1120 replies to this topic

[{IP} Aridor]

more like 30 I think

[Scryer]

Cata Emplacements can definitely be both offensive and defensive in the sense that if your enemy is charging towards you, your cata emplacements might kill a couple of a units before they get to you.

For the whole "should they turn" situation, maybe they could be exactly like buildings? Basically you'd click+drag the cata emplacement to face a certain way like a building. Only they won't turn on their own, so once you set the cata emplacement to face a certain way, it's going to stay facing towards that direction. But I could be thinking wrong here...

[dojob]

They should have incredible range (more than any other siege weapon) and decent damage that's either equal to normal dwarf catas or worse, so that players can choose to play it safe and pound the enemy base from afar for a long time or simply charge in and finish the enemy fairly quickly at the risk of taking more losses. Or, in defensive situations, u could use them for sniping other catas. As far as cost is concerned, they shouldn't be too expensive; about 1200-2000 resources should cover it, and I think they should have long build times.

[Rafv Nin IV]

The cost should be at the lower end of your spectrum--I'd say around 1250 or so. After all, King Dain only costs 2500, and he's a hell of a lot more useful than two immobile catapults. They need the ability to turn slightly, otherwise they can only fire in a line--about 20-30 degrees. Obviously, since they're mounted they should have far more range. I think the build time should be quite quick, say two-thirds that of a mineshaft, so that you don't have to defend them forever if you try to use them offensively.

[dojob]

But you shouldn't be able to just rush in and build one quickly and then murder the enemy base; it should be a siege weapon whose use ought to be thoughtful and somewhat slow, for those heavy siege situations where u can''t just charge in with normal catas.

[Fyro11]

Perhaps a quicker firing rate? Would certainly be a better option than more cata emplacements on the wall.

[*Ranger*]

How about, you have to build a seige works and an upgrade before you can build it? Then it will limit the amount of time it can be built first.

[dojob]

Meh, it shouldn't need limitations, since it's not like it's as strong as mighty catas aside from maybe requiring a siege works. The way I envision them, you'd keep a number of them behind ur walls to take down enemy catas but wouldn't have as much damage or aoe as wall-catas, and then if the enemy turtles u build them up and batter down the enemy wall catas, towers, defenses, etc, and then move in to finish off the enemy with units that do more damage; weak damage would make up for their very high range, enabling a defender to charge out and take the emplacement down before it destroys their defenses.

[Dalf32]

imo it should have greater range than normal catas (by a good bit) and should perhaps be built by a separate unit. if you think about it, all other things that are build outside of other buildings require a builder. instead of a builder however, i suggest taht you purchase an engineer (or something like that) from the siege works who would run out to wherever you wanted it built, then once he finishes building it he becomes the operator of it. that way you are required to have a siege works and it would require a bit more strategy than just rushing your builders out (makes more sense too, i think). i would say the engineer would have no attack abilities and should take about as many hits as a builder (perhaps a few fewer) but should be swift, well for a dwarf

[Devon]

It's basically a tower upgrade that shoots rocks...not a big deal.

You build one for 1500-2000, and it's just a catapult expansion on the fortress. You can put it on a hill overlooking a valley, or in your base, or whatever. Just a stronger tower-type building.

[Annullus The Grey]

how about one of the massive siege engines which had to be constructed in a fixed location, thats what i envision a weapon which is almost only usable for long range siege warfare, a weapon which does tremendous damage with little to no accuracy give it tremendous range tremendous damage but make it inacutate to the extreme theres a pity we cannot simulate the range finding sollutions of reality where you adjust your fire based on fall of shot well you used to back in the times of the battle of jutland or the battle of the somme

[dojob]

Ah, but then you may as well just tech to mighty catas or use normal ones. Too much realism makes for bad gameplay.

An upgrade that replaces the arrow-shooting top part of a their towers with a cata would be the best idea imo, now that I think about it.

[Dalf32]

you mean putting catapults on top of lvl 3 buildings? i dont really see how the two ideas are similar except for the fact taht they both include catapults. perhaps that idea should be considered seperately...

[mike_]

I think he means for the sentry towers? Which I hope is true.

[dojob]

I mean like, the normal dwarf towers could get a 500/1000 resource upgrade that replaces their thrown axes with a catapult, whose advantages would be better range, damage, and splash but perhaps (like with cata addons to forts) the catas on the towers could be taken down and they'd have a big minimum range.

[Devon]

Because then all factions would have it

[Dalf32]

im not getting you dojob.
do you just want an upgrade that replaces the axe towers with catapults? because i dont really think that would work. catapults and axe towers serve two very different purposes and switching one out for the other isnt necessarily an improvement.
or perhaps im getting this all wrong.

[dojob]

...

What I want is for all towers to be able to be individually upgraded into cata towers like individual Guardian battalions can be upgraded with hammers; the upgrade would visually replace the top part of the tower so it can no longer shoot axes or garrison archers, but like with the cata addons for forts, it now has a cata instead that can be destroyed and replaced.

[{IP} Aridor]

I don't really see that being useful.