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

Bug or Bad Joke? Siege towers are decidedly broken.

ItharusItharus Senior MemberPosts: 7,875Registered Users
Siege Towers move really fast.

I mean it, they move REALLY fast.

They seem to be moving at the speed a unit of infantry can actually run at, or only very very slightly slower.

Try walking units behind the towers you attack-move ordered onto a wall - they will be left far behind.

Now try walking a ram to the gate -- walking infantry may well leave THAT behind.

Is this a bug or a bad joke?

Siege Towers should move as slowly as the ram. Or even swap the speeds that are currently there and have the ram be a little faster because they are kinda bad anyway...

But siege towers should NOT be as speedy as they are. They really do move really dang fast. They outpace walking infantry.

If you run troops to the wall, or move siege towers to the wall... you will actually get troops on top of the wall at about the same time right now.

That's ludicrous.

Also... can we please stop pulling ladders out of our butts? Ladders don't need to be siege ramps like in Rome... but they should at least be large carried things that reduce vigor and slow down the unit a bit that you had to build before hand. Just make like... 4-8 take 1 turn or something.
Tagged:
«1

Comments

  • wunderb0rwunderb0r Junior Member Posts: 530Registered Users
    you realize this now? ^^
  • ItharusItharus Senior Member Posts: 7,875Registered Users
    Honestly, yeah...

    I made a ram 100% for giggles today and it really highlighted the speed differences, and it made me watch my sprinting archers barely getting ahead of the siege towers, just to be disrupted from their pull through 2 seconds later... which then made me look at my artillery only getting 3 volleys off before the siege towers reached the walls and I thought...

    What the ****????? That's not right.

    There are so many problems with sieges that it took this long for me to notice that siege towers are race cars, too.
  • 39821739175248623982173917524862 Posts: 852Registered Users
    wunderb0r said:

    you realize this now? ^^

    OP probably never built siege towers, because there is no reason to with current sieges. I don't blame him
  • JadawinKhanidiJadawinKhanidi Posts: 1,138Registered Users
    They just really went for speed and low-complexity with sieges. You don't need any siege weapons, and rams are just useless because they are so slow. Even just two artillery units can destroy a gate before your infantry gets there, and long before the battering ram arrives there.

    Scaling walls with infantry has only very insignifcant disadvantages compared to siege towers, but if you use those, they move with improbably high speed.

    I recently took a look at it, and many of the elements can be modded easily:
    https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1966014840

    I wanted to make the rams a bit faster at first. Doing so is easy, but the problem is that the unit operating the ram will then fall behind, until it's really far away. That makes the ram look even sillier than it already does, basically looking as if it's moved by an internal engine rather than the soldiers. And when the unit is too far away, the ram stops moving anyway until the men catch up, so it does not arrive any earlier at the gate. And it seems to be impossible to allow the operating unit to run instead of walking.
  • wunderb0rwunderb0r Junior Member Posts: 530Registered Users

    wunderb0r said:

    you realize this now? ^^

    OP probably never built siege towers, because there is no reason to with current sieges. I don't blame him
    idk, think it depends on the race. They are infantry-heavy playstyles were (IMO) I want my Inf. on the wall. healthy. and as a unit.
  • ItharusItharus Senior Member Posts: 7,875Registered Users

    wunderb0r said:

    you realize this now? ^^

    OP probably never built siege towers, because there is no reason to with current sieges. I don't blame him
    TBF most commonly I use an agent to knock down the walls.
  • Fear_The_WolfFear_The_Wolf Posts: 3,267Registered Users
    Itharus said:

    wunderb0r said:

    you realize this now? ^^

    OP probably never built siege towers, because there is no reason to with current sieges. I don't blame him
    TBF most commonly I use an agent to knock down the walls.
    The right answer. Well, save those races without the hero to do so.
  • RedReVengeRedReVenge Posts: 22Registered Users
    wunderb0r said:

    wunderb0r said:

    you realize this now? ^^

    OP probably never built siege towers, because there is no reason to with current sieges. I don't blame him
    idk, think it depends on the race. They are infantry-heavy playstyles were (IMO) I want my Inf. on the wall. healthy. and as a unit.
    Have you considered using a lord or chaff unit to draw fire from the towers so your infantry can just march up the walls?

