Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

What are defense towers even good for?

li_xinlaili_xinlai Registered Users Posts: 13
I come from WH I where defense towers are actually a crucial part of a siege defense battle, but now that I've started WH II, I find that they seem to be quite useless.

In WH 1, even the lowest level towers have a good chance of destroying at least one siege tower if you use it right and focus fire. But in WH II, it seems that no matter what I do, there is no way to even come close to destroying any of the siege towers, and this really ruins much of the fun for me.

I tried using two of the highest tier defense towers, plus two blessed trebuchet artillery, to focus down one siege tower, but couldn't even bring it below 50% when it reached my walls. One volley from both my trebuchets units only does 1% damage on the siege tower, this makes the siege tower 16 times more resilient than even a defense tower WHICH MAKES ABSOLUTELY 0 SENSE!!! How can you build a make-shift tower in potentially just one turn and have it be 16 times stronger than the defender's towers, when the defenders literally lived there all their lives???

Some might argue that in WH I the defense towers are over-powered. However, I believe that in WH I it is actually pretty balanced.

Certain positioning of siege towers can make it much harder for even a tier-4 defense tower to single-handedly destroy it, so it encourages the defenders to choose if he wants to focus his fire from multiple defense towers, this and which targets to focus on.

Attackers can counter this by, in turn, focusing his siege towers in a few locations that he deems most important, so that even if one siege tower falls, the others are close enough to breach the wall. The attacker can also use mobile or expendable units to distract the tower and buy time for the siege tower to get close enough without taking too much damage.

The defenders can then rearrange his troops so that the best melee troops can take the brunt of the concentrated flush of enemies and position the archers where it is relatively safe.

The attacker could also potentially invest more time in besieging the city, so that he will have more siege towers in battle, or if he's in a hurry, run the risk of having all siege engines destroyed.

You see that there is a lot more room for interplay and planning here.

Alternatively, the game designers could potentially make it so that you need at least tier-2 defense towers to consistently destroy enemy siege engines, this would incentivize players to spend resources towards upgrading their walls, unlike in WH II you just don't bother because it makes no difference anyway.

Let's look over to the interplay and mind games of the current WH II system.

The attacker doesn't need to even think about what he needs to do, he could just put a siege tower literally anywhere and it's pretty much guaranteed that it will reach the wall safely. The defender doesn't even bother to try and destroy the siege towers and just sit on the walls wondering why they even spent %60 dollars on this game.

The attacker may even line the walls with siege towers because there is no need to concentrate or even consider the positioning of the towers, and the defender is left to wonder why he even built walls in the first place.

The attacker can even push a siege tower face-to-face with a defense tower, completely blocking it off and rendering it useless. This trick I've used on multiple occasions in WH I, but pulling it off requires quite a bit of skill and cunning, because if I didn't play it right, there is the danger that my siege tower would be destroyed by the enemy defenses before I could reach the walls.

Now however, there is absolutely no point in guarding the walls, and I've on multiple occasions considered straight up abandoning the walls and just station my troops in the city, where my Bretonnian knights have a much better advantage, as compared to on the walls where my peasants have no advantage and every disadvantage possible.

The attacker has 0 risk in the process of breaching the walls, he doesn’t need to consider how much time to invest in building towers, because he is guaranteed that all of his towers will reach the wall anyway. It might as well be a non-siege battle, except the enemy is confined inside the fortress and his mobile troops cannot freely move around. The walls have become almost a detriment to the defender, which begs the question (again): Why the F*CK do we even gain from having walls?

I really hope the devs could really buff up the defense towers in WH II, because I used to really enjoy playing siege, both attack and defense, but now, it's almost not fun anymore.

