Catapults

DeletedUser

Guest
I don't mind less farms space cost per catapult. I'm not a heavy cat user but I do like to have them in my land nukes.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I'm new overehere, for me it's anyway lit bit wierd that you can destroy only walls with catapults, makes no sense. Maybe this is the special thing about this game that u can't destroy your opponent city : ) I was disappointed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
I just had a thought coming from the FS discussion.

I would like to see catapults in maybe a defensive role against naval attacks.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
This is a little crazy .....................

The pop is not the issue with catapults. Right now there is nothing wrong with catapults. Im a huge catapult fan already and stone hail only made it worse for players. You can destory a city from 16k to 8 k in one way if have 2 players attack and all cities have stone hail.

People yelling about pop is wrong...... In the newer worlds with the bigger pop i run 75 LS 90-115 fast trans 20 cats and 1000-1300 attack troops. Older worlds i would rock 40-50 LS 75-90 fast trans 10-15 cats and 900-1100 att troops.

Now please tell me why it would need to be lowered?

Only improvement i can see is letting it have more of a defensive bonus added.

PLEASE DO NOT LOWER THE POP!!!!!!

It would just allow more turtles to use more pop for def troops and added more to there hybrid attack troops now that they can use cats.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Catapults are the real deal, I love them, so the less pop means more free space for other units, totally agree.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
This will have the opposite effect intended: it will make catapults a smaller proportion of the troops people build.

The issue with catapults isn't the cost in resources or population, or their speed; it's that larger numbers don't produce any greater results. I'm a huge user of catapults, I've got them in almost all my land attack nukes. But never more than 20, because they're not effective in larger numbers. (And in conquest worlds I only use them to take down walls for farming so have hardly any at all. Because if I'm conquering I'd rather climb a fully built wall on a ramp of corpses than try to defend a pile of rubble for the next 24 hours.)

So what will I do if catapults cost 10 pop instead of 15? Easy: I'll take the same 20 catapults but I'll have 1400 slingers instead of 1300 (that's slingers notice, not horsemen, because where else am I going to spend all that stone I accumulate?). Which means I'll have proportionately LESS catapults than I do now, not more.

If you want more catapults, try this: catapults attack the wall BEFORE troop combat instead of after. Because when people used catapults, they didn't launch them into the attack with the assault troops and then take potshots at the wall if any of them survived. They stood back and tried to knock holes in the wall, THEN they sent in the troops.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
I think reducing the population required for building catapults is a great innovation. I would also like that you consider increasing their speed as well.
 

DeletedUser40416

Guest
I agree too, less pop would be a big improvement. I would also like to see a new defensive siege unit, one that could be used to defend against both land an sea attacks.
 

DeletedUser11165

Guest
I use cats too, reducing the population will do exactly as others have posted; will still use same cats just a larger escort which will slightly increase effectiveness.

A better addition would that they travel as fast over land as the troops they are accompanied by. So if you send 40 Cats & 2000 sling over land they travel as fast as the slings.

My bugbear has always been trying to time my cats in first before other land clearing, I don't know if code wise its possible but I would like to see the introduction of cats reduce the randomiser on that attack to +/- 6 or 8 seconds instead of 12 & keep the pop the same. This way cats would have a higher chance of being in first on heavily stacked city's reducing the wall a little bit before other nukes land.
 

DeletedUser345

Guest
avolp said:
I haven't really used cats much because 1.) they're really slow on land, 2.) they take a ton of pop that's not proportional to their usefulness, and 3.) they don't really do much to a wall if the city is stacked. In fact they don't really do anything. The point of a catapult is solely to demolish walls so that foot troops can move in. Technically, they would have longer range than any archers so stacking shouldn't be as much of a factor in wall demolition. Although the idea to make them hurt buildings too might be worth looking into.
If any implementations are made, there might need to be multiple tries before the numbers work themselves out
Click to expand...

