Popular Post Apeman Posted May 19, 2016 Popular Post Share Posted May 19, 2016 After only a few short months of being around the Nuclear Knights have surpassed the greatness only shown by Sparta. We have more nukes. Race you to 400? 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fistandantilus Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 That's no small feat, grats guys! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James II Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 After only a few short months of being around the Nuclear Knights have surpassed the greatness only shown by Sparta. We have more nukes. Race you to 400? I bet we'll have luanched 400 in this war before you get to 400. 1 Quote "Most successful new AA" - Samuel Bates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greatnate Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 I bet we'll have luanched 400 in this war before you get to 400. We'll need 7 or 8 more days, but 333 have left the silos already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgan Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 (edited) First alliance to 300 nukes? I think so. o/ NK Edited May 19, 2016 by Morgan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefontaine Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 Don't worry, I'm trying to get nukes changed to something useful rather than the crap they currently are. Congrats on having the most of the worst weapon in the game? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgan Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 Don't worry, I'm trying to get nukes changed to something useful rather than the crap they currently are. Congrats on having the most of the worst weapon in the game? 0/10 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James II Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 (edited) 0/10 They dish out 11bil in damage and he's calling them the worst weapon in the game. Edited May 19, 2016 by James II Quote "Most successful new AA" - Samuel Bates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefontaine Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 They dish out 11bil in damage and he's calling them the worst weapon in the game. Because they are the least efficient form of damage in the current game 95% of the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keegoz Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 I don't know, missiles are pretty god damn useless Quote [11:52 PM] Prefontaine: But Keegoz is actually bad. [11:52 PM] Prefontaine: He's my favorite bad leader though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Placentica Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 Congrats NK! I'm going to track you down on this leaderboard too! - https://politicsandwar.com/leaderboards/nukcas While not being a weapon you always use in a winning war, nukes a very effective in those losing wars, dishing out a lot of damage when conventional warfare isn't possible. And everyone wins and loses in these games. So it's a very nice insurance policy. Quote Hello! If you don't like this post please go here: https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=usercp&tab=core&area=ignoredusers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur James Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 (edited) nukes competition? why do you think it is more efficient than 3 naval assult or 1.5 missiles attack? I know you can the weapons approx. 3 full days and it is efficient if just stockpile nukes for war. Edited May 19, 2016 by Arthur James Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apeman Posted May 19, 2016 Author Share Posted May 19, 2016 After waiting 600 days you may be on to something finally. I really think everyone is missing the point. As the nuking nation losses infra your attacks do even less damage money wise then they did before. As I continue to nail whole cities and possibly a power plant added your numbers mean nothing. Yes let's all argue about how they suck or could we just stick to proving you all wrong while you deny it. Don't like nukes? Don't use them. To me it is a milestone. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apeman Posted May 19, 2016 Author Share Posted May 19, 2016 Congrats NK! I'm going to track you down on this leaderboard too! - https://politicsandwar.com/leaderboards/nukcas While not being a weapon you always use in a winning war, nukes a very effective in those losing wars, dishing out a lot of damage when conventional warfare isn't possible. And everyone wins and loses in these games. So it's a very nice insurance policy. You're will never catch me. Apeman be crazy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefontaine Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 I don't know, missiles are pretty god damn useless Working on that first, thus the poll I made elsewhere Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Bolivar Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 (edited) I would say the value of nukes depends on the situation. In a roughly equal fight where everyone on both sides is getting smashed and everyone has a low troop count and beige isn't a factor. Sure, nuke away. In a losing fight though when you are zeroed and the enemy is still highly militarised freely attacking at will, nuking is only going to cause greater problems down the track. Saying that, if you don't care and just want to inflict damage, nuke away Edited May 19, 2016 by Charles the Tyrant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fraggle Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 You're will never catch me. Apeman be crazy I was close and will pass you this week. You might take the title back afterwards, but I will be holding onto it for a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatkitteh Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 Inb4 the arms race Quote :sheepy: :sheepy: Greatkitteh was here.- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 Don't worry, I'm trying to get nukes changed to something useful Please don't. The only way to make them "useful" is to make them OP which would turn the game into (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) more or less. Just because a mechanic exists in game does not mean it must be fiddled with. Allow the good people to make their less than optimal decisions - it's part of both RL and gaming. 2 Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8mrgrim8 Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 (edited) That's a lot of upkeep Edited May 19, 2016 by 8mrgrim8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kastor Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 I've always said that if you get nuked, you should lose the city. Which would make nuclear rouges and warfare more costly. Infra is cheap nowadays. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 Now that is what I call loyalty to the gimmick. Keep kayfabe alive NK, keep kayfabe alive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seabasstion Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 First alliance to 300 nukes? I think so. o/ NK 300 is a very big number. sparta has been to 350 though not too long ago https://politicsandwar.com/index.php?id=132&name=Sparta&type=alliance&date=2016-05-02&submit=Go Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefontaine Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 Please don't. The only way to make them "useful" is to make them OP which would turn the game into (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) more or less. Just because a mechanic exists in game does not mean it must be fiddled with. Allow the good people to make their less than optimal decisions - it's part of both RL and gaming. Not true. There aren't effective ways of killing Improvements and no ways of killing land. Making them useful doesn't mean making them kill more infra, just make them able to kill a variety of things Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 Ahhh, land killing is an interesting twist. I don't hate it. 3 Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.