|
Post by Tony on Jun 7, 2006 7:27:59 GMT -5
yeah but a elephant alone is obviously fought with a spearman, as the bottom part of my post said.
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on Jun 7, 2006 8:10:16 GMT -5
yeah but a elephant alone is obviously fought with a spearman, as the bottom part of my post said. Yes, but you said like attacking player will lose almost nothing. However, it seems that against a very small stack losses (measured in a lost production of course) will be about equal for both sides.
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Jun 7, 2006 12:27:21 GMT -5
I dont see how, taking the example i listed above even if you lose 3 catapults which is the absoulte max you will lose if none of them retreat, there is still a considerable diffrence in hammers. Also if you are attacking with 6 catapults there is a good chance of retreat for some of them, 25% each i think. (Elephants are alot stronger then any other unit aswell).
The only time you will lose more hammers is if you attack a strong single units, which is a silly thing to do.
I dont have a battle calculator but try it yourself, so we are left with this... even with the worst rng you will still lose less shields and when the rng is going in your favour you will lose alot less this is my piont, this is why small mini stacks is not solution.
If the rng is totally agianst you youll lose 120 hammer, normal speed game, and they will lose 155. At best youll lose 40-80 hammer, this is alot less.
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Jun 7, 2006 13:02:33 GMT -5
es maybe think again - a elephnt cost 40 shields for me - how that 1/2 more then a cata
a 5 untis stack is worst to do - remember that a cata ll do collaterl damage to unly 6 units anyway - so 7 d be muich more clever then 5
as 5 and 6 is for sure the worst stack to bring consider 2 and 3 unit ministacks - but just consider the example of a elephnt axe approach - it s the best ministack u can do - elephant ll win gainst 1 cata but then ... elphent is healfway dead and axe is injured usuualy they are now easy meet for other catas or elephnts or whatever
another good ministack might be HA longbow on hill defender ll loose 2 catas for sure - but afterwards ... still there u r closest to "OUTSHIELD" him
|
|
|
Post by Necrominousss on Jun 7, 2006 23:22:32 GMT -5
I think I like the idea of catapults having 3 strength and 100% city attack combined with my idea of being able to bombard a city for 2 or 3 tiles away. But 3 strength almost seems slightly too weak. How bout 4 strength 50% city attack bombard from 2 tiles away but can only cause collateral damage to four units. And gotta have HA 50% vs. catapults. That would also be incredibly realistic as well IMO.
The only problem, is that, with early eras catapults seem over-powerful but for Renn. era starts the catapult is perfect. a weaken catapult should also come with a earlier upgrade tech.
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on Jun 8, 2006 0:23:59 GMT -5
Hmm yes but you count 4 catapults vs units that cost less than 2.5 catapults (Elephant+Axe). If you have enough ministacks you can finish catapults that are attacking or just killed your other ministacks. Of course if enemy has 60% advantage you'll lose more units, but that doesn't prove that cats are that good vs ministacks. They're good but not exactly devastating, especially if you move on the last seconds and so your ministacks can support each other on the next turn (say, you cover damaged units with non-damaged, retreat with damaged to a safe spots and later uprgrade them to heal etc.).
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Jun 8, 2006 1:09:30 GMT -5
es i dont count 4 catas to elephant axe - usually u ll loose exactly 1 cata and even this 1 might retreat
so u lost 26 and ll kill 63 shields ...
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on Jun 8, 2006 2:50:26 GMT -5
Bleh. Elephant alone kills 1.587 catapults on average (not counting retreats so it's actually smaller than that if catapults are attacking) if you have 2.587 catapults for one elephant (if you have less catapults you'll lose more on average). If you reinforce or kill damaged cats it will be better. I don't see how exactly you got 1 catapult lost.