I disagree and I don't think you've looked at the stats, using catapults actually saves losses and makes your attacks more effective while also having the added bonus of knocking down their wall. If you wish to understand further then check out the catapult section of my guide

Bangbros said:
This is a little crazy .....................

The pop is not the issue with catapults. Right now there is nothing wrong with catapults. Im a huge catapult fan already and stone hail only made it worse for players. You can destory a city from 16k to 8 k in one way if have 2 players attack and all cities have stone hail.

People yelling about pop is wrong...... In the newer worlds with the bigger pop i run 75 LS 90-115 fast trans 20 cats and 1000-1300 attack troops. Older worlds i would rock 40-50 LS 75-90 fast trans 10-15 cats and 900-1100 att troops.

Now please tell me why it would need to be lowered?

Only improvement i can see is letting it have more of a defensive bonus added.

PLEASE DO NOT LOWER THE POP!!!!!!

It would just allow more turtles to use more pop for def troops and added more to there hybrid attack troops now that they can use cats.
Click to expand...

To you and all the others who posted that they use cats and think that lowering the population will be bad, how so? It only means you can invest more population into other units in your nuke and that is only a good thing. I also fail to see how it would help turtles since the catapult in an offensive unit and should not be in defensive cities.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
I don't think lowering the population is a bad thing - quite the opposite - but I think it will have the opposite effect to that intended. It will mean people build more of other things, not more cats.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Well I don't care for cat's there slow and when your taking a city who wants to rebuild the walls? That's whey I don't build them I need to get the new city up and running asap. Not rebuild the walls. So I still won't be using them. Thx
 

DeletedUser

Guest
packin said:
Well I don't care for cat's there slow and when your taking a city who wants to rebuild the walls? That's whey I don't build them I need to get the new city up and running asap. Not rebuild the walls. So I still won't be using them. Thx
Click to expand...

In revolt world, later in the game (where every city around will have Wall 15 and above, often with a Tower) - you will understand why you want kill a wall of city you'd like to conquer. :)
 

DeletedUser

Guest
-Achilles- said:
I disagree and I don't think you've looked at the stats, using catapults actually saves losses and makes your attacks more effective while also having the added bonus of knocking down their wall. If you wish to understand further then check out the catapult section of my guide



To you and all the others who posted that they use cats and think that lowering the population will be bad, how so? It only means you can invest more population into other units in your nuke and that is only a good thing. I also fail to see how it would help turtles since the catapult in an offensive unit and should not be in defensive cities.
Click to expand...


To answer your questions...... Turtles dont really have offensive and defensive cities like other players. There cities are mostly all hybrid of swords, archers, hops, chairots with very little number of actually attack troops. With them lower the pop it will just add numbers to there defense and allowing them to have cats to attack with cats when they do feel froggy. also if they add in a defensive bonus it will still be mainly all defense in these cities.I can see where we would get more attack troops to send in attack but in the end the ration would still be roughly the same by numbers but if they get a defensive bonus it still works in the turtles favors.

To be honest the only improvement i can see is if they were slightly faster over land. catapults are slow big machines and should never be as fast as a troop walking.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
maybe make it so that catapult strength corresponds to the number of catapults because as of now, I can't remember who showed me this, but 16 catapults are more effective against a level 25 wall than 25 catapults are. that shouldn't be the case. More catapults should mean greater damage to the walls.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Well in revolt worlds, I haven`t seen any solid player without cats!
They are used in OFF cities 10-15 of them to lower the wall bit by bit.

It is difficult as it is to save the wall from mass attacks.
If you upgrade the cats any more, I see it already, every single player and every single alliance will concentrate on navy DEF building bir walls like mad, because there will be no point in building troops ,when you lose your wall so easy, you ll be sending them to be slaughter and you ll be feeding the enemy with easy BPs.

I really do not get why to change cats at all!!!
Please rethink about this idea!
 

DeletedUser30636

Guest
cats should be able to kill units also, perhaps it could be as iff the attackers cats shoot over the wall and kill population and units
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top