Page 2 of 2

Posted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 7:34 pm
by Rosti
I like associated ideas, but I'm against allowing warheads to 'change flavour' as it were - part of the straegy of this game is making effective strikes with the three different mediums presented, so allowing you to focus all your (atomic) power on one or two of those (re-loading subs! argh!) seems to defeat the point, even if I tend to have a huge stockpile of silo nukes to kill towards the tail end of DefCon 1 that I'd dearly like to use elsewhere.

Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:36 pm
by wwarnick
Like someone said, the missiles are different. You can't fire a short range missile around the world just because it was launched from a silo. Plus, allowing you to move missiles from airfields to silos would change the game's mechanics. It wouldn't play the same. However, if you play with credits, you can invest more of them in silos than you do airfields and carriers so that you have more ICBMs.

Re: Dumb Idea: Nuke Transfer.

Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 6:04 pm
by Daxx
extremejon wrote:So, have you ever launched all your bombers, and have a bunch of nukes lieing around in your airbases collecting dust? How About some way to move the nukes from your airbase to your Silos?


How? Shipping them by land? That would take days, realtime. You couldn't do it ingame. It's the same reason that there aren't any land units.