Toontje
Colonel
Reged: 01/18/04
Posts: 2578
|
A-ICBM suggestion
#133161 - 06/28/06 03:10 AM (84.24.165.226)
|
|
|
I'm not in favour of it, but if it is to be implemented I would prefer to see something like this:
- Every A-ICBM costs 1 bill.
- Every A-ICBM missile has a 5% chance to hit an approaching ICBM.
- After 10 nevyears, A-ICBM have become outdated and need to be replaced. (Or updated every nevyear for 100 mill/upkeep of 300k/nevday. Both scenario's can have benefits and disadvantages for the one purchaging them. If used need to be replaced manually.)
- 1 faction coverage as already proposed.
- Alternatively located at coordinates and faction coverage in a 100x100 or 250x250 zones area, costs would have to be adjusted to 1/10 or 1/5th of previous to reflect reduced useability. Might be a bit too complex.
(edit)
- sequentially launched obviously, max 50 against a single nuke (92% of nukes will be shot down before this). If the first one hits, cheap defence. If the 50th hit, not so cheap.
(/edit)
Ironclad nukes: 250 bill, non-interceptable (if you really, really want to hit, you can, tho multiple regulars would be cheaper as they quite likely exhaust A-ICBM supply). Envision as an infiltrator with a suitcase nuke.
--------------------
Rather to blow up, then.
Edited by Toontje (06/28/06 03:13 AM)
|
CaBhaal
Lieutenant
Reged: 10/11/04
Posts: 599
|
Re: A-ICBM suggestion
[Re: Toontje]
#133166 - 06/28/06 06:21 AM (24.32.87.123)
|
|
|
I thought we had already covered this: No!
If you want to play with nukes and anti-nukes, go try Missile Command. It's been around for ages and I hear it's fun. Meanwhile the rest of us will get back to a Mech game.
CaB
|
KingDiamond
Lieutenant
Reged: 04/12/03
Posts: 689
Loc: Germany
|
Re: A-ICBM suggestion
[Re: CaBhaal]
#133167 - 06/28/06 06:37 AM (128.176.216.116)
|
|
|
amen.
|
Toontje
Colonel
Reged: 01/18/04
Posts: 2578
|
Re: A-ICBM suggestion
[Re: KingDiamond]
#133168 - 06/28/06 07:28 AM (84.24.165.226)
|
|
|
Cab, just trying to make the best of the counternuke system. The current proposed is way to coarse imo.
If I would like to play with a lot of nukes, I'd try to find my Armaggedon disk and other c-64 stuff.
(editIf you only want vehicles and mechs, lvl 7+ is a no-go area.. I will not go there either.(/edit)
--------------------
Rather to blow up, then.
Edited by Toontje (06/28/06 07:30 AM)
|
Cluster
Sergeant
Reged: 11/15/02
Posts: 128
|
Re: A-ICBM suggestion
[Re: Toontje]
#133362 - 07/03/06 09:11 AM (62.117.3.138)
|
|
|
No no. No Anti Missile stuff. Give us nukes at 100 mills that will end this game much more quickly than the slow end by changing the game into turbo warfare
|
cbtgod
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 1813
Loc: IN A BOX UNDER A HOUSE
|
Re: A-ICBM suggestion
[Re: Cluster]
#133386 - 07/03/06 02:54 PM (70.126.173.120)
|
|
|
no way i want to spend 1000s on research and 8yrs from now ill be able to build my own nukes muhahahahahahahaha
--------------------
yes its a toad, if you didnt know that you dont know anything about cbt
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