    There is no reason to get a siege tower in this game. Absolutely, no practical reason.
  • SakuraHeinzSakuraHeinz Junior Member Posts: 2,258Registered Users
    In my 526 hours playtime I have never used a single siege tower.
  • SephlockSephlock Posts: 2,319Registered Users

    wunderb0r said:

    wunderb0r said:

    you realize this now? ^^

    OP probably never built siege towers, because there is no reason to with current sieges. I don't blame him
    idk, think it depends on the race. They are infantry-heavy playstyles were (IMO) I want my Inf. on the wall. healthy. and as a unit.
    Have you considered using a lord or chaff unit to draw fire from the towers so your infantry can just march up the walls?

    There is no reason to get a siege tower in this game. Absolutely, no practical reason.
    What if you’re lazy and want to autoresolve, but need something to improve the odds a bit?

    #JusticeForUshoran #RuneGolems #RuneGuardians #ShardDragons #Thunderbarges #Stormfiends #BigMonsters #MoreDakka
  • DecayWolfDecayWolf Member Posts: 404Registered Users
    edited January 14
    Rams aren't only useless, but it's also a liability. It slows a unit and offers no missile protection.
    Towers in WH1 used to be destroyed by basic common towers, making using them a lot worse than just running towards the gate. It got fixed now, at least.
  • ItharusItharus Senior Member Posts: 7,875Registered Users
    Sephlock said:

    wunderb0r said:

    wunderb0r said:

    you realize this now? ^^

    OP probably never built siege towers, because there is no reason to with current sieges. I don't blame him
    idk, think it depends on the race. They are infantry-heavy playstyles were (IMO) I want my Inf. on the wall. healthy. and as a unit.
    Have you considered using a lord or chaff unit to draw fire from the towers so your infantry can just march up the walls?

    There is no reason to get a siege tower in this game. Absolutely, no practical reason.
    What if you’re lazy and want to autoresolve, but need something to improve the odds a bit?

    LOL... it's true... but it takes at least 2 of them, so is the three turns really worth it?

    In my 526 hours playtime I have never used a single siege tower.

    What about those situations where you have an army that miraculously does NOT have a siege-attacker unit somehow and have to make something just to be able to rush the wall with ladders? Oh wait, you make a ram and don't use it... right... silly me.
  • GriffithxiGriffithxi Posts: 562Registered Users
    Itharus said:

    Siege Towers move really fast.

    I mean it, they move REALLY fast.

    They seem to be moving at the speed a unit of infantry can actually run at, or only very very slightly slower.

    Try walking units behind the towers you attack-move ordered onto a wall - they will be left far behind.

    Now try walking a ram to the gate -- walking infantry may well leave THAT behind.

    Is this a bug or a bad joke?

    Siege Towers should move as slowly as the ram. Or even swap the speeds that are currently there and have the ram be a little faster because they are kinda bad anyway...

    But siege towers should NOT be as speedy as they are. They really do move really dang fast. They outpace walking infantry.

    If you run troops to the wall, or move siege towers to the wall... you will actually get troops on top of the wall at about the same time right now.

    That's ludicrous.

    Also... can we please stop pulling ladders out of our butts? Ladders don't need to be siege ramps like in Rome... but they should at least be large carried things that reduce vigor and slow down the unit a bit that you had to build before hand. Just make like... 4-8 take 1 turn or something.

    Even if they were to slow towers down it makes sense for rams to be slower than towers. Rams give all your units access to the inside towers give only infantry access.
  • DecayWolfDecayWolf Member Posts: 404Registered Users

    Itharus said:

    Siege Towers move really fast.

    I mean it, they move REALLY fast.

    They seem to be moving at the speed a unit of infantry can actually run at, or only very very slightly slower.

