No matter how many times you say the same thing, it doesn't make it right.

Outposts and Colonies are treated the same way by a lot of things, nukes being one of them. Squads leaving a colony were indeed meant to be targeted, but only by those allied with the target colony.

The reason that nukes only hurt squads in the target 1 tick prior is to give them that hour to ion, otherwise any OP that got attacked more than ETA6 could be matched with a nuke and the attacker would simply have to turn.

This would make crossing water almost impossible, attacking islands impossible, moving long distance impossible... without a relic support of course. This lead for nukes to be only damaging to those in the target 1 tick prior, due to the nature that the squads affected would have that hour to ion.

This is not the case with the situation we encountered, Michael didn't consider this when he implemented the overall system, which was simplified and did not account for every contingency. A rare situation that falls outside the intended bounds of operation occurred, attention given, and now it's being fixed. That's the definition of a bug in the gameplay.

You can call one thing a loophole, and the other an intended game mechanic... but it's a lie. That was never intended, you know it was never intended, and any justification now is merely after the fact. You can't lecture us on what was intended because you're so disconnected from the game.

I appreciate the calm replies... but the fact remains that you are writing willfully deceitful things in this thread. A rare loophole in game mechanics that results in unintended situations is a bug... this is a bug and so was the floating squads thing, and yet you hastily frame me as a cheater in one situation and deny us simple metal/worker compensation in another... despite the situations being exactly the same. A game mechanic was in place that didn't address a specific situation, so we are changing it.

The bias is so thick you could scoop it with a spoon.

yes no bug here. option 2 is best.

so if i get this right, someone screwed up an attack and got hit by their own nuke, i assume either kevin or ferret sence they are two of the ones argueing, and now they are trying to change the rules and get compensated for teh loss blameing it on a bug,

i donno this was always how nukes worked, no bug, and i myself have been hit by allied nuke in the past

andrew, my vote is lock this board and dont change a thing, someones just trying to dump off some embarrassing mistake on you and its not fair.

BUT sence tahts nto an offical option then i vote option 2

if the U.S. launches a nuke and forgets there is a SEAL team in the area, they cant change the laws of phisics to guard their own men, make the game realistic, all units get damaged, friend or foe, ment to be there or not.

@ Andrew

You are indeed being deceitful, saying you know how nukes have worked and should work despite obviously not knowing how they work or how it affects the game. To anyone who plays the game seriously, saying that we simply should have turned because obviously any nuke against a colony that we're sitting shielded on is supposed to make us turn is ludicrous. It boggles my mind that anyone could think that's balanced from a game play perspective. That's why we don't let nukes that match ETA with squads, hurt them. Because any attack ETA6 or more would be made utterly useless.

You are willfully ignoring all that and splitting up this situation with the other one for your own benefit.

@ schicoman

We attacked a colony and it shielded. A nuke was launched while we were sitting on the shield and we happened to conquer it 1 tick before the nuke got there. We could not ion the nuke, but the next tick the nuke still hurt us because a bug classified us as leaving the target. So basically my issue is a nuke hurt us that we couldn't prevent from hurting us, which is a bug in the game mechanics.

Your point about SEAL teams or anything like that makes sense in the real world... but thinking about nukes in the real world has nothing to do with the game nukes. If the game nukes operated like real ones they should also do this:

Destroy structures
Kill a much larger portion of the population
Keep killing population long after the nuke attack due to radation
Kill entire armies whenever they hit one
Kill any armies that match ETA with the nuke
Cause radiation deaths in colonies adjacent to any nuke attacks

Do you not see how that would just make BD a game about throwing nukes without thinking? If there is a situation where a nuke can hurt you when you can't ion it, that's bad game design, and Michael never intended for that situation to occur, hence it's a bug.

still sounds like a mishap kev, or a miscalulation, the question i have is who fired the nuke? if it was one of your guys why not just detonate it? if you were on the attack it couldnt have been your oppositiuon (unless there is a third party like a sub involved), you cant nuke allaince mates

regardless of this info my vote remains on option 2. just seems more competitive,

One thing that bugs me with Option 2 is that you have to launch squads 2 ticks behind a nuke. It would be nice if it was altered so that when a tick turns, nukes move before any squads, do their damage, and then have squads move. That would allow the attacker to launch their squads with an ETA of 1 more than the nuke.

Basically it would work like this: say the current tick is 100. The tick turns to 101. The nuke moves, and hits any units in the tick 100 position in a 1 tick radius. Then, the squads move after the nuke has blown up. So a squad that's 1 tick away from the target when the nuke is 1 tick till arrival will still get hurt, while units 2 ticks away tick 100, or attacking with an ETA of 2 will not get hurt on tick 100. This would be a more realistic way of doing option 2.

Excuse me if this is the way Option 2 is supposed to be or if this has already been suggested.

A 3rd party fired the nuke, so we couldn’t detonate it, and because the colony was shielded we had no idea when we would conquer him.

I know you want to vote for option 2, because you have no idea what it means. Nukes hurting squads with matched ETA means that you can make anyone have to turn around from any attack by just launching a nuke with same ETA at an outpost they are attacking. These would be nukes that they couldn’t ion… that is such bad game design. It shows a basic lack of understanding for Andrew and others.
Crossing oceans without a relic would be impossible, think before you vote people.

With option 2, it will literally be impossible to cross any type of boundary such as an ocean. All an alliance has to do is take the op the alliance is moving to and then have a 3rd party launch a nuke to it. Or if the alliance is attacking an op across the boundary have a 3rd party just nuke it. The alliance cannot ion so will have to either turn back or eat the nuke. Those voting option 2 are not thinking about how this will change game mechanics but only about making the game more "realistic". Have to realize this is a a game and not real life. Many things in this game are not "realistic" and this is done for game mechanic sake and to make this a game worth playing.

Voted option 1 obviously.

-Gaurav

Yup, that's what Ive been asking why people want stuff to be "realistic" lol. Its a game, and doesn't have to be if it's bad game design.