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.
I'd be willing to bet most units with siege attacker have it now.
Except maybe Vlad. But that would look badass and I want it now that I think about it.
Well, Vlad probably does have Ogre tier strength. And if the Ogres have it...
By lore, he should even be above that, since vampires in lore are op. Still that he'll likely use magic to explode a wall, some which ... eh, i don't think the siege rework had enough charlemagne to implement.
So, I'm glad to see that Wallbreaker is in the game on giant monsters like the Giant and Stonehorn, but it being on the ogres themselves seems quite excessive. Is this exclusive to the OK or will other monstrous infantry get it as well such as Kroxigors and Trolls? They're already capable of attacking doors which is cool, but smashing down the walls sounds overkill, that's akin to regular infantry chopping down the doors. IMO Wallbreaker only makes sense on very specific units, the most massive and powerful of SEMs (Shaggoths, Dread Saurians, Giants, Mammoths, etc) or on specialist units such as Warp Grinders and Dwarfen Miners.
Honestly it just seems like sieges are just being even more trivialized. There's no reason that monstrous infantry like ogres can't make a big ramp/siege tower to get onto the walls or scale them from the inside.
Agreed.
Ogres aren't THAT strong. And if they are -- so are basically all other MI, and that's bad.
MI already laugh gates to death, this is over kill.
WTF is the point of walls if EVERYTHING can break them? Silly. Walls are already severely under powered in this game... those towers should have like 360 degree firing arcs and put out significant volleys of arrows and even have an artillery piece on top in the high end walls -- and they should fire regardless of whether a unit is next to them because the towers are little forts to themselves and just manned by local guards (guards, not garrison). Should you be able to capture them with a unit? OFC. But a friendly unit should not have to be there to keep their fire active. SMH.
Look back to Medieval, CA. You guys did this right once. Fortifications are supposed to require being massively out numbered.
The solution would obviously be to reduce the tower range of the walls, but increase the wall health, so that you would have to sacrifice a significant amount of artillery ammunition to shoot down a wall, but you could safely stand back and let your artillery do the work. After all, why are sieges of all things the ypes of battles that are rushed?
To summarise: Remove Wall Attacker on Monstrous Infantry, let all SEMs attack walls (probably a few exceptions like Mortis Engine), reduce siege tower range (maybe have it tied to wall building tier, but never outrange artillery), increase wall health, so that taking one down is a significant investment of ammunition (this woud also mean, that you have to choose whether to take down towers or walls), and allow Sieges to have a logner duration so that they aren't so rushed.
I've legitimately never understood why MI can't climb walls. It's not like walls aren't wide enough for MI models to stand and fight on top of them; some of the more extreme animations might run against the edge of the wall zone, like Rat Ogres bellyflopping or Kroxigors death-rolling, but so what? Sliding and weird animation glitches happen all the time already. Just let MI climb walls.
I've legitimately never understood why MI can't climb walls. It's not like walls aren't wide enough for MI models to stand and fight on top of them; some of the more extreme animations might run against the edge of the wall zone, like Rat Ogres bellyflopping or Kroxigors death-rolling, but so what? Sliding and weird animation glitches happen all the time already. Just let MI climb walls.
Yup. One of the things we actually needed from the siege rework. Oh and artillery on walls.
Instead we get pop up barricades. Whoop-de-****-do
I've legitimately never understood why MI can't climb walls. It's not like walls aren't wide enough for MI models to stand and fight on top of them; some of the more extreme animations might run against the edge of the wall zone, like Rat Ogres bellyflopping or Kroxigors death-rolling, but so what? Sliding and weird animation glitches happen all the time already. Just let MI climb walls.
I think it was a result of janky attack animations and a balance issue.. Though if you ask me, they should just not have Monstrous Infantry have magical ladders and instead only be able to scale walls in Siege Towers.
I've legitimately never understood why MI can't climb walls. It's not like walls aren't wide enough for MI models to stand and fight on top of them; some of the more extreme animations might run against the edge of the wall zone, like Rat Ogres bellyflopping or Kroxigors death-rolling, but so what? Sliding and weird animation glitches happen all the time already. Just let MI climb walls.
Probably because the climbing animation function only for entities with the skeleton of a standard infantry. Not the end of the world, but what's done is done.
CA could've made them climb, like how they could've made spells interact with walls, or how they could've given give the defender an area to deploy outside the wall.
Ushabti has S6 Troll has S5 Treekin has S5 Rat Ogre has S5 Dragon Ogre would be S5 too, but they are Monstrous Beasts not Monstrous Infantry like the rest mentioned here. Kroxigor has S4 Generic Ogre is S4. The more elite ones (Maneater, characters) have 5. Fimir Warriors have S4
Kroxigors were S5 on tabletop.
