It takes so long to destroy a ram that the Scorpion is unable to attack other units—a significant drawback when compared to the Mangonel.
1 Like
Why would you use scorpions to take out a ram when there are other more effective units?
1 Like
Generally, siege weapons are effective against one another, yet scorpion struggles even against rams. It isn’t exceptionally cheap, either. I find this unfair.
Scorpions is not an anti-siege or anti-building unit, it is an anti-infantry and anti-archers unit. It is better to see them as a hand-cannoners with resistance to archers and skirmishers.
You should not use scorpions to take out rams just like you should not use hand cannoners to take out rams.
2 Likes
It is strange for a unit from the Siege Workshop to fail at functioning as a siege weapon. Units from the Barracks, Archery Range, and Stable all fulfill their respective roles as infantry, archers, and cavalry. If that was the intended design, then the Scorpion can only be described as a failure.
Are spears and militia used against the same enemies? Eagles? Are skirmishers used against the same as the other archers? Do you use non scouts vs monks? Do you use camels against archers? Spears against shock units? So on and so on
1 Like
I don’t think you quite understood what I meant. In any case, broadly speaking, infantry perform the role of infantry, ranged units handle ranged combat, and cavalry fulfill the role of cavalry. The Eagle Warrior should be viewed as an exception for civilizations that lack cavalry. The Scorpion is the only odd unit out; while it is produced at the Siege Workshop, it cannot actually function as a siege weapon.
Which is?
From what I see, different infantry units hold different roles. Militia-line is a general-purpose unit that counters shock infantry (like eagles/fire lancers). Halbs and fire lancers hard counter cavalry units. Eagles are a scout replacement - a raiding unit. Champis are a militia/scout hybrid, acting as general purpose front line unit that is also strong against archers and a raiding unit. And there are unique infantry units that hold different roles (Obuch are a front line support unit, Huskarls/ghulams are an anti-archer unit, etc). Some infantry units are great against cavalry, while others are meh (or worse) against cavalry. Some are extremely hard countered by ranged units, and others counter ranged units.
Cavalry unit roles also vary, though almost all of them are good raiding units. Scouts are a raiding unit that counters monks (and is a great meat shield). Knights are a raiding unit that doubles as a power unit. Steppe lancers are a raiding unit that dominates in massed melee combat (not too good against ranged units though). Camels are an anti-cav unit (and are meh as a raiding unit). And cav archers are a superb raiding unit as well (that can deal with spears reasonably well).
I see no reason why every siege unit needs to have an anti-siege role.
4 Likes
I don’t understand why you are citing special units trained at the Castle as examples; such units are irrelevant to the topic at hand. Furthermore, as I mentioned, Mesoamerican civilizations are a case where infantry are forced into specific, specialized roles. And while camels differ from knights, no one would argue that they don’t fit the definition of cavalry. My point is simply that the Scorpion doesn’t feel like a proper siege weapon. I suggest you re-examine the units from the Barracks, Stable, and Archery Range before offering a rebuttal.
What is your definition of cavalry ?
I suggest you explain more explicitely what you mean, because it is not clear for most of us.
If you mean ranged units attack from distance and stable units are fast & have high hp, then workshop units have high pierce armor and are mechanical (need redemption to convert). And I do not know what infantry would have as defining feature.
Scorpions role is to beat up clumped up units, especially good against slow archers or infantry. They are slower, more epxesinve than archers but in return deal high pass trough damage.
Rams counter scorpions by tanking their damage, just like rams counter archers
Broadly speaking, all biological ranged units fall under the category of the Archery Range; mounted units are classified as cavalry, and the rest as infantry. Actually, there is a point I overlooked: the peculiar role that Skirmishers play in this game. From that perspective, one might ask why the Scorpion couldn’t simply be treated the same way. However, since Skirmishers do function as ranged units, placing them in the Archery Range makes sense; the Scorpion, on the other hand, performs a role similar to the Skirmisher yet is produced at the Siege Workshop, making its classification a rather unusual exception.
Yes, I like the Scorpion’s piercing attack. Would adding siege-deterrence and siege capabilities to the Scorpion’s current role cause issues with unit matchups?
you mean splattering groups of clustered units? Something the Mangonel also does with more oomph but way less accuracy? That kind of “siege capability?”
What does siege mean anyway? I think it just means repairable,!non biological contraption. It even has a small building bonus if that’s your criterion
1 Like
Unlike the Mangonel, it deals piercing damage, so its role doesn’t completely overlap; therefore, I don’t see an issue with it having significant bonus damage against buildings and siege weapons, just like other siege units.
But why would it have bonus against buildings? Scorpios and similar devices are anti-personnel engines, shooting arrows instead of stones. If the arrows were flaming or exploded upon impact, however…
This would be an interesting gimmick for a new civi.
1 Like
Chinese Rocketry tech should be this
2 Likes
I would rather scorpion dealing more bonus damage vs cavalry archers instead of rams.
1 Like
I would go further give it siege and ship bonus damage
That is why he is asking for more bonus damage. Scorpions historically are Comically oversized crossbow with projectiles weighing over a pound and a draw weight of up to 4000LB. in gameplay they can pierce several elephants but deal one damage to siege ram thanks to pierce and ram armor. Meanwhile Chu-Ko-Nu and Kipchaks secondary projectile deal 4 to 2 damage each.
Fair point but the Mangonel-line is anti-archer, anti-infantry, anti-siege, and anti-building. it cost twice as much but at its maximum effectiveness it can pay for itself in a single shot. Since mangonel nerf are unlikely giving scorpions. who get countered by hard countered by mangonels anti-siege bonus damage is reasonable.
Hard disagree even if Scorpions are not the intended Counter they should deal like 5 damage. spearmen are not an intended counter to cav archers but they still do bonus damage which allows them to kill trapped or neglected CA. Rams are an antibuilding specialist but they demolish Siege Onager up close despite SO being an intended counter because being hit by a battering ram should logically destroy any siege equipment.
Yes, if scorpion are effective against both siege and buildings then they would have the same role as Mangonels. If scorpions where designed as a regional or Romans mangonel replacement then that would be 10/10 unit design. I am in favor with giving Scorpions enough anti siege bonus damage that are cost even against mangonels with victory coming down to positioning. If you want scorpions to be buffed further try thinking of a niche that is not covered by the mangonel-line.