Battleships shoot down nukes now
Multiple players on the official forum have confirmed that battleships now shoot down strategic nuclear missiles. This change was introduced, apparently inadvertently, in the v3254 hotfix patch. As you may already know, battleships have tactical missile defense that they use to shoot down incoming tactical missiles. Somehow, something changed in their targeting, and they now target and shoot down strategic nuclear missiles before they hit and create an explosion.
The range of standard strategic missile defense is 75 whereas the battleship’s is 32, so the range is significantly lower, but then again, the battleship’s anti-nuke is free (rather than having to pay per-missile). The battleship is now a much more important part of fleets. Previously battleships were outshined by destroyers, which were simply more efficient at destroying enemy units, but now that battleships also provide strategic missile defense, you may see them being used a bit more. After all, they’re the only thing that can prevent your entire fleet from being nuked (remember that a recent patch took out the ability for anti-nukes to be built on water).
Should this inadvertent ability be preserved, or should it be removed in a later patch? Is strategic missile defense on battleships a good idea? Discuss!
Loading …
June 13th, 2007 at 9:54 am
well id like it to stay BUT if it does i DEMAND the UEF anti tak’s be FIXED so i dont need 6-8 of them to shoot down 2 missiles!!!! or im gonna take my fatboy mod the shit out of it and when i come back its gonna fire nukes!!!! 3 @ a time…. all 4 turrants…. AND im gonna make it cost 1 mass!!! just to give the poor UEF SOME sort of advantage (even then id still bet we would loose 90% of the time anyway!)
June 13th, 2007 at 10:24 am
I do agree that there should be some sort of naval anti-nuke capability (although in my experience nukes aren’t particularly effective against large fleets), but free anti nukes on all battleships seems a little extreme. I would give it to the carriers, perhaps, and make them build their anti nukes.
June 13th, 2007 at 5:10 pm
Considering they took away the ability to build SMD on water, it sounds like a plan.
Though I wish they’d fix the stuff they broke like the ASFs.
June 13th, 2007 at 5:50 pm
I like the idea that carriers can build SMDs (at cost) better. It doesn’t really make sense that battleships get it; it’s more of a support role, while battleships aren’t really support units. Also, you shouldn’t get it for free.
June 13th, 2007 at 7:53 pm
on battle ships should be fine but i think they should have a ‘chance to miss’ so u need a few to take out a nuke for shure…..
also being a tak defence does that mean aeon (or is cyban) battleships that turn the nuke back on them the enermy! that could be VERY nasty
June 13th, 2007 at 7:55 pm
PS forgot to mention that i dont think they should have to PAY for it… be much better if it had a 5min reload time (or only had 1 defence per battleship!
June 13th, 2007 at 8:07 pm
I remember seeing one of my Battleships shooting down an Artillery shot before too.
Anti-nuke on Battleships for free sounds a bit harsh though.
June 14th, 2007 at 12:15 am
I don’t mind them being able to shoot down nukes (and thus voted the ambivalent option), but there should be some cost, whether it’s in the fact that they only have one anti-nuke to shoot or the reload time is really long or you have to build the missiles manually. Anything that balances it out works, really.
Whether or not it makes sense is another story. Battleships are supposed to be on the offensive side of the map, not guarding your base from nuclear assault. Odds they’d probably only shoot down your own nukes as they attack the base you’re trying to nuke, so it’s probably best to get rid of the functionality altogether.
June 14th, 2007 at 11:12 am
I like the carrier idea much better. Battleships are purely offensive weapons.
June 16th, 2007 at 11:49 am
yeah, give it to carriers like in uberhack!
June 18th, 2007 at 2:57 pm
Maybe it should be an upgrade for the battleship, a small anti-nuke launcher. It shouldn’t be as good as the ground-based one though.