… allow them and only them to intercept rockets (though not nuclear rocket, as it would change the end game "nuclear balancing" too much 
Please log in to post a reply.
I think there was a similar idea about a month ago. I would like to see this happen, but, it would devalue rockets a lot. And make then near useless against countries with rocket fighters.
but who builds rocket fighters en masse? regular interceptors are better
Not critically so, as you could only protect one or maybe 2 provices with R. Fighters, given their short range. And only defensively, you can't really protect an advancing army.Vamaw wrote:
I think there was a similar idea about a month ago. I would like to see this happen, but, it would devalue rockets a lot. And make then near useless against countries with rocket fighters.
Also, countries investing in rocket fighters would have less of the rest
Also, you can also send 5 rockets at a time, the R.F. won't destroy them all.
That's why I want to push an idea to make R. Fighters more usefulFUNGUS_TE_FIRST wrote:
but who builds rocket fighters en masse? regular interceptors are better
Would it work if you intercept rockets that are not nuclear with a high price?Vamaw wrote:
I think there was a similar idea about a month ago. I would like to see this happen, but, it would devalue rockets a lot. And make then near useless against countries with rocket fighters.
I don't think so. Nuclear rockets are just too valuable to be intercepted, even if the price of interception is high too.Ryan04px2025 wrote:
Would it work if you intercept rockets that are not nuclear with a high price?
Kind of trueVamaw wrote:
I don't think so. Nuclear rockets are just too valuable to be intercepted, even if the price of interception is too high.Ryan04px2025 wrote:
Would it work if you intercept rockets that are not nuclear with a high price?
Rocket fighters are extremely good early on, its not until late game that they lose their value, and even against high tier interceptors, rocket fighters are proficient, the interceptors just have a longer range.FUNGUS_TE_FIRST wrote:
but who builds rocket fighters en masse? regular interceptors are better
Perhaps they could add anti air missiles for shooting down other missiles in particular, like a runoff of advanced anti air.
yes they may be slightly better against regular interceptors, I was a bit silly with that post, but I still am yet to see a large amount in a game.
I always prioritize them first, given their huge damage and defense right when they are available, but i still keep interceptor research going while, as their range late game makes them arguably better. Late game, rocket fighters are best used defensively, against interceptors and bombers.
I guess that would be smart if your late game has active players, which almost never happens to me, so ill se very few built by allies seeing as the ai isn't going to strategically bomb you, and AI on its own doesn't really build it
I haven't seen anyone building many rocket fighters, in particular due to the level 3 airport requirement (very pricey), the high research requirement (2 level of rockets + the rocket figher itself) and the fact that by day 16 they have only 3/5 of the range of fighter and barely more than half the range of bombers, which means that you need a dense network of airport to use them, you can't use them to escort bombers in long range attack and you can't really follow up your ground attack.
Defensively for dense regions (typically Western Europe) they can make sense, but this is a rare situation indeed.
I think lack of range is the larger reason I don't use them often. The one thing I have used successfully is against naval bombers. But the lack of range means my airport has to be much closer. That makes them easy targets for other players to take out the airport and just kill them off as convoy troops. Big waste, I think of them as that weapon in the tech tree that teases you with possibilities with and then lets you down.
Please log in to post a reply.
