Balista is too OP

[Uragan008]

I don't know why anyone brought this question, but Balista is soo overpowered. I am tired of fighting with army of more than thousand men and be wrecked by Balista. Also, Balista is totally useless against walls! What a ♥♥♥♥! Isn't supposed to be artilery good agaist walls, and not wrecking soldiers? Also, Balista makes all artillery obsolete, because cannons don't do any damage and are pointless. Please for a love of god, nerf Balista!
#NerfBalista
#BuffCannons

[EnemigoDeLaMafia]

I really dislike ballistas. Their siege damage is almost non existant, they slow the entire army down, and they supposedly trade killing area for accuracy, but when you are going with siege, it's all about the damage. They arch is way too shallow as well. Catapults are better in every regard, in my view.


You really shouldn't be having a trouble. Specially not with cannons. If they brought too many siege engines send the entire army forward. chances are they are not going to be able to withstand it. As soon as you close the distance those ballistas are useless.

You can also go the other way around and gl for a ranged build with 4 to 5 siege engines, good archerd and strong infantry and cavalry. In that case you just sit on the hill and watch them die horribly. My preference was 2 catapults+ 2 trebuchets or eventually 3 bombards+ 2 trebuchets. Just give that a try. See how skitmishing with that plays out.

If they got somewhat bugged and are spamming sieges (we're talking 10 pieces per amy, hire some light cavalry and disable them whist the army marches on loose formation.

Keep the general away. Sometimes they can get lucky shots.

It shouldn't be a problem, really.

[EnemigoDeLaMafia]

Publicado originalmente por Is you is or is you aint my baby:

On a slightly related note, what is better? Using flaming or normal balistae?

Flaming has a greater effect on their morale, at the trade of accuracy and speed* (iirc) but you'll want to use regular shots and use flaming to cause routing once they are wavering.

Publicado originalmente por Bazookah:

How should I use ballista? I tried attacking from High ground and my ballista misses. the enemy ballista from low ground hits me though. that was weird.

also, during siege, if I already broke the wall, I tried bringing ballista but I killed 6 spear men in friendly fire. seems like ballista is useless inside settlements.

so, is the use of ballista in normal battles similar to the use of archers in terms of friendly fire? If I target further enemies which are not in contact with mine would that not hit my units?

is there a way to count friendly fire losses?
Edit: it is actually not that useful even in siege because the damage is very low. Catapults are much better.
sometimes ballista damage on wal is just 1% LOL
also, in difficult terrain, sometimes I cant even damage walls unliss I come close. However, if I come close AI will bring his units and my ballista will die to arrows. so it is better to just use rams, ladders, and siege towers tbh.

I'd recommend going straight for catapults. Ballistas are much inferior.

After lines have met you'll want to target archers or troops routing. If you can march them into a flank with some defender troop, then you can shoot straight into the enemy and not worry too much. Catapults have a much better firing arch altogether. So they perform better if you need to shoot their archers, for example.

[Bazookah]

does anyone like ballista more than archers?

[EnemigoDeLaMafia]

Archers are more versatile and maneuverable as well as not slowing the army down and having better firing archs. I'd take a tier 2 archer any day. Peasant archers vs ballista? Could be situational. If you get those peasants directly behind thr enemy and shoot their backs they can still do some hefty damage, believe it or not. Maneuvering the ballista around is much more complicated, it will slow the entire army on the campaign map, has to be guarded and its more terrain dependant

[Ashur_Arbaces]

Publicado originalmente por Bazookah:

does anyone like ballista more than archers?

They're neat in multiplayer sieges for sniping enemy artillery inside walls and having a cheap anti infantry artillery piece that doesn't missfire into your own troops like a catapult or trebuchet.

[Ashur_Arbaces]

Publicado originalmente por Ctesiphon:

...According to them they already lost the source code...

This gets brought up from time to time but so far no one has been able to provide a source that they actually said this.

[Ctesiphon]

Publicado originalmente por Ashur_Arbaces:

Publicado originalmente por Ctesiphon:

...According to them they already lost the source code...

This gets brought up from time to time but so far no one has been able to provide a source that they actually said this.

We all know CA is bullshitting players because they know MED 2, or its older titles, can still beat their newest titles by a large margin. The post from where I read that also states that he would not even be surprised if CA makes a Med 2 mobile like Rome 1 mobile.

[Inardesco]

Publicado originalmente por Ctesiphon:

Publicado originalmente por Ashur_Arbaces:

This gets brought up from time to time but so far no one has been able to provide a source that they actually said this.

We all know CA is bullshitting players because they know MED 2, or its older titles, can still beat their newest titles by a large margin. The post from where I read that also states that he would not even be surprised if CA makes a Med 2 mobile like Rome 1 mobile.

Except no.

What Medieval 2 had for years was its moddability, which primarily is the campaign map. Atilla, Rome II and Warhammer may not have campaign moddability but do have a lot of other places.

Modders for Atilla, Rome Ii and WH can implement new mechanics, with supporting UI and loads of other stuff that simply cant be done in Medieval 2.

As for mobile version of Rome 1, thats done by Feral Interactive, the same company that handles their mac/linux releases and until tablets get to a point of 2,5ghz cpu or higher, Med 2 isnt gonna happen for them.

Medieval 2 had its glory days, but compared to modern titles, misses a lot of quality of life.

[Chofa]

My principal use for Ballistas are long range rams, use them to break the door in sieges.
Also are good to take a few towers.

[escortford591]

My one issue with all siege engines is the insanly high moral of their crew, they tend to be the last ones fighting when everyone else has brocken 2-3 times already. I got so annoyed by that, that i modded their moral down to 2.

[Chofa]

Publicado originalmente por escortford591:

My one issue with all siege engines is the insanly high moral of their crew, they tend to be the last ones fighting when everyone else has brocken 2-3 times already. I got so annoyed by that, that i modded their moral down to 2.

Totally agree, it makes no sense some guys with knifes can fight that long

[Shadow of the SPQR]

This thread's missing a good dose of brevity.

[I am Goyim]

are people actually complaining about balista's lol?

[Matt]

Ballistas are absolutely terrible, I have never seen them do any serious damage, they are a waste of money 100% of the time. I don't know why you are complaining about such a useless unit lol.

[2GenL]

Publicado originalmente por Uragan008:

Publicado originalmente por Bazookah:

On topic: send some cavalry to kill them.

Have you even try it? The problem with that is that Balista fires too damn fast, so it will destroy your cavalry before they even get there. And even if they got there, they would be absolutely wrecked by the Balista's operators. After all, peasants are the best infantry in the game.

Dont run at them lollll. Run around them