, nukes are supposed to be overwhelmingly devastating. Mind you, an actual nuke is supposed to nearly bankrupt a country. Thus it is my belief that all strategic weapons should be made more expensive, though I do like the idea of making nuclear defense cheaper. If the nukes themselves are expensive to buy and maintain, then players will be more incline to wage war conventionally.
Which now made me think of something. Why is it that we have Nuclear Submarines, but no Attack Submarines? If the game is to be somewhat realistic, then shouldn't they have ALL aspects of a real navy? It is almost as if the GMs have no respect for submarines. |
| Andy | Friday, May 10, 2013 - 08:33 pm
Yes, we plan to extend the navy but only after navy units become real units.
We will then extend the role of the navy and make it into a much more significant part of the army. |
| Tallisibeth na Colliete | Friday, May 10, 2013 - 09:04 pm
Do we know when that will happen? |
| Pink panther | Friday, May 10, 2013 - 09:30 pm
How about Navy Transport Ships. |
| Jark Valiga | Friday, May 10, 2013 - 09:35 pm
well i invested lots of money in my current navy when the changes are made will my navy be completely obsolete? |
| Andy | Friday, May 10, 2013 - 11:37 pm
nothing will be obsolete.
the weapons will be usable as is in the new units.
it will be possible then, to upgrade these weapons and units as with all other units.
I do not have a date right now. |
| SuperSoldierRCP | Saturday, May 11, 2013 - 05:20 pm
Andy
Can i above ask why my post was deleted?
Its hard for me to state my opinion and give accurate info to players when my posts are removed without warning and im given no info as to why?
Its like punishing someone and saying well just because.
Can i ask what was wrong with my post? |
| SuperSoldierRCP | Saturday, May 11, 2013 - 05:23 pm
i cant wait for navies to be updated!
its been a long time they've been suck at this 120Q issue, i remember when they were beautiful weapons of Mayhem |
