Catapults need a counter!

Discussion in 'Planetary Annihilation General Discussion' started by mattdaman354, March 27, 2014.

  1. KNight

    KNight Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,681
    Likes Received:
    3,268
    The FX might have been for "lightning", but within the Moho engine it was treated just like any other beam weapon like the Rhino or Monkeylord.

    Mike
  2. mattdaman354

    mattdaman354 New Member

    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    3
    Yeah, the fixed arty in PA is very cheap compared to SupCom.
  3. irregularprogramming

    irregularprogramming Member

    Messages:
    99
    Likes Received:
    41
    The catapult is really the worst building in the game.

    If anything it should build missiles and work like the nuclear missile launcher but cheaper. Right now you can just build it and the other player has no option but to relocate his base.

    I'd rather see it just removed from the game completely.
  4. Remy561

    Remy561 Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,016
    Likes Received:
    641
    I also think there should be some anti artillery and anti catapult thingy for turtlers. In supcom we had shields and since shields won't be in the game I guess it will be some kind of anti missle launcher.
  5. mredge73

    mredge73 Active Member

    Messages:
    201
    Likes Received:
    96
    Allow AA to target the missiles but at a high miss rate?

    Kinda like metal marines for the SNES.
    (great game that has a free PC downloadable version)
    MrTBSC likes this.
  6. Alphasite

    Alphasite Active Member

    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    26
    Why no let flak shoot down catapult shots?
  7. igncom1

    igncom1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,961
    Likes Received:
    3,132
    While there is a sense of doubt about the balance of the catapults tracking ability.

    On any decently non-knifefighty kind of map the static artillery is MORE then fair.

    Artillery range in the supcom games were a little more then suspect for the T3 artillery, that for defensive players undid the point of expanding at all.

    T2 artillery in supcom needed the player to expand next to their target to have any effect, much like in PA.


    So to say that we need a anti-missile defence means that you are not tackling the issue in the right way at all.

    Namely, if your opponent is allowed to put up their artillery next to your base, you deserve to get shot at.

    If you play on a small enough map for that artillery to be in rage from their base, then you are both playing on the wrong size of map, but are also likely at a loss to the point of the games scale.
    MrTBSC and websterx01 like this.
  8. carlorizzante

    carlorizzante Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,371
    Likes Received:
    995
    Sounds good. But I would prefer a gatling gun. Just because it's more choreographic.
  9. websterx01

    websterx01 Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,682
    Likes Received:
    1,063
    That is a terrible outlook I think, removing it without trying to fix it first would be a waste and a shame.
    tehtrekd likes this.
  10. Quitch

    Quitch Post Master General

    Messages:
    5,885
    Likes Received:
    6,045
    Is there a bug with how the Holkins handles small planets?

Share This Page