personally I LOVE missles, but I think they are starting to get WAY overused and abused (I even am guilty of this ), what i propose is late-game missle defense systems, these can be mobile as well as immobile, put them in cities where they are most vulnerable and kind of create a "shield" for cities that don't have the money to put it in every city, this will make controlling cities even more important for the strategy. This couldn't be for just anti-missle projects, there could be mobile SAM sites for planes.
Please at least consider this, thank you
-Mizolo
Post a Reply
Please log in to post a reply.
29 Replies
6 May 2016, 19:41
I think it's a good idea. Even an idiot can spam a bunch a rockets and get a few units to conquer a whole country.
Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival. -Winston Churchill Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching. -George S. Patton
6 May 2016, 19:46
Agree ! or just add some upkeep , u can stack like 500 , and just spam them forever
6 May 2016, 20:01
Funske wrote:
Agree ! or just add some upkeep , u can stack like 500 , and just spam them forever
Upkeep isn't necessary, but I think the price should just be increased. I mean 1k steel, 500 rare materials, and 25 manpower isn't enough. Maybe they should at least add on an oil cost.
Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival. -Winston Churchill Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching. -George S. Patton
6 May 2016, 20:06
Good suggestion.
"I came, I saw, I conquered" Written in a report to Rome 47 B.C., after conquering Pharnaces at Zela in Asia Minor in just five days; as quoted in Life of Caesar by Plutarch; reported to have been inscribed on one of the decorated wagons in the Pontic triumph, in Lives of the Twelve Caesars, Julius, by Suetonius. "Alea iacta est" Gaius Julius Caesar.
6 May 2016, 20:26
rockets have so many weakness I dont think this is really needed...
I dont care too much if it fits the Timeline..
but rockets can be nailed in transit, and even when set up ready to fire..
I just flew 2 fighters behind enemy lines, spotted 4 rockets in a convoy, and nailed them...
and just spotted 2 more to the north, so I can scramble some fighters there.. or fire my own rocket..
I like it, but I think that is would just put rockets out of use all together...
each unit needs some checks and balances on each other..
If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists -Friedrich von Haye
7 May 2016, 13:16
oceanhawk wrote:
rockets have so many weakness I dont think this is really needed...
I dont care too much if it fits the Timeline..
but rockets can be nailed in transit, and even when set up ready to fire..
I just flew 2 fighters behind enemy lines, spotted 4 rockets in a convoy, and nailed them...
and just spotted 2 more to the north, so I can scramble some fighters there.. or fire my own rocket..
I like it, but I think that is would just put rockets out of use all together...
each unit needs some checks and balances on each other..
Rockets outrange tacs and interceptors , unless the guy is planning to capture ur terit with rockets convoys , ull have a hard time destroyng them
7 May 2016, 13:30
Funske wrote:
oceanhawk wrote:
rockets have so many weakness I dont think this is really needed...
I dont care too much if it fits the Timeline..
but rockets can be nailed in transit, and even when set up ready to fire..
I just flew 2 fighters behind enemy lines, spotted 4 rockets in a convoy, and nailed them...
and just spotted 2 more to the north, so I can scramble some fighters there.. or fire my own rocket..
I like it, but I think that is would just put rockets out of use all together...
each unit needs some checks and balances on each other..
Rockets outrange tacs and interceptors , unless the guy is planning to capture ur terit with rockets convoys , ull have a hard time destroyng them
yes but rockets cant do much damage to aircraft, once their air borne..
its not that hard to destroy convoys..
If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists -Friedrich von Haye
7 May 2016, 15:47
oceanhawk wrote:
rockets have so many weakness I dont think this is really needed...
I dont care too much if it fits the Timeline..
but rockets can be nailed in transit, and even when set up ready to fire..
I just flew 2 fighters behind enemy lines, spotted 4 rockets in a convoy, and nailed them...
and just spotted 2 more to the north, so I can scramble some fighters there.. or fire my own rocket..
I like it, but I think that is would just put rockets out of use all together...
each unit needs some checks and balances on each other..
That is because you have time to micromanage your game. Think of poor Mr.9-5 with a wife and kids who doesn't have time to sit at a computer for hours to hunt enemy rockets.
What if Mr.9-5 plays Lil' Timmy who stole his mother credit card and is spamming rockets, air bases and IC on the frontlines? Hardly fair.
9 May 2016, 19:03
Mizolo wrote:
personally I LOVE missles, but I think they are starting to get WAY overused and abused (I even am guilty of this ), what i propose is late-game missle defense systems, these can be mobile as well as immobile, put them in cities where they are most vulnerable and kind of create a "shield" for cities that don't have the money to put it in every city, this will make controlling cities even more important for the strategy. This couldn't be for just anti-missle projects, there could be mobile SAM sites for planes.
Please at least consider this, thank you
-Mizolo
Totally agree. It should make all rockets except Nuclear Rockets hit at like 15 or 30 less attack, I was also thinking that Level 5 Fortifications should make Nuclear Rockets hit lower than usual. Kind of like a Nuclear Bunker
Carl Wilson “Dad, how do soldiers killing each other solve the world's problems?” ― Bill Watterson, Calvin and Hobbes: Sunday Pages 1985-1995: An Exhibition Catalogue "Rule 1, on page 1 of the book of war, is: 'Do not march on Moscow'… Rule 2 is: 'Do not go fighting with your land armies in China." Bernard Law Montgomery, British general
9 May 2016, 19:34
Carl Wilson wrote:
Mizolo wrote:
personally I LOVE missles, but I think they are starting to get WAY overused and abused (I even am guilty of this ), what i propose is late-game missle defense systems, these can be mobile as well as immobile, put them in cities where they are most vulnerable and kind of create a "shield" for cities that don't have the money to put it in every city, this will make controlling cities even more important for the strategy. This couldn't be for just anti-missle projects, there could be mobile SAM sites for planes.
