According to the Missile Weapon Ranges table on ACKS Core 103, composite and long bows have a maximum range of 210’, crossbows 240’, and arbalests 360’.
According to the Artillery Characteristics table on D@W: Campaigns 44, light and medium ballistas have a maximum range of 200’ and heavy ballistas/light catapults 300’.
Is this accurate? If so, is it intentional that a common, easily-used, hand-held, man-portable weapon (the arbalest) should outrange every possible ballista? If so, what’s the reasoning for it?
If arbalests have longer range, are more mobile, do roughly half as much damage per hit, have more than double the rate of fire, and can be operated by a single easily-trained soldier rather than a crew of several specialists, then what’s the point of having a ballista? The only advantage I can see of a ballista over an arbalest is the ability to damage wood (med/heavy) or stone (heavy) structures - but, if those structures are guarded by crossbowmen, it’s an irrelevant advantage because the ballista can’t get close enough to attack the structure without first/also allowing the crossbowmen to fire on the ballista’s crew.
(For the sake of completeness, I will also note that ACKS Core 112 lists the maximum range of ballistas as 200 yards rather than 200’, but, according to ACKS Core 93, “all distances are measured in yards rather than feet in the wilderness… Weapon and spell ranges are measured in yards in the wilderness also”, so the arbalest’s maximum range is similarly increased to 360 yards when outdoors, keeping it greater than the maximum range of a ballista.)
 Despite the name, crossbowmen use arbalests as their default armament, per ACKS Core 52 and D@W:C 27.
 Per the description of Manual of Arms on ACKS Core 62, crossbowmen can be trained in 1 month, the shortest possible training time.