Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Anti-nuclear missiles can be built much faster than regular nukes, for half the price, and can fire much faster. You'd need to send a cluster of nukes - probably at least six, ideally more - in a single barrage to overcome a prepared nuclear defense. This same price can net you at least several experimental units which can't be defeated with a simple anti-nuclear missile and actually respond to commands.
Nuclear missiles are more of a way to catch someone off-guard if they either don't have the resources for anti-nukes or don't anticipate you using them, such as if they neglect to scout.
Personally, I'd just invest in experimental units - they usually cost less than a single nuclear missile and tend to cause more problems for the enemy.