adding inaccuracy to ranged units.

How often do you think a catapult would hit a solider? yeah a field of them marching you MAY get a few on impact and maybe some from the roll/debris but most people go... Oh shiii and move

Think about it for a second.

One catapult, yeah. Maybe you could doge it, but with that many people on such a field, it'll be hard. Besides, not everyone is as observant in warfare. Some might be busy running, some will be screaming, some will be looking in the air, some will be up front not caring.

Now, when there's 5,000 catapults, I'd say chances are VERY slim of not being hit.

For archers, well, think of the movie "300" or "Hero", both good examples of how archers are put to good use. Of course, not all arrows will strike true, but shoot enough of one thing, and chances are you'll kill some people.

I think a reason why they don't shoot as far, is because well, they just can't. And they do less damage because well, you could get shot in the arm or leg and still live, compared to a catapult.

[GoldenRico]

3Xs cav beat cats yes the lost is great but u win

Not true. Depends on how you build your cav army. You can win and get pretty good amount of prestige

But in reality there would never be more than 1000 catapults on a battlefield... there not easy to make, use, transport + ammo + people ... it doesn't happen..

I can see how this would be good. With archers, in the real world you'd have to take into consideration wind speed and direction, how fast the guy can actually shoot the arrow, and in which direction the targets are moving. All of these would make an archer less accurate at long ranges But catapults are designed as long-range weapons, I would think they would lose power/damage the closer an enemy got, especially if you assume the rocks separate into multiple smaller rocks, with a closer target there'd be a less time for them to spread out and take out more troops. Assuming your cats are at the end of the battlefield, if you shot an enemy about 70 units from you, your rocks/fireballs wouldn't spread out as much. But if you shot into a group of infantry at max range, the projectiles would spread far apart in midair, raining death down on the enemy and then possibly bouncing along the ground at high speeds to take down even more guys.

But in reality there would never be more than 1000 catapults on a battlefield... there not easy to make, use, transport + ammo + people ... it doesn't happen..

Imagine the battlefield that your thinking about in that sentence.

Now multiply by x2,x3, even x10.

Think LOTR but on a bigger scale. This is a medieval real time strategy simulation. Simulations can be as big or as small as they can be, compared to it's real life counterpart.

[Taylor5555]

The only main problem I see with this is the unpredictabilty. People would be unwilling to attack if they don't know whether or not the catapults they have built will get the job done. This will decrease the amount of fighting and while getting a possibility of making the battle field a more exciting place, it would decrease the amount of people willing to use it, therefore losing players and making the rest of the game more waiting and less actual playing. I like this in the fact that it would add realism but I'm not entirely sure it is worth it.

I would have to say i like this idea and agree with all of the previous posts. Another thing that i would like to add would be ,as slightly mentioned, would be if say cavalry got close enough to the cats that tge couldnt be harmed. If you think about it, in real life(although this is total fiction) there would be great difficulty hitting a horses running at full speed, let alone 50 feet in front of the catapult. So i guess what im saying is there needs to be a distance variable that affects the damage if the catapults.

Sorry about all my spelling errors lol.