Woa hey, that sounds like a bug.

What sounds like a bug?


OK here's the rest of the information.


Catapults suffer a 90% damage reduction when attacking non-seige units.

In the test game, a stack of 10 catapults attacked a stack of 10 scouts from a safe range. Although catapults are rated to deal 50-60 dmg each (for a total of 500-600 damage), the scouts only suffered 63.5 damage. That's only 10% of the rated damage!

Catapults also suffer this damage penalty when attacking ranged units such as archers, marksmen, ballistae.

Catapults dealt normal damage to other catapults and battering rams.


~~~~~

So here's my big question:

Is it fair that catapults suffer a 90% damage reduction when attacking non-seige units when boulder demons do not suffer any penalties at all? Also take into consideration that boulder demons only cost 150 points in the army selection screen, whereas catapults cost a whopping 400!


What do you all think?


--Green Tea--

I think you've spent a long time testing things

No its true, Boulders are supposed to have that penalty also. Its supposed to be on all siege units. I asked Req how soon it could be fixed and he said very soon. So all you punks who use massed boulders, those days are about to be over.

the good old fashion wars are back yippie celebrate good times come on

Something i havent really figured out yet.. why is a catapults damage decrease? one would think getting struck by a catapult would de deadly.. so why isnt it so?

I almos think that if your dumb enough to get in range of a catapult and not kill it you deserve to get destroyed. Thats my opinion

Buildings can't avoid catapult shot, but footsoldiers can evade big whopping boulders dropping from the sky.

One boulder crushes 2 people at most. An archer shoos a hail of arrows and kills more.

Ok, in reality catapults were used to shoot a lot nastier stuff than massive boulders, like hail, or barbed chains, but let's not go there in here. Wouldn't be balanced ya know.

Egregius has a point, but what if they did max damage to troops withing a certain range (say 3 spaces) to simulate this change in munitions? They would still function in the normal way beyond that, but they would do much more damage when close to units (if not full damage, then maby 50-75%). They would, however, return to regular damage in mele (we don't want to make them a super unit).

What do you think of that?

I like what BloodBaron said, it was more along my lines of thinking, except he hit it dead on.

and yes Eg your right... i wasn't thinking too well today it seems as that should have been obvious

I thought boulders didn't have the penalty only because those are the only demonic unit that has anything close to ranged. It functions as both seige and ranged. but I guess with flying units, the demonic class isn't REALLY supposed to have a ranged troop type...

The idea of doing extra damage at close range with catapults sounds like an interesting idea, they might actually appear in battle games used by people who aren't 1:1

Then again arbs have a similiar range and there are few people who use them (unless they happen to be troop of the day).


Hmm, a mace-cat formation, sounds funny


Kyrion

TO ALL THE WHINERS AND PROFESSIONAL COMPLAINERS…

Shut up! It’s about time you stopped your petty excuses and appeals to Req to change the system.
I will take the risk of sounding like a boot-licker and say that in my opinion Req created an extremely balanced system. Having a unique troop like the Boulder demons or catapults or the Demigods (for that matter), is part of the game and the life of fantasy gaming. It’s not all fair or 1v1 or B&W. This is what makes it fun!

Whoever it was further back that said; that being a good general is all important, had it exactly right! I love to play with massive boulder demon armies and think I’m quite good at it BUT… I have lost several times to medi armies with HCs, Marks and Mace. I lost to other demons and also to several other variants of the races/armies/etc..

Some fantastic players like Lonstorm beat me with better usage of the boulders themselves. Others like Boevoipes maneuvered like hydrofoils on cocaine and decimated my boulder army with Medi armies. That is why they are ranked at the top of the Battle champions list!!!

But these great generals are the exception, while most of the other players have embarked on elaborate pre-battle dances, aimed to insure their relative safety and comfort in the battlefield. As a (real) military veteran, I can tell you that no enemy ever, will negotiate the terms ahead of time with you and the element of surprise, despite your best intelligence, is always great. All this pathetic talk before the game about “Medi Vs Medi only” or “no boulders” or any other such pre-conditions, shames you before the game even started.