I said I was lazy and just flipped through the rulebook, but there it was listed as 4 Still not in the mood to pick up the Lizard armybook to check if actually 5 there
-----Red Dox
This is from the 8th ed book; they were also S5 in 6th ed. They were only S4 in 7th ed.
It's doesn't make any sense from a realism standpoint, but it's a way to balance a race that has only a couple of weak units capable of scaling walls. That's the whole point.
It's doesn't make any sense from a realism standpoint, but it's a way to balance a race that has only a couple of weak units capable of scaling walls. That's the whole point.
They should have just made it so they could scale walls then
It's doesn't make any sense from a realism standpoint, but it's a way to balance a race that has only a couple of weak units capable of scaling walls. That's the whole point.
They should have just made it so they could scale walls then
Probably. But they didn't, so they needed another way.
I think Wallbreaker should not go to ogre-sized units and that Ogres should rely on their Slave Giants, artillery, and other giant creatures to break down anything other than gates.
It seems fair with the re-work to sieges that more will be chokepoint battles and since monstrous infantry still can't climb walls and the Ogres have no flyers and limited ranged they would be completely stymied by walls, even more than Bretonnia whose trebuchets and peasant archers + flying cavalry are decent besiegers.
Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence in society.” Mark Twain
It seems fair with the re-work to sieges that more will be chokepoint battles and since monstrous infantry still can't climb walls and the Ogres have no flyers and limited ranged they would be completely stymied by walls, even more than Bretonnia whose trebuchets and peasant archers + flying cavalry are decent besiegers.
Ogres will have excellent artillery and two of the most destructive lores in the game via fire and the Maw which would destroy blobs once they bust down the gates. Ogres were already going to be fine in sieges and no they're just going to weed-wack through the walls and bulldoze the defender.
The solution would obviously be to reduce the tower range of the walls, but increase the wall health, so that you would have to sacrifice a significant amount of artillery ammunition to shoot down a wall, but you could safely stand back and let your artillery do the work. After all, why are sieges of all things the ypes of battles that are rushed?
To summarise: Remove Wall Attacker on Monstrous Infantry, let all SEMs attack walls (probably a few exceptions like Mortis Engine), reduce siege tower range (maybe have it tied to wall building tier, but never outrange artillery), increase wall health, so that taking one down is a significant investment of ammunition (this woud also mean, that you have to choose whether to take down towers or walls), and allow Sieges to have a logner duration so that they aren't so rushed.
Agree with almost everything. Only the artillery range thing bothers me. Imho the defender should always have the option for counter battery fire. Just blasting away from safety is a relatively boring one sided affair and both sides should be involved in any possible strategy. If you want to blast down the walls (legitemate strategy!) you should out-artillery the defender! Mechanically this could easily be achieved by having 2 different types of towers (the current long range artillery ones and shorter ranged small arm ones with a 180°-270° firing arc) and making artillery deployable on walls (with the +20% range bonus) but also making sure that the attacker can deploy his artillery in clos enough to the walls that those are in range.
The solution would obviously be to reduce the tower range of the walls, but increase the wall health, so that you would have to sacrifice a significant amount of artillery ammunition to shoot down a wall, but you could safely stand back and let your artillery do the work. After all, why are sieges of all things the ypes of battles that are rushed?
To summarise: Remove Wall Attacker on Monstrous Infantry, let all SEMs attack walls (probably a few exceptions like Mortis Engine), reduce siege tower range (maybe have it tied to wall building tier, but never outrange artillery), increase wall health, so that taking one down is a significant investment of ammunition (this woud also mean, that you have to choose whether to take down towers or walls), and allow Sieges to have a logner duration so that they aren't so rushed.
Agree with almost everything. Only the artillery range thing bothers me. Imho the defender should always have the option for counter battery fire. Just blasting away from safety is a relatively boring one sided affair and both sides should be involved in any possible strategy. If you want to blast down the walls (legitemate strategy!) you should out-artillery the defender! Mechanically this could easily be achieved by having 2 different types of towers (the current long range artillery ones and shorter ranged small arm ones with a 180°-270° firing arc) and making artillery deployable on walls (with the +20% range bonus) but also making sure that the attacker can deploy his artillery in clos enough to the walls that those are in range.
I would counter enemy artillery with my own artillery. So I would allow artillery to be placed on the walls, as they well should be.. Also, as I said, I feel the range of the towers of the walls, should increase with each rank of the building. So maybe a tier 5 tower has the same range as most of the artillery in the game, with only a select few pieces yet outranging it.
It seems fair with the re-work to sieges that more will be chokepoint battles and since monstrous infantry still can't climb walls and the Ogres have no flyers and limited ranged they would be completely stymied by walls, even more than Bretonnia whose trebuchets and peasant archers + flying cavalry are decent besiegers.
It's like you've never played a siege battle off autoresolve or something...
2 units of MI shred a gate in seconds and are generally fine for clearing it out, too. MI are a bit stronger than they probably should be in this game, really.
