I'm just trying to get across that if you are thinking: This is how it is in real life, then this is how the game should be EXACTLY. then you need to take a few steps away from the computer, maybe even leave the house and go to a few school dances or something to start off, and do something else. Seriously, this is NOT real life. This is a game, and the name suited the niche that was filled by this particular rocket, for the most part.
>_> I don't think krenzo will ever have to post again. We can simply quote him from random dead threads to get our point across >_>
The nuke can be called a very high explosive missile, simply carrying a warhead just like the HE one, but with a chemical that causes more rapid expansion over a larger area. Problem solved.
There, that solves the naming issue. Now can we get back to balance? Just in case everyone knows, I don't care if the nuke is unbalanced with fast money. I want it balanced in a normal game.
Can't be arsed to read this all, just a simple solution brought up ALOT: Rename Nuke to Tactical Nuke, make the research and weapon description specific about the fact that its a SMALL ASS NUKE.
yeah, it's 1 tsp of plutonium, not 1 TBSP... -_-'' balance them: Make them a smidge more accurate, with slightly lower heat to the person firing it and lower weight to allow full 6 layers of absorb armor on an NF heavy with a nuke as the only weapon.
Naming it tactical doesnt mean its any less powerful than a strategic nuke, at least thats what my sorce has stated. Powerful nuclear tactical weapons come in all shapes and blast sizes, from neutron bombs, to 2-man portable ones. Uses The uses on the battlefield for TNWs would include: Against a large ground force Against a fortified underground bunker Against remote and/or heavily-defended target locations difficult or impossible to reach with conventional weapons Against a carrier battle group or any collection of surface vessels Against a large amphibious invasion force Against a 100+ vehicle supply convoy So in other words, even a small nuke has mass killing power. Advice-replace it with a new weapon altogether.
but then if a tank has composite it can have real weapons as well, allowing it to basically fight with a cannon, and leave the nuke as a parting gift on death, or for ranged combat.
Advice-get over the fact it's called a nuke. Okay, we've heard you loud and clear, nuke blows everyone up and kills everything for the next X years. Point made. Imagination is lacking. ahwell, take out the reduced weight so that it's 23 layers of absorb armor. that way it's not a ton of extra weight for extra weapons, but still have that layer of armor you'll need in case you either hit yourself or can't over heat them in one shot. Sry for the double post.
The point is that if its a high cost, high heat, high weight weapon, it should cause massive damage to the target, so as it is, reduce the cost heat, and probably weight as well, but not so much you could have a be heavy with nuke and a railgun. And double posting is ok when nobody bothers reading them...
Heres something to consider: nuke is only a joke against buildings (turrets excluded). Its blast radius can take out most of a turret farm in one hit. It absolutely rapes infantry as they only have time to think "oh shit, nukes!" (nukes move noticeably slower than other missiles). It can peel through 3+ plates of tank armor with sheer splash damage regardless of the armor type, as well as doing it to multiple tanks at once, and causing massive heat. It does do massive damage, its about using it right. If anything is wrong with the nuke, its that its not an easy weapon to use efficiently. The cycle time, weight (as in restrictions to armor and weapons), and heat makes it hard to use truly effectively in combat. Its not like other weapons where its a matter of wearing down an enemies armor, but rather a heavy support weapon.
the main reason i bought this up was beacuse its FUGLY seeing a missile unrealisticly break the laws of physics, i can understand that artiliary would make it unbalanced but at the same time id rather not see it as a pansy missle. id like it either removed/replaced with a different weapon/make it come from a silo [which takes serveral minutes ect ect bla bla bla
have you ever seen an airplane land? if the flaps on the missile are slightly angled so that the thrust isn't pushing it straight, but rather at an angle, it would keep it moving off the ground, but still going straight. It's not impossible for something to go slow and stay off the ground.
"Weight" "200" //weight in terms of effects on engine and weight restrictions for chassis It weighs 200 for everything needed to mount a nuke payload onto a tank. That means theoretically that 12 nukes weighs that much, including the launching pods they are probably contained in.
J_4mes, do you actually listen when people say we don't care about realism? I don't care if 1 gram of what a nuke is composed of weighs as much as the sun's gravitational pull is, it won't work in a game, so it's not going to fall out of the sky. And NO NUKE SILO, this is not an RTS only game.