(I’m considering going on multiplayer and abuse the crap out of these siege towers, use them to block off every defense tower, hopefully this will ruin the game so much that it generates enough attention for the devs to realize just how broken the current siege mechanics are. If any youtuber sees this feel free to use my tactic and make tones of videos about it, I believe this can help us all in the long run)
«1

Comments

  • FifthOfSpaghettiFifthOfSpaghetti Registered Users Posts: 1,630
    I found a fully levelle capital can easily demolish towers and infantry(at least for Skaven on Vortex, as I’ve not done extensive testing) but minor settlements and capitals without the defence buildings don’t really help at all :/ I find they are a little helpful at taking out enemy artillery but solid meh.
  • blaatblaat Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 3,121
    edited November 2018
    I am told that NW towers are far more powerfull then OW defense towers

    snip

    It's much easier and more fun to get engrossed in lore that takes itself seriously and tries to make sense within its own frame of reference.

    the reason I prefer LOTR over warhammer fantasy and 40k

    I am dutch so if you like to have a talk in dutch shoot me a PM :)
  • FifthOfSpaghettiFifthOfSpaghetti Registered Users Posts: 1,630
    blaat said:

    I am told that NW towers are far more powerfull then OW defense towers

    I could see this, as when TWW2 first released even regular towers where OP and they got a fat nerf to useless. Upgraded ones are still OP but only for capitals.
  • ArsenicArsenic Registered Users Posts: 5,637
    Personally I find defence towers are better at causing damage to enemy units, rather than siege towers, and use them accordingly.

    One thing that did strike me a odd during a Bretonnia playthrough, why can't archers with fire arrows target siege towers? Isn't that one of the main reasons fire arrows were used, historically, that and to set fire to habitations?

    "Ours is a world of fleeting glory. But it is glory, nonetheless."
  • HarconnHarconn Registered Users Posts: 937
    edited November 2018
    I find siege towers should give troops 90% physical resistance, but those should at least took a bit dmg on their way to the walls. Imagine fireballs or canon shots hitting the siege tower,... also defense towers would be a little help if they actually can influence a bit of dmg to troops in a siege tower.
    _______________________________________________________________________________________________________

    My German Youtube-Channel - Let's Plays (Strategy, RPG, Indie,...): https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChwblqvwr8XxKP0GzCcUb8Q
  • FifthOfSpaghettiFifthOfSpaghetti Registered Users Posts: 1,630
    It might not be so bad if you can target ranged troops at the towers
  • li_xinlaili_xinlai Registered Users Posts: 13

    I found a fully levelle capital can easily demolish towers and infantry(at least for Skaven on Vortex, as I’ve not done extensive testing) but minor settlements and capitals without the defence buildings don’t really help at all :/ I find they are a little helpful at taking out enemy artillery but solid meh.

    Pray tell, which capital are you referring to? Because in my Bretonnian capital (like, the capital capital) with level VI main settlement building, I still couldn't get 50% on the siege towers.
  • li_xinlaili_xinlai Registered Users Posts: 13
    blaat said:

    I am told that NW towers are far more powerfull then OW defense towers

    Eeeeexcept I was playing on the old world part of the mortal empires, and I still can't destroy **** with the towers.
  • li_xinlaili_xinlai Registered Users Posts: 13

    It might not be so bad if you can target ranged troops at the towers

    Except not really, Bretonnian fire arrows can't even target towers.
  • Warlord_Lu_BuWarlord_Lu_Bu Registered Users Posts: 2,328
    Defence
    "I am the punishment of Tengri, if you had not sinned, he would not have sent me against you." - Chenghis Khan Temujin
  • blaatblaat Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 3,121
    edited November 2018
    li_xinlai said:

    blaat said:

    I am told that NW towers are far more powerfull then OW defense towers

    Eeeeexcept I was playing on the old world part of the mortal empires, and I still can't destroy **** with the towers.
    which is what I meant OW defenses are weaker (so I hear) than NW ones so that might make them nearly incapable of destroying towers

    snip

    It's much easier and more fun to get engrossed in lore that takes itself seriously and tries to make sense within its own frame of reference.

    the reason I prefer LOTR over warhammer fantasy and 40k

    I am dutch so if you like to have a talk in dutch shoot me a PM :)
  • li_xinlaili_xinlai Registered Users Posts: 13
    blaat said:

    li_xinlai said:

    blaat said:

    I am told that NW towers are far more powerfull then OW defense towers

    Eeeeexcept I was playing on the old world part of the mortal empires, and I still can't destroy **** with the towers.
    which is what I meant OW defenses are weaker (so I hear) than NW ones so that might make them nearly incapable of destroying towers
    Oh, sorry, I misread. Still, it feels pretty broken if you have such a disadvantage playing as a OW faction.
  • blaatblaat Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 3,121
    li_xinlai said:

    blaat said:

    li_xinlai said:

    blaat said:

    I am told that NW towers are far more powerfull then OW defense towers

    Eeeeexcept I was playing on the old world part of the mortal empires, and I still can't destroy **** with the towers.
    which is what I meant OW defenses are weaker (so I hear) than NW ones so that might make them nearly incapable of destroying towers
    Oh, sorry, I misread. Still, it feels pretty broken if you have such a disadvantage playing as a OW faction.
    as are OW races in general look at the red trees

    HE spearmen have on rank 9 more MD than chosen GW their attack

    snip

    It's much easier and more fun to get engrossed in lore that takes itself seriously and tries to make sense within its own frame of reference.

    the reason I prefer LOTR over warhammer fantasy and 40k

    I am dutch so if you like to have a talk in dutch shoot me a PM :)
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 25,095
    This patch actually buffed defense towers and even low level ones now have a shot at destroying incoming towers. Before that even highly advanced towers were hit and miss when it came to stopping towers.

  • harngersteinharngerstein Registered Users Posts: 822
    Personally I find the useful for whittling down enemy cav/ large and, most importantly, killing enemy artillery. You can often knock out most of the enemys artillery units before their siege towers hit the walls. Then I use them to target enemy ranged.
  • dreagondreagon Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,162
    Upgraded defence towers are pretty good against units. I never bother using them against siege equipment since the nerf. One thing they should fix are the towers on the Ulthuan gates. Those things are just bad at dealing with anything with a bit of armor. The garrison doesn't know how to deal with them and the towers don't upgrade, even though the game tells you they do.
    "The dog is a peasant and the cat is a gentleman." H.P. Lovecraft
  • RikRiorikRikRiorik Registered Users Posts: 8,556
    ...absolutely nothing, uh!

    The main problem is that there is seldom any reason to even build siege equipment. The battering ram is so slow it can often not even make it to the gates before they are knocked down and you don’t take enough casualties on approach to warrant spending several turns building towers when you could just be replenishing and going for the next conquest the turn after.
    Lord of the Undermountain and your friendly neighbourhood giant (Dwarf)
    Favourite campaigns: Clan Angrund, Followers of Nagash and the new Huntsmarshall’s Expedition
  • GwydionGwydion Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,223
    they do impressive damage.... the fire rate is just much slower and id dare say that they are more inaccurate now. Pre the recent buff i used them to target enemy arty or very bunched up units and nothing more.
    PLEASE CA!!! Chaos Warriors need a faction that is not horde only by the time the trilogy is finished! We beg of you!

    Just Realized this topic has been viewed more, the topic of " Limiting Race Expansion/ Colonization Expansion" alone than more than half of the stickied things at the top of the forum... I hope you are too CA and I mean that in a positive way from a huge fan!

    Please improve sieges! Add racial flavor and ACTUALLY make them "deeper rather than wide" copy and paste with different art needs to go!
  • FrostPawFrostPaw Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,116
    Siege defence for me seems to end so rarely in an actual siege defence, that I can't form much of on opinion about max tier siege defences. They do seem redundant due to the speed enemies can close to the walls and the distance they start from the walls to begin with.

    I've never destroyed a siege tower in WH2. After 700+ hours, perhaps that says enough. Then again, when every unit has a pocket ladder or key to the gate I find walls mostly redundant too.

    I miss being able to sally out at the walls and actually benefit from them.
  • ZerglesZergles Member Registered Users Posts: 3,014
    Different factions' towers seem to do different things. I was freaked out by the purple balls that VC towers started shooting.

    Some are anti infantry. Some are anti large. Some are better at destroying towers. I assume...
  • Fear_The_WolfFear_The_Wolf Registered Users Posts: 3,796
    So lrveling up your walls gives your towers the ability to wreck poorly managed towers. Your own ranged units and artillery can contribute as well. If you have high arc arty, have it chip in and you'll rapidly knock down towers.

