Isn't really a ram a structure, so shouldn't catapults treat rams as such and have an advantage vs. ??

True, but this may make cats even stronger, and I thought this was a problem in that rams were largely useless (though their health and speed has been increased, so perhaps not as much now)?

shouldn't there also be trebuchets
......
.......
what? its seems a good idea to me....

It isn't an advantage. I think rams should be treated the same way as cats. If they are like buildings they would have a max damage of 250 for melee.

Didn't rams have wheels and stuff? They were at least moved close to the wall or door. Catapults were also somewhat mobile, at least easier to move and re-aim than a huge trebuchet.

IMO, the catapult should be more useful against troops and less against buildings. A ram should deal more damage than a catapult against buildings, but you need to get close, and no use against troops. Trebuchets should be the most effective against buildings, but pretty much immobile.

k, trebuchets were in medieval time the most powerful and surprisingly the most accurate siege machine, until cannons at least, but had to be constructed at the siege. So if they were to be implemented in the game they'd have to take a turn to be unpacked or built and a turn to be packed, the movement doesn't have to be cut, and who suggested trebuchets anyway.....oh, it was me.
As for rams vs. cats, cats would never be able to hit a ram in a million years, a cat is a heavy machine which takes five minuets to reload at least, and at least ten to adjust, wile the ram would be moving and the cat would not be able to hit, cats are not very good against troop as they would only be able to hit around 4 men a time and if the unit is moving they are even harder to hit, so no, cats should be relatively useless against infantry and no they shouldn't be able to get bonuses against rams as they move.
This is a some what waste of breath.

I think the Romans used catapults to bombard enemy troops before a battle as well they were used as siege engines.

dby
Yes Romans used lots of siege weapons and yes they used it on battlefield.

linkasy
Just load catapult with pile of smaller stone

or fire wood or fire stone or fire ermm....balls

Or pies!!

Arrrrrghhhhhhhh...
and died oversugared by piles of pies from all over the world cumulating in WOL forum, which is in real Forum Of Top Secret Society of Evil Pie Lovers

yeah, but romans are difront from medieval people, who just didn't think like them.

right linkasy, but we are here rather in fantasy setting based on late medieval and in some places, siege weapons was still or again in use

My point is that rams have an auto defense against ranged weapons, whichmake sense. But wouldn't a big rock just crush one?

Also in this war I attacked and pinned a stack of rams. Eventually I killed them, but they in turn killed some of my units. How can a ram kill a knight or an HC? I mean cant you just step out of the way? Here comes this big log on wheels, oh no, what do I do, I guess I'll just try to deflect it. huh?? Rams should inflict 0 damage to troops.

the guys carrying the ram drop it and start killin knights! with pies!

BigAmigo, you are right rams shouldn't have attack against troops, maybe some small att like comanders, lots of ppl should be used to move that machines.

Last Edited : Sunday, 19 December 2004 - 18:32

hmmm...i wouldnt completely agree with that
those that push the rams and stuffs is still an army and they did fight when of course attacked
its just the damage done should be less...so it shouldnt be 0 damage done

but I doubt they are fighters of high quality. If you want to consider the crew as warriors then the weapon is useless without a crew so if you kill a crew that is probably related to militia in both quality and armor then you kill that weapon. Now we are back to ranged being able to wipe them out and a stack of 40 knights should kill hundreds unlike the 7 I'd kill per attack.

Many times I believe the crew was inside these rams and they were self contained, manually powered little tanks with a heavy log on the end of it. SO either they die quick or they inflict no damage to troops, but you cant have it both ways.

Hey... Braveheart (Mel Gibson) was in the front of their ram. Like their ram, the one on the picture here don't have a roof. But I guess the picture is wrong since it gets ranged protection. I doubt that they are inside a tank-like vehicle tho - thats a bit over the top. The description says it's powered by a small team. They could still be skilled and brave warriors - but I dunno.

Skilled and brave warriors are used to fight, crew for that machines are rather unskiled peasants with some seargants