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

Had Good Siege Battle Going On...

Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior MemberRegistered Users Posts: 24,590
Was assaulting Karak Izor with Skarsnik's Amry + attached Waagh. Had just taken the walls, there were still substantial dwarf forces left guarding the victory point, including Ironbreakers, I prepare for the final push and then...

army losses kicks in and the Dwarfs all run away to the eternal shame of their ancestors.

Talk about anti-climactic.

Can we please remove the army losses penalty from siege defenders until the victory point is taken? Siege assaults always seem to end about ten minutes too early.

Comments

  • JycceJycce Registered Users Posts: 264
    That would be great yes. IMO, garrisons should be unbreakable (or shouldn't be able to shatter) in at least all the faction's capital (maybe only if they are tier 3 or above).
  • WaaaghCheifWaaaghCheif Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,184
    Army loss penalties needs to be trickle down, it just feels like a on and off switch currently, binary.
  • hhhmmmhhhmmm Registered Users Posts: 129
    Siege battles are super tedious as is. Making defenders fight to the last man would make that even worse
  • LordCommanderLordCommander Registered Users Posts: 1,265
    Army loss penalties only affecting heavily damaged units (units under 25% health maybe) makes more sense. Having three or four enemy units in town centre suddenly deciding to mass route is awkward and is too advantageous to artillery-heavy factions.
  • SolidJamesSolidJames Registered Users Posts: 229
    Yeah I agree with @hhhmmm I wouldn't mind longer sieges with less army loss penalties across the board but only once they actually make sieges not suck so much ass that even taking a pyrrhic victory AR is more appealing than actually fighting the battle yourself.

    Much more needs to be done to sieges to make them more enjoyable first than making them longer by default and that fix ain't coming until game 3. So as it stands the idea itself isn't a bad one but is made one by the current sad state of siege battles. Something to look forward to in the future hopefully.
  • Bonutz619Bonutz619 Registered Users Posts: 2,148
    edited June 4
    Agreed. Army losses kick in way too early.
  • innerpinnerp Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 641
    yep i've noticed it kicking in when enemies still have half an army left (not counting low tier armies)
  • GeorgeTrumanGeorgeTruman Registered Users Posts: 52
    While we're at it we should narrow the streets! Anything to make sieges more tedious and clunky.
  • erza321erza321 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,350
    I just like to point out that the OP is fighting Dwarfs and they should fight to the bitter end to protect their holds.
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 24,590
    edited June 4
    hhhmmm said:

    Siege battles are super tedious as is. Making defenders fight to the last man would make that even worse

    They're tedious because CA levelled the playing field between attacker and defender and then made them quasi mandatory with the overly generous siege timer, although they reduced it at least by two turns in the Shadow and the Blade patch.

    Sieges should greatly favor the defender, but at the same time, sieging someone out should be a viable alternative too, so the siege timer should be reduced by at least another two turns, but the defender should get massively buffed in return.

    Sieges right now end too effin' early because the defender poops his pants as soon as the walls are taken, that needs to be changed because it makes no sense. When would half a dozen Dwarf units in relatively good shape willingly surrender a Karak to an army of battered Greenskins?

  • TheLowKingTheLowKing Registered Users Posts: 158
    Sieges are just battles with slightly different terrain unfortunatly. They have ended up with a bunch of old mechanics like capture points and towers combined with walls being bad and a completely messed up retreat mechanic. Makes things a bit of a jarring mess. Its not made easier by the strength of garrisons either.

    CA really need to decide for Warhammer 3 what they want sieges to be.
Sign In or Register to comment.