If you want to battle, pick the best army you can, an army that can handle different enemies and different tactics. Those top players I mentioned above, will beat you regardless of what silly conditions you chose or what you field. Battles are supposed to be short, violent and great fun. You do NOT ask the other drivers at the Demolition Derby to allow you to hit them back, before the race right?!

So, people like Green Tea which at least had some factual basis for their argument –well done, at least contribute something to everyone’s knowledge, but posts in the spirit of “ boulders are a bug and I’ll ask Req to change it…boohoo…boohoo…” should really really stop.

Thanx for that Rog Ironfist.

I don't like boulder demons, they're really powerful, for what they are, and they seem to be almost unbeatable if you take the wrong sort of army, but it's your fault for taking an army that has virtually no chance...

It is rather annoying for people who are getting a nice ranking up (say, about level 25) have very little chance of fighting a boulder demon force and winning.

If you are good though, you can have a chance (I took 3 HC stacks in a 3000 point game and won against a boulder demon force), but I believe that generals who are equal in ability will result in the BD winning unless the opponent took a decent force to counteract them..

Maybe there is a killer anti-boulder demon strat out there, but until then either avoid playing them or find a way to cope with them...

There are tactics for beating them, the same as there are ways of beating HC-Marks, Mace-Marks, Ultra powerful Demon Lord/Demi-God forces and swarmy armies (40+ stacks).. although the tactics are a lot more specific and, if you haven't faced them before you'll have no serious chance against a professional.


However, if they're troop of the day there is NO WAY that I'll face them


Kyrion

Last Edited : Wednesday, 26 November 2003 - 11:31

Rog, even those great battlers who beat your boulder strat will also tell you that boulder demons are very unbalanced.
You say your good at playing with boulders, well news flash: Its not that hard to be good when you use massed boulders.
Boulders are supposed to have the seige penalty, wether you like it or not, thats how it is. They are a seige unit, thats how its supposed to be.
I know that a boulder strat isn't unbeatable, its just very hard to beat. You need to know ahead of time that your opponent is playing boulders, because to have a good chance at beating them you need a specialized strat. And this strat is going to get its butt kicked if your opponent chooses anything but boulders.
Its unbalanced. Req knows its unbalanced, thats why hes going to fix it. Would Req try to fix something when theres no problem? Get real dude.

And another thing you said. Agreeing on medi vs medi is wrong? Of course theres an element of suprise still there, its not like someones saying 'And you cant use HC, marks, and mace!'. You still have a broad range of choice. And a general is already going to know what race hes about to fight. When Alexander the Great began his conquest, he knew he was about to go fight some damn Persians. So why would a player not know that he was about to fight medieval or demons, so he can prepare in any way they want?

Last Edited : Wednesday, 26 November 2003 - 14:14

let me give light boulders are unbalanced and make this game unfun i mean you go demi 9 times out of 10 i would say you see a all boulders strat
now i think if demi gets range and flying that medi should to but thats just my view on what would balance the medi vrss demi also boulders should go up in cost if we want to keep them at there power now
i mean they seige unit kill as much as marks do i mean that just not right considering how much marks cost and how much boulders also the boulders like i said are to powerful and they can be beat if you know they are coming now rog im not trying to use you but for examplae when silva and J talbain were going to fight medi vrs medi and you jumped in the game with boulders then saying that you don't care what you face it gives the surprise element to the game well you know you had the upper hand because 50% of time or more is going to be medi so then i would like to say in war you know what your enemie has normaly what race and such i mean i could get easy points by waiting for someone to get in the game then jump at them with boulders and get easy points but that unhonorable in my point of view

Wow, I'm torn. I tend to agree with Rog, but good points have been made to the contrary.

First, I completly agree that your army should be able to face any situation and give you a reasonable shot at winning- and that means unit diversity/good tactics. However, I stop short of saying that a player should be able to use their set up to equal effect against both Medi and Demonic battles (I'm talking about when using a Medi set up). When facing another Medi, you must be prepared to handle all troop types (RPSR), however in battle with demonics you only need to (realisticly) worry about the RP...R and the F(flying) because demonic cavalry, to be frank, blows.