Ogres were never going to have a problem in sieges. Especially not given that they can blow them apart with their guns and given recent spell history, probably have a spell that breaks them too.
Giving them wall breaker on top of that is a bit of a farce. Wall breaker should require specialized weaponry or GREAT size. Rogue Idols were kind of famous for their ability to smash walls -- people were like "wow that's cool! a unit so big it can break walls!". Now things that are at best knee height to them are going to do it? Without some warpstone driven power tools? What?
It seems fair with the re-work to sieges that more will be chokepoint battles and since monstrous infantry still can't climb walls and the Ogres have no flyers and limited ranged they would be completely stymied by walls, even more than Bretonnia whose trebuchets and peasant archers + flying cavalry are decent besiegers.
It's like you've never played a siege battle off autoresolve or something...
2 units of MI shred a gate in seconds and are generally fine for clearing it out, too. MI are a bit stronger than they probably should be in this game, really.
Ogres were never going to have a problem in sieges. Especially not given that they can blow them apart with their guns and given recent spell history, probably have a spell that breaks them too.
Giving them wall breaker on top of that is a bit of a farce. Wall breaker should require specialized weaponry or GREAT size. Rogue Idols were kind of famous for their ability to smash walls -- people were like "wow that's cool! a unit so big it can break walls!". Now things that are at best knee height to them are going to do it? Without some warpstone driven power tools? What?
It's like you haven't looked at the stats of the Leadbelchers or seen what tier they are. Ogres cannot blow apart the walls with their guns and there is no indication they get a spell to break walls so that would leave Ogres with what, 3 units that might break walls and two of them are 5th tier.
Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence in society.” Mark Twain
Comments
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeOgres aren't THAT strong. And if they are -- so are basically all other MI, and that's bad.
MI already laugh gates to death, this is over kill.
WTF is the point of walls if EVERYTHING can break them? Silly. Walls are already severely under powered in this game... those towers should have like 360 degree firing arcs and put out significant volleys of arrows and even have an artillery piece on top in the high end walls -- and they should fire regardless of whether a unit is next to them because the towers are little forts to themselves and just manned by local guards (guards, not garrison). Should you be able to capture them with a unit? OFC. But a friendly unit should not have to be there to keep their fire active. SMH.
Look back to Medieval, CA. You guys did this right once. Fortifications are supposed to require being massively out numbered.
- Report
7 · Disagree 7AgreeTo summarise: Remove Wall Attacker on Monstrous Infantry, let all SEMs attack walls (probably a few exceptions like Mortis Engine), reduce siege tower range (maybe have it tied to wall building tier, but never outrange artillery), increase wall health, so that taking one down is a significant investment of ammunition (this woud also mean, that you have to choose whether to take down towers or walls), and allow Sieges to have a logner duration so that they aren't so rushed.
- Report
5 · Disagree 5Agree- Report
5 · 1Disagree 5Agree- Report
4 · Disagree 4AgreeInstead we get pop up barricades. Whoop-de-****-do
- Report
5 · 3Disagree 5Agree- Report
3 · Disagree 3AgreeCA could've made them climb, like how they could've made spells interact with walls, or how they could've given give the defender an area to deploy outside the wall.
- Report
1 · Disagree 1Agree- Report
1 · Disagree 1Agree- Report
1 · 1Disagree 1Agree- Report
1 · Disagree 1AgreeThis is from the 8th ed book; they were also S5 in 6th ed. They were only S4 in 7th ed.
- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
2 · 2Disagree 2Agree- Report
2 · Disagree 2Agree- Report
1 · Disagree 1AgreeThat said they should also be able to build rams.
- Report
6 · Disagree 6Agree- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
1 · Disagree 1Agree- Report
0 · 1Disagree AgreeSiege rework is a complete and utter joke.
- Report
2 · Disagree 2AgreeMechanically this could easily be achieved by having 2 different types of towers (the current long range artillery ones and shorter ranged small arm ones with a 180°-270° firing arc) and making artillery deployable on walls (with the +20% range bonus) but also making sure that the attacker can deploy his artillery in clos enough to the walls that those are in range.
- Report
1 · Disagree 1Agree- Report
1 · Disagree 1Agree2 units of MI shred a gate in seconds and are generally fine for clearing it out, too. MI are a bit stronger than they probably should be in this game, really.
Ogres were never going to have a problem in sieges. Especially not given that they can blow them apart with their guns and given recent spell history, probably have a spell that breaks them too.
Giving them wall breaker on top of that is a bit of a farce. Wall breaker should require specialized weaponry or GREAT size. Rogue Idols were kind of famous for their ability to smash walls -- people were like "wow that's cool! a unit so big it can break walls!". Now things that are at best knee height to them are going to do it? Without some warpstone driven power tools? What?
- Report
1 · 1Disagree 1Agree- Report
0 · Disagree Agree