Administrators Popular Post Alex Posted June 9 Administrators Popular Post Share Posted June 9 Basically, the title. Double the cost (money and resources) for missiles and nukes, as well as require at least 1,000 infrastructure in your whole nation to build any new ones. This is a nerf to the nuke/missile turret (or griefing) strategy, while still making it possible (just more expensive - you have to buy at least 1K infra and spend more per missile/nuke) and would have minimal to no impact on regular players. 11 12 49 Quote Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest ItForums Rules | Game Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Scarfalot Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 Ideally don't double the money cost, but otherwise this should be a good adjustment 1 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Exalts Posted June 9 Popular Post Share Posted June 9 You added a project that allows people to buy a second nuke each day, and already then it is very expensive to afford. Now you propose making nukes even more expensive. Nukes and missiles are fine, they don't need to be changed. It will have an impact on regular players, it will make it even more horrible to be on the losing side of a war, and will leave pirates with no good solution to inflict damage once they've been countered. 1 21 4 Quote Wag a pot of coffee in my immediate vicinity and I'm all yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post penpiko Posted June 9 Popular Post Share Posted June 9 Who's out here nuking at less than 1k total infra? Feel like that's a strange requirement. At c40 I'd need a surprisingly high 25 infra per city to allow me to nuke. Not that I'd think locking nukes behind infra would be a good thing, but that seems useless. 1 14 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post JWebb Posted June 9 Popular Post Share Posted June 9 no 10 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeric Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 All I see here is "increase cost" like Pen said the infra requirement is pointless. If you wanted an infra limit you would want to MAYBE put it in the project that you need x amount of infra in EACH city to support nukes. (This is also not a great idea) Hard no from me too 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elesh Norn Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 Infra limit seems good if it goes up a little. Cost doubling is too harsh. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shiho Nishizumi Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 27 minutes ago, penpiko said: Who's out here nuking at less than 1k total infra? Feel like that's a strange requirement. At c40 I'd need a surprisingly high 25 infra per city to allow me to nuke. Not that I'd think locking nukes behind infra would be a good thing, but that seems useless. To my knowledge, there's a grand total of one person doing it. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penpiko Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Shiho Nishizumi said: To my knowledge, there's a grand total of one person doing it. Intriguing, well I'm sure the $10,207.48 per city it would cost to get up to 35 infra in all cities would hurt the war effort. Edited June 9 by penpiko 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kastor Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 (edited) I think the cost should go up. If you have 10 cities that is just 100 infra which is easy to do. nukes/missiles should be tied to infra, agreed, but it should be a formula, to stop letting people abuse it: 500 x cities -750 a person at 25 cities would need 500 in each city to use nukes, minus 3 cities. This seems really fair, if you get hit, you can still somewhat operate. It would take SEVERAL rounds to get this and pretty much end all low infra nuke turrets. Edited June 9 by Kastor 13 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Viselli Posted June 9 Popular Post Share Posted June 9 Kastor told me to upvote this 17 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexiosKomnenos Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 19 minutes ago, Kastor said: It would take SEVERAL rounds to get this and pretty much end all low infra nuke turrets. Why is this a benefit, why should this be a goal? Are low infra nuke turrets a rampant problem in PnW? 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Son of Sparda Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 Double the rss amount and only increase the cash amount by like 0.5x and don't put the 1k infra limit that should balance things out better 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Itachi Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 7 minutes ago, AlexiosKomnenos said: Why is this a benefit, why should this be a goal? Are low infra nuke turrets a rampant problem in PnW? Nations being able to dish out damage with basically no outward risk to themselves sounds bad. 1 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Canbec Posted June 10 Popular Post Share Posted June 10 (edited) Until we see a workable solution to the boring war mechanics that allows the losing side to actually rebuild and meaningfully damage the winning side instead of endlessly being sat on, I don't see why we should nerf the only way a zeroed fighter can still do damage. Edited June 10 by Canbec 19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexiosKomnenos Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 7 minutes ago, Itachi said: Nations being able to dish out damage with basically no outward risk to themselves sounds bad. “Sounds bad” you talk as if it doesn’t currently exist and dealing damage at a low cost would be a detrimental change to PnW, yet it does exist and I see very few communal complaints about this supposed issue of nuke turreting. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KONAN Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 Huh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Fikingdom Posted June 10 Popular Post Share Posted June 10 Alex, I do agree that the game requires some changes ( war mechanics especially) but with all due respect your proposed change doesn’t make sense. Why the losing side in a war would be force to keep building infra to 1000 infra to launch nukes? The cost of fighting a losing war is big enough as is. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kastor Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 54 minutes ago, Canbec said: Until we see a workable solution to the boring war mechanics that allows the losing side to actually rebuild and meaningfully damage the winning side instead of endlessly being sat on, I don't see why we should nerf the only way a zeroed fighter can still do damage. Are you legitimately 0 infra? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ketya Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 Why would we want to make delivering damage more difficult? The war mechanics already bring wars to an immediate conclusion. This makes the game even more boring. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Derkic Sawh Posted June 10 Popular Post Share Posted June 10 (edited) And here we have it again @Alexagain bending to the whims of kastor and TGH. You might as well just force everyone to farm instead of bending over for the few players. Where was this update when people paid to have serene wei nuked for 3 months straight? Edited June 10 by Derkic Sawh 3 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spukey Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 45 minutes ago, Kastor said: Are you legitimately 0 infra? I would assume Canbec would be more affected by the cost increase than the infrastructure requirement. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derkic Sawh Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 2 hours ago, Jeric said: All I see here is "increase cost" like Pen said the infra requirement is pointless. If you wanted an infra limit you would want to MAYBE put it in the project that you need x amount of infra in EACH city to support nukes. (This is also not a great idea) Hard no from me too The tl;dr is because im nuke turreting TGH they are whining enough alex is changing the game. favouritism 1 hour ago, Viselli said: Kastor told me to upvote this Cope 3 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denison Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 Alex wasting time and effort on out of touch suggestions? Typical 5 Quote Janny Larpers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbolini Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 1 hour ago, Derkic Sawh said: The tl;dr is because im nuke turreting TGH they are whining enough alex is changing the game. favouritism Cope based 1 Quote 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.