Catapults Need a Re-Work

I think this is the problem: the catapults too similar to pelters and if i bring doxes mixed with my forces, witch most players do, they are worthless, since they waste that damage killing doxes.

I agree that it should have more range to work as an intermediate between the pelter and the holkins, and with more range for its missile, it would have more time to do it's damage and it could also work as a anti artillery weapon.

Also Holkins can work as a defense when coupled with radar, since hey take out huge chunks of a army at a time.

I find pelters to be almost entirely worthless regardless of meta. Maybe if they brought back the original pelter but just adjusted its accuracy way down? Useful against hordes but clumsy against structures?

Catapults I find useful mostly in FFAs where you're liable to end up attacked by a wave of nothing but T2 units. A wave like that will roll over most any sort of defense, except for one that's heavy on catapults. The high damage, high accuracy shots do well against a T2 vehicle attack.

I think we should consider upping the range by 25% - 50% but I don't want them where they were, which was directly competing with the Holkins with only slightly less range than it.

The most infamous AT gun of all time was derived from a flak cannon, so yes, they do.

A catapult can be blocked by a single sniper bot sitting in your base, nothing can stop a holkins round, except for killing the gun itself, if anything, catapults should have longer range.

Why do people continue to focus so much on dox?! They aren´t as powerful as they were before, they´re actually quite balanced right now! (the last update on Holkins made it even more clear! )

Not to mention mass tank invalidates dox anyway.

I'd like to point out, the 2-3 months ago that those posts were made, dox were indeed the primary meta. Regardless, the catapult issue still stands against hordes of ANY unit. No aoe, no retargetting.

Setting aside whether or not the catapult is cheap enough to be pushed into "t1" it's utility for better or worse is beyond "basic" defenses. So for that reason it belongs as a cheap advanced structure.

Having said that I'd argue it deserves some aoe, even if only a little.

Also, and this is a matter for easy debate.
If we keep the short range as it is, then it needs lots more aoe since it's utility is still very cost-inefficient.

Or if we expand the range closer to a holkins, keep the aoe minimal.
Also allow re targetting on the fly once the original target has been killed allows for more catapults to be useful.
This should be given priority though because of the catapults rate of fire.

Make it's range a bit bigger, and instead of AoE, have it fire in volleys, maybe change the model to have 3-6 or so launch 'barrels' make it like a missile pod sorta looking thing, each missile locking onto a different target. that should make it more of an effective defense, as well as adding a bit of 'rule of cool'

I'd have to say........... no?
Not that I'm against the idea, I think that it needs more details before I'm willing to accept it at face value is all. So please don't misunderstand.

Mostly because it'd be way too cost efficient then. But upping construction cost could fix that? I dunno.

The only other factor I think worth mentioning is how easy it'd be to program that ingame.
I'd like someone familiar with programming code to answer that issue please?

Having said that, if your intention was to have them fire in a spread pattern rather than just one target,
We could accomplish that through area command.

Also if you allow for re-targetting on the fly... Then I can accept your thinking as a curious idea worthy of playtesting.
I could be wrong, but I'd think this last point is much easier to code in.
If that's true, then increasing catapult rate of fire is the obvious solution then.

Otherwise..... Revolver artillery?

I remember them ye back in the day..........

Oh, yeah, I'd expect it to become more expensive, if it could fire multiple missiles at once, then it'd certainly become the advanced defence structure to deal with advanced armies, and so it's cost would be able to reflect that, i'm under the impression that having the missiles find a new target upon death of their initial one can be done more easily, i know that things like boats with multiple guns etc can't really aim at multiple targets at once etc. (although i'd like to look into the practicality of a structure being built, where each barrel is actually a smaller 'unit' in and of itself, which targets for itself.)

Tactical missiles firing in salvos was how it worked in supcom2, and was a significant difference between them and artillery if I remember correctly.

But they were also limited to firing from expensive nuke launchers or short range from factories unless you were the Aeon. There was something very satisfying about seeing the missile swarms on the strategic zoom.

And mobile tactical missiles, UEF cruisers.

Ah of course, I was only thinking about them as static defences. But the mobile and navel ones did work the same way and in turn were intercepted by static and mobile Tactical Missile Defence. Does PA have anything that offers that kind of missile defence, I don't think I've noticed if there is any.

Bot snipers can shoot down TMLs, but then again TMLs are much less common.

I think they are completely fair. with unit cannons they can do some really nasty damage if you push with them

Perhaps another solution would be a more advanced homing system?

If the catapult sees dox and infernos mixed in, instead of targeting the dox it will aim for heavier units by default. This would not make the high alpha damage go to waste by swarms of weak units charging first, but it will target the shellers, vanguards, etc. as it's preferred target.

EDIT: as in make it similar to the ground AA changes

Cluster missiles is my balance suggestion; similar damage per missile as a Bumblebee drop, but with a circular distribution. Less overkill, more effective defence