They make a good point Rog, you wouldn't employ pikemen (in any quantity) against a cavalry-less nation. If the demonic player wants to use them, my other troops can deal with them well enough. While it doesn't destroy my battle plans, it does make a percentage of my army (essentially) useless. Demonics have the same problem with using their rocks against other demonics, so I don't see any problem in establishing beforehand what race you will play. Though I agree, it shouldn't matter too much.

However, I do have a problem with using massive single unit armies. If you enjoy playing them then ok, but to me it breaks down strategy. You've seen what some of the great players can do with the units they have, while you can just move your mass of boulders and shoot (I speculate). Your units give you diverse power in battle, I'm trying to get to the point where tactics give me that same power: its harder, but in my mind more enjoyable then winning by brute force (but if you enjoy it then go for it, I'm not implying you don't use strategy in your battles). This single 'power unit' apporach is the main reason I dislike HC (in battles).

As I've posted in the unfair thread under bugs (which I'm surprized Rog never posted on), I don't have a big problem with boulders. I don't think they are a perfect unit (in terms of stats and cost) but I don't have a problem with the basic ideology behind a hybred ranged/seige unit. I think, however, more efforts should be made to ballance that role as seige/ranged unit.

The point was made above that cats throwing stones at troops (realisticly) wouldn't do much damage at long range because the troops could dodge the boulders. So, I think a solution like mine above (limmit ranged unit damage, but increase it as ranged decreases {much like archers have it, only with a more dramatic difference}) would work well for both boulders and cats, and it would weaken the use of those 'objectionable' all boulder armies (theoreticly at least, new tactics may compensate). Its a toutchy issue, and one that will have to take the 'new' campaign games into light, but I don't think you can say boulders are a 'perfectly' ballanced unit.

If, however, you want a quick fix I would recommend rasing the cost of boulders slightly (no more then 50pts) from their low cost of 150. They are just a little too powerful in relation to their cost, making masssive single unit armies feasable (which I take issue with). A player shouldn't be able to ride through battle with one powerful unit (with perhaps some filler). At least HC have counter units, but boulders in mass have no one weakness, many factors need to be combined to overcome them, and I think that encourages this one unit complacancy. You wouldn't see a player using all HC survive very long (rightfully), yet boulders can get away with it.

This topic can be closed now. Boulder Demons have been changed, so this isn't an issue anymore.

Thats true. This will undoubtably upset a few people (notably Rog who probably saw this comming after all the posts complaining about the 'problem').

*This post was written while constantly sighing and shaking head in amazement*

Maybe this topic should be closed or moved to chit-chat, but it seems that the main topic remains open. If you think that changing Boulders (giving them more Cat. Like characteristics) will solve anything you are so utterly and completely wrong!!!

I love playing Boulders because they appeal to the artillery man in me. I will learn to use them differently and as always, also employ other troop types. As a side note I will mention that; I never won with Boulders alone and always had another troop finish the enemy (usually the professional complainers) off.

But if any of you think that complaints about unfair advantage or arguments about bugs set within troop capabilities will cease, you are severely wrong. First it was the Demigods, then came the complaints about the HC, then the flying troops. Every time some loser or bad general will find a reason why their game play has been compromised by “The System”. The point I was making earlier was exactly it!!! The system should NOT be perfect. The world is not perfect. A few units with unfair dis/advantage should exist, just as they do in real life. The good players learn to deal with them, be flexible and win under any circumstances.

Now the truth is, that NO, I didn’t see it coming because I thought Req will hold against the whining. Those who pathetically demand “Medi Vs Medi only” or the numerous times I heard “No flying troops” or “You cheat! You use Demigods” or even “I don’t play against ranged units” and then Quit the game. Argghh!!! Boulders were just a symptom.

Personally I would advise everyone to learn to live with what they’ve got and deal with it. Ask any of the top 10 battle’rs or campaigners and they’ll corroborate this. Maybe it’s a question of age, maybe experience, but mostly because (I believe) that the only remarks Req will take on board will be those like Green Tea, who’s comments were factual.