prefer cpu with machines or without machines?

[jay--z]

hi as you guys know my team *SPQR and me are working on new mod for praertorians and i need to know if you guys like cpu with or without machines?
please vote and thanks

[theruler]

Do you mean Siege machines?

[jay--z]

yes, with machines i mean catapultes,battering ram and ballista for cpu
guys vote we need ur answers

[Hans Barca]

Originally Posted by theruler

Do you mean Siege machines?

not the assault towers and ladders from campaign
just the skirmish battle machines

[theruler]

With.
I love to burn them down...


Why not?

[jay--z]

man no you got me wrong.. i mean do you like cpu to play with machines or not

[theruler]

them = enemies' machines.

[Hans Barca]

haha
and do you like to build machines urself?

[jay--z]

Originally Posted by theruler

them = enemies' machines.

i'll try to make it simple,
when you play vs 5 cpu alone vs them.. you do great but all sudden they do machine and kill ur army with 10 sec with catapultas or ballistas while you didnt even have time to do machine,
after my fast explanation you would like to still see machines for cpu or not
and thx

[theruler]

Ok, I see the point.

I usually cope with this behaviour by building archers as soon as my captain is entered in the city.
You should have the time to build 4 archers and 2 spearmen to burn the incoming machines and engage the infantry that carry them (to stop manage the machines) as soon as they approach.

I do Love Catas.
But the superiority feeling that comes by killing half of their army with a well settled hit of my ballista is unmatched.
Ballistas, due to their strategic use are more exposed to cavalry or enemy fire, but assist them with troops and leave at its side auxiliary infantry and you are sure the ballistas will be protected and repaired promptly.

I love Elephants too!

[Devoti]

Oh, ok then, when u recruit a bigg army, would u like to be destroyed with 2 ballists, hehe, cuz believe me, i tried, lol so i think without machines with be much better, well, and i think machines are not fair, u know why?, because when some one wants to attack, and will put all of his troops on 1 point, and so, then machines (Catas Only) will destroy all of his army without losses, so i think that machines are good only for sieges, ok, cya^^

[Kajman]

Originally Posted by theruler

I do Love Catas.

theruler, +1 Respect to YOU from Cohors Praetoria "Iron Scorpions"

CATAS and BALLISTAS are SUPER. They for real Warriors only. For Warriors who dont fear to fight and can think in battle as Commander. For Warriors who can attack and take enemy fortifications.

[jay--z]

good to see that you respect somoene lol ^^
IS i laugh ^^
in real life machines were only used for siege because sometimes a ballista or catapult can kill somes of your own army and we all know that there is no stupid general on earth who will put his army in danger of his own machines

[theruler]

theruler, +1 Respect to YOU from Cohors Praetoria "Iron Scorpions"

Thank you, man! Now I am at +1 respect. Hope to gain more!

Anyway, in Roman period, Ballista was used in battles, to destroy light offensive or defensive structures. It was even reported the usage of portable ballistas during the Second Punic War, called SCORPIONS (now I should be to +2 respect, right Kajman?! ). The first use was, however, in siege, as you said, Jay, but has a little difference from the ones in our game... In real life ballistas, you can adjust elevating arc. And that's the reason why it was effective in sieges... You could have hit men on walls.

And that's the difference.
Let's speak only of the game... let's leave out real life implications.

In game:
Catas are "mainly" for sieges, and works well in skirmish. with a single unit of infantry you can build and command 3 catas in less than 5 minutes.

Ballistas are the definitive weapon in Skirmish, useless in sieges (you could use it to shoot at portals, but, belive me, it is never a good thing). But you have to know how to use them.
For me are still hard to manage. If you forget to give an order, you could say goodbye to 1/4 of your army.
Do not think ballistas are useless... they must stay ahead, and under open fire (may be with two legionary troops in testudo formation to absorb enemy arrows) they are easy to destroy, but if they manage to put a good hit (decreasing by 1/3, 1/4 the incoming enemy's army) and then destroied, they did the work they was built for.
How much did it cost? only few minutes... nothing else.


Pyro Studios put catas and ballistas in skirmish mode for a reason.
And it was a good reason, to me.
No need to remove them.
Anyway it is your mod, do as you wish.

[Kajman]

Originally Posted by theruler

Thank you, man! Now I am at +1 respect. Hope to gain more!

Additional Respect
+1 for katas
+1 for ballistas
+1 for battle rams also
+1 For Good Replay "In game: Catas are "mainly" for sieges, and works well in skirmish. with a single unit of infantry you can build and command 3 catas in less than 5 minutes." I proove it's all really and very simply for this warriors who are able quickly to manage with mouse
+1 from Germanicus Valerius Victrix
+1 from me
+1 from Hasdrubal

[theruler]

Originally Posted by jay--z

there is no stupid general on earth who will put his army in danger of his own machines

there are many, actually.
never heard of any "expendable pawns"?

And no stupids among those generals... only wise (but cruel) men that know well what loss-benefit ratio means.

[jay--z]

no a good general or commander would never even risk to kill any of his own army

[theruler]

points of view...
To me a good commander is the one that makes you win the battle (tactic).
The good general is the one that makes you win the War (strategy).

We all know there is no victory at no cost.

                                                               TheRuler.

[jay--z]

it's ur point of view i respect it even tho still a leader wouldnt risk his machines to kill his own army.. maybe his war have cost but that cost aint to watch his soldiers die of his faults

[Hans Barca]

whenever i build machines, i get ballistas in front in 2 lines, with space in between. archers behind, then catas

ballistas kill advancing enemy, and when the enemy attack, they get drawn into attacking the machines, then archers cover, then ballistas, then my main troops attack. while my machines attack the troops behind the enemy first line (maybe archers, to avoid them attacking my own troops)

i just think of machines as 'useful for expendable diversion'

this way, i don't have to let my troops die of machines

[Hans Barca]

Originally Posted by theruler

points of view...
To me a good commander is the one that makes you win the battle (tactic).
The good general is the one that makes you win the War (strategy).

i don't think a leader that wins a battle with severe costs of his own soldiers because he used his machines is a good leader.
to win a war, u need the troops
if the troops die in a battle cos of some machines that keep killing ur troops, u can't win a war

[theruler]

You got me wrong, or probably I didn't express myself corretctly enough.

If my front line ballista has been engaged by a praetorians troop (or another key enemy troop), I HAVE to command my catas to fire at them... knowing that this will lead to losses for my side... but if we put the mine and enemy's on a Libra... (7 aux infantry Vs 16 praetorians...)

I never talked about deliberately kill my troops due to poor commands management.
I usually pay great attention at what my machines are aiming to.
If it happens to have losses due to my own fire, it was cause I wanted to. What else? Nespresso? err... I mean... Human error, maybe?


cheers.

[Hans Barca]

aha, but its not just the 7 aux infantry
read the rest of the post:
archers behind the ballistas, and other main troops behind them

[Hans Barca]

the other troops would charge - and obviously, i stop the catas from attacking the praetorians, etc

[Hans Barca]

u should have +1 point for humour
the forums are getting too dull and "unused" a bit