Trebuchet vs Catapults

[AlphaShard]

I've seen in many of my multiplayer games that Treb's don't get used much and some seem to really not like them. The only advantage the Cat has over the Trebs seems to be in it's 5 base attack. Whereas the Treb has 100% city attack and double the bombardment damage. I'm just wondering why some would perfer the Cats over Trebs.

 

[DrakenKin]

The job of siege is not only to lower city defenses. Its primary role is to weaken big enemy stacks so you can finish them off with your armies easier.

So the simple answer is that Cats are more versatile, and versatility is often good in this game.

 

[r_rolo1]

Trebs are weaker on hammer basis in all the roles a siege unit can have than catapults , besides attacking cities. Most of the MP battles happen in open ground, so obviously people will prefer the catapults for that job....

 

[Lyoncet]

That's not to say that Cats don't have their place; in single player where you often have huge stacks defending cities, Trebs are quite useful. Still, going full trebs is usually not a good idea even then.

 

[Bibor]

Trebs are weaker on hammer basis in all the roles a siege unit can have than catapults , besides attacking cities. Most of the MP battles happen in open ground, so obviously people will prefer the catapults for that job....

Yes, but there's one more advantage to trebs over catapults - they're (much, much) cheaper to upgrade to cannons. That goes pretty nice together with the "Knight-to-Cuirasser-to-Cavalry" strategy. I'm talking Single Player ofc.

 

[Silu]

Yes, but there's one more advantage to trebs over catapults - they're (much, much) cheaper to upgrade to cannons. That goes pretty nice together with the "Knight-to-Cuirasser-to-Cavalry" strategy. I'm talking Single Player ofc.

That's not an advantage, that's mathematics. The upgrade cost is directly derived from the hammer cost difference of the unit and what it's upgrading into (plus a flat fee of 20g). Because of the flat fee you actually pay more gold per hammer when making "cheap" upgrades like Treb->Cannon

 

[AlphaShard]

Still +100% City Attack and -16 bombard isn't a bad thing for a few more hammers though it is one point less in attack then the Cat. It just impressed me when I took a 20% defense down in one hit. Some maybe a few Trebs with Cats wouldn't be all that bad use of my resources.

 

[CivMcNut]

I play single player and I find that +100% city attack makes trebs pretty useful against cities, and that's where 90% of the fighting happens in this stage of the game. They often have much greater odds of retreating from a siege attack on a city. My big lament with them is that they are easier for a foe to kill if you're trying to transport them alone to your army and they get attacked. A catapult can survive an attack from an axeman, a treb probably won't.

 

[capnvonbaron]

Bombard promoted trebs are wonderful for bringing down city defenses fast, as you know... the faster you can do that, the better, because the enemy often can't reinforce and the faster your offensive can move, the shorter the war and the less WW you will suffer. CRII/III trebs shred stuff inside cities, but aren't very useful otherwise, so a stack of cats is often very good to bring along as a "stack-defense-by-means-of-offense" tool.

There is no 100% correct-all-the-time answer for what to bring, considering things like tech level of your enemy, strength of the enemy and what kind of SoD he is fielding, and the terrain involved... you just have to do what's right for that particular game.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Accuracy cats are more cost-effective for bombardment than accuracy trebs.

Literally their only advantage is vs cities. They are worthwhile only in that context.

In MP they're sitting ducks even moreso than cats, which can at least survive against the likes of ancient era units decently.

 

[capnvonbaron]

Accuracy cats are more cost-effective for bombardment than accuracy trebs.

derrr... sorry meant accuracy. But you have a good point there concerning hammer to bombard ratio that I didn't really consider. I suppose that becomes especially evident on epic and marathon speeds...

 

[Deckhand]

Accuracy cats are more cost-effective for bombardment than accuracy trebs.

Does the extra maintenance $ affect this?

Would you recommend this approach:

• cats (with what? and accuracy) for bombardment and open field counterattack
• trebs (with city raider I, II) for city assault colateral damage

 

[bestsss]

well, for collateral damage the catapults are better. If you dont have ok winning odds w/ trebuchet don't attack with. The most damaged catapult will do better job, esp. if you attack something like CG3/D++ longbow on a hill. Immune to 1st strike units are better for damaging the top defender the catapults are better for collateral damage.

Saved gold on maintenance is not important in a medieval war scenario. Hammers are way more important to arrive w/ good amount of units.

 

[AlphaShard]

I guess it just comes down to Cats being the cheaper and thus quicker to build. I'm going to test to see if a CR Treb works better then a CR Cat.

 

[Willem]

I'm going to test to see if a CR Treb works better then a CR Cat.

If they're attacking a city, of course they will. That's the whole point of having them in the game.

 

[automator]

I play only single. But still, I primarily build cats. They have use when you get a surprise DoW on you. I pop out a few Trebs before declaring war myself, but for a peacetime army, Cats all the way.

 

[vicawoo]

Surprising opinions, considering how much people value city raider catapults over barrage.

In post-classical to medieval warfare, I don't find bombardment to be the limiting factor, but attrition from dead catapults and unlucky units, or wasting time having to heal your withdrawn catapults. As long as they don't have flanking damage, your damaged catapults can be used to bombard. Your second promotion can be put to much better use than accuracy.

 

[Bibor]

My guess is that Trebuchet units represent "advanced city siege engineering", while the Catapult unit represents the "field engineering" units like Onagers, ballistae, catapults, incendiary pigs etc. that were used from ancient times to gunpowder.

Technological advances weren't as simple as in civ... trebuchet system evolved during around a thousand years.

 

[bestsss]

If they're attacking a city, of course they will. That's the whole point of having them in the game.

not even the case... the collateral damage depends on the type of the unit *only*, not health, attacking odds or anything else (unless there is reduction of the collateral damaged, like air type and there are bunkers in the city, or attacking siege units w/ a siege units, machine-guns comes to mind).

Trebuchers might simple better odds (but not necessary), thus actually survive while attacking a city or a fort.

on a side note:

Surprising opinions, considering how much people value city raider catapults over barrage.

It doesn't mean they are right and the barrage promotion, itself, doesn't work so well.

 

[Willem]

not even the case... the collateral damage depends on the type of the unit *only*, not health, attacking odds or anything else (unless there is reduction of the collateral damaged, like air type and there are bunkers in the city, or attacking siege units w/ a siege units, machine-guns comes to mind).

Trebuchers might simple better odds (but not necessary), thus actually survive while attacking a city or a fort.

Collateral damage for both are exactly the same:

<iCollateralDamage>100</iCollateralDamage>
<iCollateralDamageLimit>50</iCollateralDamageLimit>
<iCollateralDamageMaxUnits>6</iCollateralDamageMaxUnits>

but Trebuchet get 100% bonus on city attacks with a base strength that's only 1 less than a Catapult. You do the math.