Nuclear Artillery Shells

[goduranus]

Guy from poison artillery shell thread. If we couldn't have both, I think poison artillery shells should come first, cuz IRL nuclear artillery is a gimmick thing that people have only experimented with, poison artillery was used on a large scale to great effect. Although admittedly, with nukes currently fired out of shoulder launchers, realism isn't what we're going with here.

Gameplay wise, poison artillery would be cheaper than nuke artillery, like with poison capsules to nuke rockets. But poison wouldn't be that much less effective against artillery targets, seeing how the artillery is most often used on bases that are highly vulnerable to poison capsules.

Agree with the guy above with regards to autofire ammo usage issue.

[Rakshasa]

Nuclear artillery seems like it would be overpowered by far. One of the things that makes the nukes balances is you need to be there on foot and there's a danger you blow yourself up.

What I'd really like to see is some kind of artillery shell that can be used to target biters automatically.

[Koub]

OK for nuclear artillery, but as with nuclear rockets, blast radius should be greater than range

[Jürgen Erhard]

OK for nuclear artillery, but as with nuclear rockets, blast radius should be greater than range

I would love to have radiation in game. Including "no, you cannot just run across a uranium ore patch without taking damage" and "you cannot stockpile thousands and thousands of uranium ore, not in your normal chests anyway". And of course then nuclear artillery, while you'd be safe (if far enough, 32 tiles min distance would surely not suffice), the radiation cloud could/would affect you. And would anger a lot more critters than just the ones from the nest you shot at.

[chris13524]

OK for nuclear artillery, but as with nuclear rockets, blast radius should be greater than range

I would love to have radiation in game. Including "no, you cannot just run across a uranium ore patch without taking damage" and "you cannot stockpile thousands and thousands of uranium ore, not in your normal chests anyway". And of course then nuclear artillery, while you'd be safe (if far enough, 32 tiles min distance would surely not suffice), the radiation cloud could/would affect you. And would anger a lot more critters than just the ones from the nest you shot at.

I disagree that I shouldn't be able to stockpile thousands and thousands of uranium ore. You should be able to do that. But I do agree that it would be a nice little "easter egg" to take damage when standing on uranium ore.

[ManaUser]

Dumping nukes via artillery is cool, but wouldn't laying down Rods of God from space be better?

An alternative rocket payload, that gives you a targeting designator instead of science?

Yep, that exactly how it should work. Load your rocket with up to 10 nukes and get as many targeting designators back. Unlike the artillery targeters, these would be consumable. That way there's no need to separately track "nukes still in orbit".

[Zavian]

I actually think that tracking nukes still in orbit makes much better sense. I don't consider that each nuke having its own individual designator that can't be replaced if lost to be realistic. Consider what happens if you die, and don't recover your corpse, or what would happen in multiplayer, if someone grabs all the nuke designators, and then disconnects. If designators are just something cheap to build, then neither situation is a problem, and everybody can carry them in multiplayer, without having to make sure they put them back into storage before going offline.

[bobucles]

I don't consider that each nuke having its own individual designator that can't be replaced if lost to be realistic

How so? The items could very well be super secret "launch codes" that make the nukes available. Perhaps such security doesn't make sense against biters, but in a PvP environment whoever has the launch codes has the nukes.

No matter how it's set up a server master would definitely want to control who can launch nukes and who can't.

[ManaUser]

I actually think that tracking nukes still in orbit makes much better sense. I don't consider that each nuke having its own individual designator that can't be replaced if lost to be realistic. Consider what happens if you die, and don't recover your corpse.

Ah, I admit I did not consider that. I haven't really got into MP, so I always just reload when I die. I'm still inclined to think this is an acceptable simplification, but I concede that's a significant downside I hadn't thought of.

[Phidi]

I don't think this is such a bad idea. I mean, the artillery itself is useful but you need millions of shells to destroy a late game biter base. And you need even more turrets to kill all those biters running at you.

[bobingabout]

that's like, actual nukes.

Also for those uninformed, Nuclear rockets actually are in the game already.

[Shaftoe]

There is a mod for that, while you wait. I play with it. Its pretty good & reasonably balanced.

https://mods.factorio.com/mods/SirDoomb ... cArtillery

[Oktokolo]

+1 when combined with Option for disabling artillery auto target.
Always thought it to be odd that rockets (not only the nuclear one) have so little range.

OK for nuclear artillery, but as with nuclear rockets, blast radius should be greater than range

That would actually be fuckin' awesome. Clean a track to the middle of biter infested continent, place some conventional turrets and an artillery turret there, load one atomic bomb, run back to home base and use designator to clean up one circle of artillery radius worth of biters with one shot.
That's truly the american way of life! Want this!

Also see Nuclear Artillery.