Trebuchet vs Catapult

[lazyj]

Ok, I need some ideas from people who are more nerdy more immersed in antiquity than I am.    I got my BG blood pumping again thinking about a Siege expansion, and I still like a lot of my test stuff especially now that leemie came up with so many great ideas. But I feel like I am making too many assumptions and would like 2nd and 3rd opinions.

I am looking for some clarification on Trebuchets and Catapults. From my weak and uninformed research, I am assuming first of all that I should probably call Catapults "Onagers" to be more specific for the class of thing I am thinking about, and leave some space in the game for smaller catapults to end up in factions later on. I am also assuming that Trebuchet technology more or less replaced Onagers, but they were both close enough to each other to be viable in the BG system.

So if we're talking about things that actually were designed to break down fortified walls, I need some comparative analysis. In each of these questions, which of the two was "better" than the other?

Which one had longer range?

Which one did more damage, assuming all other things are equal?

Which one reloaded faster?

Which one was more vulnerable to counter attacks and breakdown?

Were they ever used inside a castle as counter-battery weapons (e.g. Lord of the Rings siege of Gondor)?

How accurate are we talking about? In BG terms, should there even be a to hit roll vs static targets?

[lazyj]

Wow nothing? Hmm... ok. Let's try it this way. I am making these assumptions:

Longer range: Onager, slightly
More damage: Trebuchet
Faster reload: push
More vulnerable:
 - to enemy attack: push
 - to breakdown: Trebuchet, but not enough to represent in game
Counter Engine fire: yes, but much longer reload time representing slower and less ammo
Accuracy:
 - Against static structures: average.
 - Against anything else: very very low.

I'm saying they can shoot roughly twice what the Ballista and Longbow can reach. Is that accurate? I have no idea really. Also on the weird outside chance that they do make contact with a normal unit they are going to crush some fools... but without many dice it shouldn't be an instant kill.

[Jatha]

Ok, I need some ideas from people who are more nerdy more immersed in antiquity than I am.    I got my BG blood pumping again thinking about a Siege expansion, and I still like a lot of my test stuff especially now that leemie came up with so many great ideas. But I feel like I am making too many assumptions and would like 2nd and 3rd opinions.

I am looking for some clarification on Trebuchets and Catapults. From my weak and uninformed research, I am assuming first of all that I should probably call Catapults "Onagers" to be more specific for the class of thing I am thinking about, and leave some space in the game for smaller catapults to end up in factions later on. I am also assuming that Trebuchet technology more or less replaced Onagers, but they were both close enough to each other to be viable in the BG system.

So if we're talking about things that actually were designed to break down fortified walls, I need some comparative analysis. In each of these questions, which of the two was "better" than the other?

Which one had longer range?

Which one did more damage, assuming all other things are equal?

Which one reloaded faster?

Which one was more vulnerable to counter attacks and breakdown?

Were they ever used inside a castle as counter-battery weapons (e.g. Lord of the Rings siege of Gondor)?

How accurate are we talking about? In BG terms, should there even be a to hit roll vs static targets?

I'm no expert, but I have read quite a bit of military history and strategy, so I think I can help you out.

Which one had longer range?
Generally speaking, Trebuchets had longer range.


Which one did more damage, assuming all other things are equal?
Again, Trebuchets


Which one reloaded faster?
Not exactly sure, but I think Onagers win this one. It shouldn't really matter, though, because in Battlegrounds you always have the opportunity to shoot on your turn.


Which one was more vulnerable to counter attacks and breakdown?
As far as vulnerability goes, they were both were quite easy to disable or destroy once you got close enough. I think Trebuchets would be more liable to breakdown though, due to the increased complexity in their construction.


Were they ever used inside a castle as counter-battery weapons (e.g. Lord of the Rings siege of Gondor)?
I think most siege weapons were destroyed in raids by the defenders. However, in rare occasions (when the city or castle was important enough to warrent it) I believe catapults were used by the defense. However, this is a fantasy game, and as such no one will think twice about you giving the defenders the option of having their own catapults.


How accurate are we talking about? In BG terms, should there even be a to hit roll vs static targets?
The crews who manned the Siege weapons usually had to find the range of their targets, but you would probably be fine assuming that they've already done so before the main assault.

Good luck with that siege pack, I hoped this helped.

[lazyj]

Thanks for the feedback!

See I'd thought a Trebuchet had the longer range too but I thought I found something that contradicted that presumption. Of course, I can't find the reference now.

Regarding the accuracy: I'm considering just saying that there's no rolls to hit with Siege weapons, just rolls to damage. But it feels like that moves too far away from the BG method and adds extra lines of rules if you want to try and shoot them at regular units.

My current build has the Trebuchet at (4)6/8, with an additional (0)-2/0 when shooting at anything with an MC greater than 0", and it is unaffected by any command cards. Since walls just have a 0/x defense, that means most of the time you're effectively 4 shots with 4's to hit (assuming Extreme Range).

And if you decide you'd rather take a shot at that group of swordsmen over there, you get four dice... but at skill 0 (6 - 2 for siege penalty - 2 for extreme range - 2 for their evade and no command cards). But if one DOES connect at power 8 it's almost guaranteed to do damage to anything. Just not a lot of damage boxes.

And if you're trying to consider costs into this... don't bother. I have an alternative plan for that!