    Try walking units behind the towers you attack-move ordered onto a wall - they will be left far behind.

    Now try walking a ram to the gate -- walking infantry may well leave THAT behind.

    Is this a bug or a bad joke?

    Siege Towers should move as slowly as the ram. Or even swap the speeds that are currently there and have the ram be a little faster because they are kinda bad anyway...

    But siege towers should NOT be as speedy as they are. They really do move really dang fast. They outpace walking infantry.

    If you run troops to the wall, or move siege towers to the wall... you will actually get troops on top of the wall at about the same time right now.

    That's ludicrous.

    Also... can we please stop pulling ladders out of our butts? Ladders don't need to be siege ramps like in Rome... but they should at least be large carried things that reduce vigor and slow down the unit a bit that you had to build before hand. Just make like... 4-8 take 1 turn or something.

    Even if they were to slow towers down it makes sense for rams to be slower than towers. Rams give all your units access to the inside towers give only infantry access.
    Towers offers missile protection, allow to pick engagements on the walls, and avoid the fatigue penalty.
    Essentially removing all advantages from defense and turning it into an advantage, because now you can choose whom to engage.

    Rams is a death sentence to whatever unit you want gone.
  • Fear_The_WolfFear_The_Wolf Posts: 3,267Registered Users
    DecayWolf said:

    Itharus said:

    Siege Towers move really fast.

    I mean it, they move REALLY fast.

    They seem to be moving at the speed a unit of infantry can actually run at, or only very very slightly slower.

    Try walking units behind the towers you attack-move ordered onto a wall - they will be left far behind.

    Now try walking a ram to the gate -- walking infantry may well leave THAT behind.

    Is this a bug or a bad joke?

    Siege Towers should move as slowly as the ram. Or even swap the speeds that are currently there and have the ram be a little faster because they are kinda bad anyway...

    But siege towers should NOT be as speedy as they are. They really do move really dang fast. They outpace walking infantry.

    If you run troops to the wall, or move siege towers to the wall... you will actually get troops on top of the wall at about the same time right now.

    That's ludicrous.

    Also... can we please stop pulling ladders out of our butts? Ladders don't need to be siege ramps like in Rome... but they should at least be large carried things that reduce vigor and slow down the unit a bit that you had to build before hand. Just make like... 4-8 take 1 turn or something.

    Even if they were to slow towers down it makes sense for rams to be slower than towers. Rams give all your units access to the inside towers give only infantry access.
    Towers offers missile protection, allow to pick engagements on the walls, and avoid the fatigue penalty.
    Essentially removing all advantages from defense and turning it into an advantage, because now you can choose whom to engage.

    Rams is a death sentence to whatever unit you want gone.
    Or, here me out on this one, you use neither and just run up the walls.

    I'm actually a fan of a more high speed approach to sieges, as earlier titles devolved into you just huddling up on the gate and hitting the fast forward button way too easily. We saw it pop up again with ToB. It wasn't better just because it took longer. But the way sieges are now makes strategic equipment and preperation useless even if you aren't corner cheesing LoTW style. The idea that I would build a ram just to start a siege then immediately drop it is mind boggling to me, but it happens now.
  • SteelRoninSteelRonin Junior Member ChilePosts: 716Registered Users
    siege equipment are useless, is a waste of turns. The campaign demands rush gameplay, building siege equipment is a waste of time. With units that can destroy gates, you can attack in the same turn and win the settlement, that is win-win.
  • DecayWolfDecayWolf Member Posts: 404Registered Users

    DecayWolf said:

    Itharus said:

    Siege Towers move really fast.

    I mean it, they move REALLY fast.

    They seem to be moving at the speed a unit of infantry can actually run at, or only very very slightly slower.

    Try walking units behind the towers you attack-move ordered onto a wall - they will be left far behind.

    Now try walking a ram to the gate -- walking infantry may well leave THAT behind.

    Is this a bug or a bad joke?

    Siege Towers should move as slowly as the ram. Or even swap the speeds that are currently there and have the ram be a little faster because they are kinda bad anyway...