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Jun 8, 2006 7:28:10 GMT -5
in my experience elephnt loose about 4 of his 8 hp to cata - even if he loose only 3 next cat might kill him and if defender got 1 elephant aswell he ll just kill elpeht for sure after 1. cat won
the trick is too weaken ministack with cata to have then a counterunit (this counterunit is just often another cata
|
|
|
Post by IanDC on Jun 8, 2006 8:51:52 GMT -5
I think I like the idea of catapults having 3 strength and 100% city attack combined with my idea of being able to bombard a city for 2 or 3 tiles away. Bombarding from 2 - 3 tiles away translates to lobbing rocks from London to Birmingham, or Washington to Richmond in terms of scale. I'd go along with a 3 strength 100 % city attack bonus, that's much more like a catapult to my mind.
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Jun 8, 2006 20:12:53 GMT -5
you have to get that pic/animation of the catapult in the game out of your minds. a basic unpromoted EARLY catapult is like the one in the picture in the game a catapult with "first strike" promotion is like a roman "scorpion" (equivilant to launching a javelin in excess of 400 yards) a catapult with promotion up to "collateral dammage" would be more like a trebuchet throwing an oil burning projectile a catapult with both collateral I and II (city damage) is more like a siege engine throwing an oil burning projectile that basically explodes from some gunpowder basically creating "napalm" - the results were DEVASTATING. 198.144.2.125/Siege/OtherSiegeEngines/OtherSiegeEngines.htmyes, for game purposes the pictured catapult looks like it should have been a bit weaker and would probably be easier to play but in reality, catapults and on up the line (seige weapons) were incredible - if an army had them and used them correctly - they had the battle advantage. I like it the way it is, but then again, I like things to be more historically accurate.
|
|
|
Post by Elledge on Jun 8, 2006 20:27:36 GMT -5
I know that I'd rather play a game which is perfectly realistic, instead of balanced and fun!
Just saying.
|
|
|
Post by ironclad on Jun 8, 2006 21:16:29 GMT -5
pillage roads then move your stack in if u cant single/double move to immoblize his cats
|
|
|
Post by lporiginalg on Jun 9, 2006 1:46:14 GMT -5
ya I agree the collatoral damage factor is over-powered. Defence bonus should be takin into account as well as unit strength. There's no reason a stack of horse-archers, for example, which are +50% vs catas should take the same amount of colat damage as a stack of axes.
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Jun 9, 2006 5:36:21 GMT -5
Horse archers only get 50% versus catapults when they are attacking i believe. So the top catapult is resonablly effective agiast the first horse anyway, this is why so much of your army can be catapults as long as you have a decent road network.
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on Jun 9, 2006 7:53:37 GMT -5
Horse archers only get 50% versus catapults when they are attacking i believe. So the top catapult is resonablly effective agiast the first horse anyway, this is why so much of your army can be catapults as long as you have a decent road network. No, it works in defence as well but with a big enough stack and collateral damage you'll still win if you have LOTS of catapults.
|
|
|
Post by churchill1 on Jun 9, 2006 9:34:47 GMT -5
"Horse archer: +50% attack versus catapult" - Civilopedia
And i have found this to be true in my experience.
So there is no way u can use horse archers as a counter for catapults.
I played colasus in a 1v1 once, he had no res and all he could make was catapults. He was just waiting for me to finish him off. so i sent a stack of horses with catapults, foolishly thinking they would counter his catas (which was a similar size to my stack of horses). They absolutely mashed my horses up, i think killing everyone, i just couldnt believe it. but now i see it makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Jun 9, 2006 13:17:04 GMT -5
Horse archers only get 50% versus catapults when they are attacking i believe. So the top catapult is resonablly effective agiast the first horse anyway, this is why so much of your army can be catapults as long as you have a decent road network. No, it works in defence as well but with a big enough stack and collateral damage you'll still win if you have LOTS of catapults. LOL, i think its time for you to stop posting in this thread
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Jun 9, 2006 15:29:52 GMT -5
churchill dude why didnt u go in with single horses?
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on Jun 9, 2006 15:34:23 GMT -5
"Horse archer: +50% attack versus catapult" - Civilopedia And i have found this to be true in my experience. So there is no way u can use horse archers as a counter for catapults. Ops you're right, i just checked it with a WorldBuilder just in case.
|
|