    I know a lot of people are saying towers are unnecessary with pocket ladders, but pocket ladders also lead to a large number of casualties frequently. Siege towers ensure most of your boys get there alive and then get an advantage in the fight. So knowing how to knock them over can be important. If your faction lacks ranged options necessary to knock out towers, often your own defensive towers are more than capable. See Lizardmen. Otherwise just ensure your ranged units hit the towers.
  • GamgeeGamgee Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,912
    edited November 2018
    The Lizardmen kahmehameha wave goers absolutely destroy. I think it’s the max level towers on main settlements. So op I won 2.5 v1 army with a made for defense capital. Probably could have won 3v1 lol.
  • SephlockSephlock Registered Users Posts: 2,386
    edited November 2018
    Zergles said:

    Different factions' towers seem to do different things. I was freaked out by the purple balls that VC towers started shooting.

    I like the Bretonnian towers the best.
    MOO!
    #JusticeForUshoran #RuneGolems #RuneGuardians #ShardDragons #Thunderbarges #Stormfiends #BigMonsters #MoreDakka
  • Godefroy_de_BouillonGodefroy_de_Bouillon Registered Users Posts: 2,479
    Arsenic said:

    Personally I find defence towers are better at causing damage to enemy units, rather than siege towers, and use them accordingly.

    One thing that did strike me a odd during a Bretonnia playthrough, why can't archers with fire arrows target siege towers? Isn't that one of the main reasons fire arrows were used, historically, that and to set fire to habitations?

    No historically no fire arrows were used, and God forbid to lighten up siege toweres. They used other mens to do it. And Siege toweres were covered in fresh animal fur to prevent it from being ignited.
  • AnsaAnsa Registered Users Posts: 19
    A unit of low tier peasants can break through keep door in about a minute.
    The only reason I build walls is the garrison increase.
    Other than that the walls a joke right now.
  • CrossilCrossil Registered Users Posts: 7,481
    I was actually surprised how quickly upgraded Skaven towers demolished some of my elite troops.

    Then again I rarely build towers unless it's evenly matched, and not in AR which favors defenders a lot but looking at their army.

    UNLEASH THE EVERCHARIOT

  • Axle53Axle53 Registered Users Posts: 2
    Maybe im playing the game wrong but i find seige towers dangerous to go against, and useful when defending. First step of any attack, i usually park my lord out the front to soak damage while arty destroys them - if not i seem to take horrendous casualties from them on the approach. When defending, i find them indispensable for destroying hell cannons etc. Also, my favourite cheese tactic in the game (i only use it in the dire-est circumstances) is to sally out with cav and literally park them infront of oncoming seige towers. The dumb ai just grinds to a halt rather than go round. This buys your tower plenty of time to wipe out that unit of chosen, at the cost of a unit of pistoleers. (Eventually the rest of the on foot attacking army will catch up and kill your brave equine road block, but its usually a trade in your favour)
  • MonochromaticSpiderMonochromaticSpider Registered Users Posts: 968
    Towers should be weak. Is this WH or a tower defense game?
  • li_xinlaili_xinlai Registered Users Posts: 13
    Axle53 said:

    Maybe im playing the game wrong but i find seige towers dangerous to go against, and useful when defending. First step of any attack, i usually park my lord out the front to soak damage while arty destroys them - if not i seem to take horrendous casualties from them on the approach. When defending, i find them indispensable for destroying hell cannons etc. Also, my favourite cheese tactic in the game (i only use it in the dire-est circumstances) is to sally out with cav and literally park them infront of oncoming seige towers. The dumb ai just grinds to a halt rather than go round. This buys your tower plenty of time to wipe out that unit of chosen, at the cost of a unit of pistoleers. (Eventually the rest of the on foot attacking army will catch up and kill your brave equine road block, but its usually a trade in your favour)

    I tried that and my fastest cav literally can't reach the towers in time because the AI starts the towers at the farthest point from the gates.
  • li_xinlaili_xinlai Registered Users Posts: 13

    Towers should be weak. Is this WH or a tower defense game?

    I disagree, the defenders did not spend multiple turns, manpower, and gold to build towers that are weak and useless. They literally have less health than the attacking siege towers which makes zero sense.
Sign In or Register to comment.