    But siege towers should NOT be as speedy as they are. They really do move really dang fast. They outpace walking infantry.

    If you run troops to the wall, or move siege towers to the wall... you will actually get troops on top of the wall at about the same time right now.

    That's ludicrous.

    Also... can we please stop pulling ladders out of our butts? Ladders don't need to be siege ramps like in Rome... but they should at least be large carried things that reduce vigor and slow down the unit a bit that you had to build before hand. Just make like... 4-8 take 1 turn or something.

    Even if they were to slow towers down it makes sense for rams to be slower than towers. Rams give all your units access to the inside towers give only infantry access.
    Towers offers missile protection, allow to pick engagements on the walls, and avoid the fatigue penalty.
    Essentially removing all advantages from defense and turning it into an advantage, because now you can choose whom to engage.

    Rams is a death sentence to whatever unit you want gone.
    Or, here me out on this one, you use neither and just run up the walls.

    I'm actually a fan of a more high speed approach to sieges, as earlier titles devolved into you just huddling up on the gate and hitting the fast forward button way too easily. We saw it pop up again with ToB. It wasn't better just because it took longer. But the way sieges are now makes strategic equipment and preperation useless even if you aren't corner cheesing LoTW style. The idea that I would build a ram just to start a siege then immediately drop it is mind boggling to me, but it happens now.
    It's not useless and it can be helpful. That being said I never said it's neither necessary, a priority or a must.
    I basically never build towers either. But at least towers are useful if needed or if an army does not have siege breaker, if the army can build in 1 turn, would actually be an asset instead of liability as it's for rams.
  • RedReVengeRedReVenge Posts: 22Registered Users
    Sephlock said:

    wunderb0r said:

    wunderb0r said:

    you realize this now? ^^

    OP probably never built siege towers, because there is no reason to with current sieges. I don't blame him
    idk, think it depends on the race. They are infantry-heavy playstyles were (IMO) I want my Inf. on the wall. healthy. and as a unit.
    Have you considered using a lord or chaff unit to draw fire from the towers so your infantry can just march up the walls?

    There is no reason to get a siege tower in this game. Absolutely, no practical reason.
    What if you’re lazy and want to autoresolve, but need something to improve the odds a bit?

    Sounds like you should play on an easier difficulty then.
  • ItharusItharus Senior Member Posts: 7,875Registered Users
    I played my sieges with actual tactics, and it was great.

    Just because you CAN cheese your way through a game and it's boring doesn't make that the fault of the developers. You made that choice, not them. If you want to just blob and FF - that's on you.

    When I did sieges in older titles I would often have a round or two of attacks that were just bombarding the outer wall and coming to a draw and choosing to continue siege. Then I'd move in with ladders, rams, towers, and attack the next wall. Sometimes I'd do it all in one big battle if I had enough forces. Back then, you could Win, Lose, or Draw. A draw meant the siege remained in place. It was great. I really miss that. Damage also carried over so anything you hurt in one battle was still there the next so long as the siege didn't break. It made a great multi-stage grinding siege battle that was truly awesome.

    Nowadays it's binary - win or lose - and if you lose you get negative traits almost immediately. There's no such thing as tactical withdrawal to resupply. It's lame.

    I want the ability to actually have walls matter, and to use siege engines and artillery properly.

    You're 100% welcome to ignore this and blob and fast forward to victory, but please don't try to dissuade CA from making a good system for those of us who moderate our impulse to always achieve the optimal solution even if it means breaking the game.
  • RedReVengeRedReVenge Posts: 22Registered Users

    siege equipment are useless, is a waste of turns. The campaign demands rush gameplay, building siege equipment is a waste of time. With units that can destroy gates, you can attack in the same turn and win the settlement, that is win-win.

    This is the proper approach to the game. Just cheese the AI. It's awful at sieges.

