Nuke and anti-nuke interaction

Currently, the probability of intercepting a nuke by an anti-nuke missile is 100%.
Would it be more fun to add some probabilistic effect and make this something like 90%?
Both teams will cross their fingers when they know a nuke has been fired on a protected area :)
I think some time ago I heard that "real" missile interception systems have a 50% hit ratio.

But doesn't your argument imply that fro example a Bertha should always hit the same spot when aimed there?
Or is it a limitation of the game physics that is is so inaccurate?

Pyrostasis has a point about sightly random physics being cool with things like Bertha.

But even if a 100% intercept rate is unrealistic, the fact is that not having a 100% intercept rate is UNFUN. It would suck to do everything right, expand and eco properly, and be just about ready to close the deal when the other team launches a nuke. No problem, you have an antinuke, built at the expense of offensive units. You're safe. Except that it fails, and the nuke takes out all the singus so carefully guarded, as well as the strider hub with the 90% Paladin and half the eco.

GG.

Well, that was fun.

There is a way to make nuke play less binary without introducing random chance.
I think this still applies, but nuke play on really large or long maps is actually not that binary.
On large maps, nukes will travel towards the target at a shallow angle when fired at a distant target(unless it have been changed and the missile always stays at the same elevation until it reaches the target area).
This means that when the nuke is destroyed by the anti-nuke, the explosion will be pretty close to the ground, and the explosion radius will even overlap with the safe anti-nuke range.

I much prefer ranges that are more "physical" and not as binary.

If we wanted nuke play to be less binary, we could make the anti-nuke a laser weapon with spherical range that requires a certain amount of time to destroy an incoming nuke, for example. The anti-nuke would then start firing at the nuke well before the nuke is in the "safe" radius of the anti-nuke, but it would destroy the nuke before the radius of the explosion area would affect the safe radius of the anti-nuke.
A disadvantage of the system I mentioned is that you could stack anti-nukes in the same place to increase the safe area drastically.

Pyrostasis you can increase nuke hit chance with spy.

When Bertha aims at the other team's Singu I see approximately 4 out of 5 shots miss due to randomness. The game outcome depends on randomness in this scenario. When it misses a lot, the other team might have a chance to react. If not, they will blow up. Now my question is: Is it fun? I believe yes, although you can't control it. What is your opinion? I'm not talking about the nuke anymore.

To reply to Pyrostasis: I agree that the idea of randomness to a certain extent makes games more fun. However, in the case of a nuke maybe not so.

Katastrophe, rand() is part of our daily life.
It is just everwhere and we got used to it.
I didn't grep the source code of ZK for rand but I guess nearly every projectile has some random "salt" in it.
It just makes things interesting, non-boring and more natural.

Lets make glaive factories randomly make a detriment 1% of the time.

Lets some games be instnatly won due some natural disasters suddenly meteors start falling on whatever side of the map now and then. (Actually duke nukem is pretty close ot this).