Please at least consider this, thank you
-Mizolo
Totally agree. It should make all rockets except Nuclear Rockets hit at like 15 or 30 less attack, I was also thinking that Level 5 Fortifications should make Nuclear Rockets hit lower than usual. Kind of like a Nuclear Bunker
Agreed.
Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival. -Winston Churchill Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching. -George S. Patton
9 May 2016, 19:45
Thanks.
Carl Wilson “Dad, how do soldiers killing each other solve the world's problems?” ― Bill Watterson, Calvin and Hobbes: Sunday Pages 1985-1995: An Exhibition Catalogue "Rule 1, on page 1 of the book of war, is: 'Do not march on Moscow'… Rule 2 is: 'Do not go fighting with your land armies in China." Bernard Law Montgomery, British general
9 May 2016, 19:50
Carl Wilson wrote:
Kind of like a Nuclear Bunker
In WWII forts were more of an above ground affair and not particularly nuke-proof. The same still rings true today. Remember, there is a difference between a fort and bunker and you cannot make a city a bunker.
9 May 2016, 19:56
Well also remember that nobody ever used Nuclear Rockets or Carrier or Subs or Battleships in WWII.
Carl Wilson “Dad, how do soldiers killing each other solve the world's problems?” ― Bill Watterson, Calvin and Hobbes: Sunday Pages 1985-1995: An Exhibition Catalogue "Rule 1, on page 1 of the book of war, is: 'Do not march on Moscow'… Rule 2 is: 'Do not go fighting with your land armies in China." Bernard Law Montgomery, British general
9 May 2016, 20:00
Carl Wilson wrote:
Well also remember that nobody ever used Nuclear Rockets or Carrier or Subs or Battleships in WWII.
It does go to the early 60s or 50s.
Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival. -Winston Churchill Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching. -George S. Patton
9 May 2016, 20:03
Exactly, and it has some fantasy in it.
Carl Wilson “Dad, how do soldiers killing each other solve the world's problems?” ― Bill Watterson, Calvin and Hobbes: Sunday Pages 1985-1995: An Exhibition Catalogue "Rule 1, on page 1 of the book of war, is: 'Do not march on Moscow'… Rule 2 is: 'Do not go fighting with your land armies in China." Bernard Law Montgomery, British general
9 May 2016, 21:01
So-so.
9 May 2016, 21:34
Quasi-duck wrote:
In WWII forts were more of an above ground affair and not particularly nuke-proof. The same still rings true today. Remember, there is a difference between a fort and bunker and you cannot make a city a bunker.
Correct. For example the Japanese forts.
"I came, I saw, I conquered" Written in a report to Rome 47 B.C., after conquering Pharnaces at Zela in Asia Minor in just five days; as quoted in Life of Caesar by Plutarch; reported to have been inscribed on one of the decorated wagons in the Pontic triumph, in Lives of the Twelve Caesars, Julius, by Suetonius. "Alea iacta est" Gaius Julius Caesar.
11 May 2016, 15:13
Quasi-duck wrote:
oceanhawk wrote:
rockets have so many weakness I dont think this is really needed...
I dont care too much if it fits the Timeline..
but rockets can be nailed in transit, and even when set up ready to fire..
I just flew 2 fighters behind enemy lines, spotted 4 rockets in a convoy, and nailed them...
and just spotted 2 more to the north, so I can scramble some fighters there.. or fire my own rocket..
I like it, but I think that is would just put rockets out of use all together...
each unit needs some checks and balances on each other..
That is because you have time to micromanage your game. Think of poor Mr.9-5 with a wife and kids who doesn't have time to sit at a computer for hours to hunt enemy rockets.
What if Mr.9-5 plays Lil' Timmy who stole his mother credit card and is spamming rockets, air bases and IC on the frontlines? Hardly fair.
Gold spamming is a different issue..
Rockets are slow to move...
if you actually gather some intel you will know where they are..
you cant blame players inability to correctly deal with rockets, on the unit
Rockets have so many weaknesses..
I dont have time to be here every minute of every day.. maybe you do..
but even still its easy to deal with rockets..
its another reason not to stack units..
If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists -Friedrich von Haye
If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists -Friedrich von Haye
11 May 2016, 17:29
What I meant by Nuclear Bunker is all your troops could flee into it. I think it would be good for late games when all you have coming at you is Nuclear Missiles.
Carl Wilson “Dad, how do soldiers killing each other solve the world's problems?” ― Bill Watterson, Calvin and Hobbes: Sunday Pages 1985-1995: An Exhibition Catalogue "Rule 1, on page 1 of the book of war, is: 'Do not march on Moscow'… Rule 2 is: 'Do not go fighting with your land armies in China." Bernard Law Montgomery, British general
), what i propose is late-game missle defense systems, these can be mobile as well as immobile, put them in cities where they are most vulnerable and kind of create a "shield" for cities that don't have the money to put it in every city, this will make controlling cities even more important for the strategy. This couldn't be for just anti-missle projects, there could be mobile SAM sites for planes.