    Towers cost 2 turns (which is time that you can't afford to lose with your armies).
  • ChesterMcGirrChesterMcGirr Posts: 255Registered Users
    DecayWolf said:

    Rams aren't only useless, but it's also a liability. It slows a unit and offers no missile protection.
    Towers in WH1 used to be destroyed by basic common towers, making using them a lot worse than just running towards the gate. It got fixed now, at least.

    Pro tip: Use a hero to push the ram
  • endurendur Posts: 3,242Registered Users
    I'm ok with the ram speed, but agree that siege towers should move slower.

    Currenly, I've very rarely seen a siege tower destroyed by enemy tower fire, so I think it would be ok to slow down the towers without impacting siege balance.
  • Fear_The_WolfFear_The_Wolf Posts: 3,267Registered Users
    Itharus said:

    I played my sieges with actual tactics, and it was great.

    Just because you CAN cheese your way through a game and it's boring doesn't make that the fault of the developers. You made that choice, not them. If you want to just blob and FF - that's on you.

    When I did sieges in older titles I would often have a round or two of attacks that were just bombarding the outer wall and coming to a draw and choosing to continue siege. Then I'd move in with ladders, rams, towers, and attack the next wall. Sometimes I'd do it all in one big battle if I had enough forces. Back then, you could Win, Lose, or Draw. A draw meant the siege remained in place. It was great. I really miss that. Damage also carried over so anything you hurt in one battle was still there the next so long as the siege didn't break. It made a great multi-stage grinding siege battle that was truly awesome.

    Nowadays it's binary - win or lose - and if you lose you get negative traits almost immediately. There's no such thing as tactical withdrawal to resupply. It's lame.

    I want the ability to actually have walls matter, and to use siege engines and artillery properly.

    You're 100% welcome to ignore this and blob and fast forward to victory, but please don't try to dissuade CA from making a good system for those of us who moderate our impulse to always achieve the optimal solution even if it means breaking the game.

    This isn't the answer either. Saying repeatedly that you can use avoid blobbing choke points in older titles is the exact same argument as saying you can use siege towers in TWW. I could wait the three turns needed to get a couple towers up, but why would I. In older titles I could take those three units out of pike wall formation in the gate, but why would I. I've no reason not to, other than intentionally hamstringing my siege attempts.

    Older titles aren't the answer, TWW isn't the answer, and even 3K does nothing to stir the pot. Hell the power that ranged units bring to 3k is so oppressive with a high ranked strategist that siege fights rarely get the chance to devolve into the gate grind, so I suppose that's something. Everything died to ranged fire. 7/10 sieges in 3k never see melee, which is also mot the answer.

    Sieges need a way to discourage congregating around choke points, as well as a way to punish the attacker for taking their time to benefit the defender. You do this by offering up the attacker multiple options to attack the settlement with, that the AI will use, and giving the defender the siege advantage necessary to pressure the attacker. It is their walls. They stand to lose more. We don' t have that in a TW yet and you won't find the answer in a forum post. But hey, at least CA recognizes that seiges are a work in progress.
  • TsiarTsiar Posts: 314Registered Users
    edited January 14
    Tagged: Siege is Bad

    Extremely based.
  • NyxilisNyxilis Posts: 3,352Registered Users
    Sieges are so sloppy that I haven't used towers in ages. Wouldn't have even really known. Haha.
  • DecayWolfDecayWolf Member Posts: 404Registered Users
    edited January 14

    DecayWolf said:

    Rams aren't only useless, but it's also a liability. It slows a unit and offers no missile protection.
    Towers in WH1 used to be destroyed by basic common towers, making using them a lot worse than just running towards the gate. It got fixed now, at least.

    Pro tip: Use a hero to push the ram
    If the army doesn't have a hero?
    How much damage it would take from missiles? Especially AP ones. Any hero would be dead long before reaching the gate.

    Also why would I even want that? gate breaker units can destroy almost as fast, if not, normal infantry can do the job.
    Rams would also take the space units that could be hiding from enemy fire.

