Combat

Hi.

I'm new to the game so please forgive me if I'm completely wrong here but...

I've been reading a few things, and a recent war report made me think: is combat totally rubbish?

The war I saw showed a collection of units go up against 1000 catapults. The catapults wiped the army without any losses. Basically all the attacking troops stood still while the enemy catapults inched forward and bombarded them, wiping out each unit type one at a time. Even the attacking catapults failed to make a single hit - they all got wiped out instantly.
This makes me think, why bother building any unit type other than a catapult, and whoever has the most catapults has an "I win" button. If so, it really makes the game worthless. Why spend money on coins only to get stomped by a rampaging catapult horde?

One guide says this

Anyone who has played alliance wars knows how important and at times difficult it is to maintain an army, first of all it is still not common knowledge that the only unit worth building are catapults. Nothing else matters at all, trust me, there are no speed advantages, cav cannot reach cats fast enough, inf are not used as blockers, you’re not going to get the first hit with archers, build only catapults

So I'm not the only one who thinks combat is a bit pants. Why can't each army fire simultaneously? At the very least that would give some attrition to a rampaging horde. Why isn't there a little randomness to each attack, so the catapults won't always hit? Why isn't there a minimum range for all combat units (eg so catapults can't kill an infantry unit that's managed to sit on top of it?) Why isn't there a 1 unit can only kill 1 unit rule, so a horde of cannon-fodder can be used defensively?

Any comments, or is the combat system really this pointless?

Much to learn you have young one

Ok firstly, the 1000 catapults that wiped thed collection of units with no losses did so by either:
- Having greater speed than the opponent, thus gaining the first attack (In battles, speed generally defines the winner).

Or

- by upgrading the "shooting skill" tech. This means that the attacker's catapults have a further attack range than the opponents catapults, thus being able to attack them without being counter-attacked.



Secondly. Other units have their advantages against catapults.
Infantry are cheaper to make and out-number catapults 10:1.

Cavalry have fantastic speed and defense, perfect for getting close to catapults with minimal losses.

Archers are faster than catapults, so if you use them right, they will get the all important first attack.



Thirdly. It's true that catapults are the only unit with building for ALLIANCE WARS. But that's only because alliance troops do not benefit from any attribute points, equipment or techs unlike your own troops.



Hope this helped clear up a few things

but, assuming a field 801m long (best for infantry), 10 inf v 1 cat at a speed of 150 for the inf, means the cat has 5 turns to pummel the inf until they get close enough. If each cat can kill 2 inf, I think that means you'd have to have 10 inf for each cat so when the inf finally get close, there'd be 1 man left standing to attack the cats (and you need 6 inf to take out a cat)

However, I do understand you might want a set of cav or archers to act as a target for enemy cats while your cats take the enemy out, but assuming an equally costed force, just buy cats and kill (in order) the enemy cat, cav, archers, inf - without many, if any, losses