    Bigger battles may also have missiles units outside the walls, and also artillery pieces. Getting cover is quite important.
  • DecayWolfDecayWolf Member Posts: 404Registered Users
    Itharus said:

    I played my sieges with actual tactics, and it was great.

    Just because you CAN cheese your way through a game and it's boring doesn't make that the fault of the developers. You made that choice, not them. If you want to just blob and FF - that's on you.

    When I did sieges in older titles I would often have a round or two of attacks that were just bombarding the outer wall and coming to a draw and choosing to continue siege. Then I'd move in with ladders, rams, towers, and attack the next wall. Sometimes I'd do it all in one big battle if I had enough forces. Back then, you could Win, Lose, or Draw. A draw meant the siege remained in place. It was great. I really miss that. Damage also carried over so anything you hurt in one battle was still there the next so long as the siege didn't break. It made a great multi-stage grinding siege battle that was truly awesome.

    Nowadays it's binary - win or lose - and if you lose you get negative traits almost immediately. There's no such thing as tactical withdrawal to resupply. It's lame.

    I want the ability to actually have walls matter, and to use siege engines and artillery properly.

    You're 100% welcome to ignore this and blob and fast forward to victory, but please don't try to dissuade CA from making a good system for those of us who moderate our impulse to always achieve the optimal solution even if it means breaking the game.

    You don't need to blob to advance. You don't need to cheese to win. The AI will murder any blob if they have artillery, even if they suck at not punishing with Vortex spells.

    A quite simple and strategical solution for nowdays is. Send chaff first to initial climb and eat arrows.
    Put your worthy units adjacent to walls to avoid missiles, send them where they need to be.

    You need to have map control, kill the enemy missiles outside the walls, try to negate arillery if they have it. But once you have the walls, you can go all in at once from all directions, then just keep pushing.
    That's the most standard going all in, and it ain't cheesing.
  • Grimgor_the_CAkeGrimgor_the_CAke Posts: 1,702Registered Users
    Siege tower is fun. I use them as shields sometimes. By the way, have you tried going back to the wall from outside thru enemy siege towers? Yeah, it is attacking from the rear :)

    I seldom success with using ram though.
  • wunderb0rwunderb0r Junior Member Posts: 530Registered Users

    wunderb0r said:

    wunderb0r said:

    you realize this now? ^^

    OP probably never built siege towers, because there is no reason to with current sieges. I don't blame him
    idk, think it depends on the race. They are infantry-heavy playstyles were (IMO) I want my Inf. on the wall. healthy. and as a unit.
    Have you considered using a lord or chaff unit to draw fire from the towers so your infantry can just march up the walls?

    There is no reason to get a siege tower in this game. Absolutely, no practical reason.
    I don't see how one option is in any way superior to the other. There are so many factors in this game, I just disagree to outright state that towers are completely useless (at last, Im talking SP campaign ofc)

    plus, I like me my immersion and no siege is complete without SIEGE TOWAHS!
  • ItharusItharus Senior Member Posts: 7,875Registered Users
    In older TW games there were more passive attacks built into the fortresses that *did* discourage blobbling. Towers all fired, first off. You had to capture or destroy them to get them to stop -- and capturing didn't happen automatically from attacker presence, you had to clear the defenders out first - and those towers could fire in all directions. Second, gateways had boiling oil and murder holes. Passing units through a gate you hadn't first destroyed by bombardment or captured from the walls was a fast track to losing units. There were also concentric walls with overlapping fields of fire, these other walls required either being breached by artillery or siege engines, or scaled. Or you face the gate again... the gate had some of the best ranged fire coming out of it in addition to the damage it did to units moving through before the gatehouse was capped/destroyed.

    Go figure.

    So... yeah... the answer kind of is in older total wars. Just gotta make the AI have better logic to deal with it. The system really started going downhill with Shogun 2. The system in Shogun 2 was fine for Shogun 2 because japanese fortifications were... well... japanese fortifications. Different design elements. In a game that uses predominantly european/middle-eastern fortification philosophy though the system is sorely lacking as is.
Sign In or Register to comment.