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

A proper Siege Rework

drogarito#2548drogarito#2548 Registered Users Posts: 1,817
As we can see, those in-battle deployables are useless and the AI cannot even use them properly. With wallbreaker ability or whatever it's called, the walls will last for 5 minutes max. You can clearly see that CA was aiming for the cheapest option here.

But how should siege rework look like? Basically, it should be improved version of Rome 2 and Shogun 2 sieges. One of the things that I would love to see are unique faction capitals and other unique cities. By unique cities, I mean completely different look of Hellpit and Skavenblight just like Athens and Sparta are different. Each faction should have like 3-4 unique looking tier 5 cities. Or simply put it, each subfaction should have its own unique capital.

Another thing is that buildings built in the campaign should be clearly seen in the city while under siege. Some of the buildings can be used as a cover for ranged units.

The thing that we also desperately want are unique faction siege engines. Each faction should have its own siege engines (not siege units like plagueclaw catapults or bolt throwers), but siege engines that take a couple of turns to make. They should ofc have their ups and downs. But reducing siege engines to siege towers, battering rams and GODDAMN LADDERS is so bad. If ladders are present, they should take at least one turn to make each! I mean, you are in the fantasy universe, be creative, make something BIG AND SCARY to scale the walls. Just look what Archimedes did to the Romans and make it on steroids lol.


The walls should be wider and way tougher. The walls are crumbling too fast while walls in Rome 2 could hold up way longer. The stronger the wall is, the bigger the challenge the siege really is.

Unique faction siege engines demand unique faction defensive mechanisms, whether we are talking about pre-deployables catapults, balistas, or some giant solar death ray. I'm looking at you, that old Dwarfs trailer with some imba siege engines! Gates should have molten lava or acid or stones thrown to the attackers. Also, the city walls should be surrounded by moats & ditches - water, fire, slime, lava, ice, you name it. Terrain and climate could play a bigger role on the battlefield (both during siege and regular battles). For instance, Kislevites would have some penalty while fighting in Tomb King's terrain. If that is already the case on campaign map where climate exists, why shouldn't this be applied in battles and sieges? There should be more terrain obstacles like aquatic or sewer slime terrain that makes some units suffer while the others benefit from it. For instance, skaven and nurgle benefit from the slime by moving faster, while the slime itself is corrosive to armoured units. Or something like that, idk.


Some stealth units like deathrunners should be able to climb walls unnoticed and capture points. towers or even open city gates unnoticed. Some monsters should also be able to climb walls. It is better for them to climb them than to pierce through them like a knife through the butter. OFC, climbing walls skill should be rare in rosters to make things more balanced.


One of the coolest features would be UNDERGROUND levels of the city. Just imagine a city's sewer system filled with deathrunners that can pop out of nowhere in the city surface. A defender should be able to deploy some units at the underground chokepoints. On the other side, he might spot a force of dwarfs sappers who are trying to detonate the walls (with a big boom at the surface level!!!). Or imagine Ikkit Claw planting the bomb or nuking the city to begin with lol UNDERGROUND level should be in dark ofc. You could deploy some torches in order to detect stealth units like deathrunners or some stealth gobbos or whatever the case. Some factions might have torches everywhere, some might have none.

That leads us to COVER OF DARKNESS - i.e. good old night battles. Night should actually reduce the visibility of both the attacker and the defender. Torches would be of use, but it would be even trickier to have some rain extinguishing them all LOL. Night battles are where stealth units shine for obvious reasons. And of course, fire arrow should improve the visibility as the arrow wave approaches.

Rain and wind should be able to **** things up to ranged units and artillery alike. No more mindless doomstacks y'all! Some factions like elves should have this penalty reduced or ignored for some units.

What also should be reworked are the capture points. Sieges should be 360 (if not 420 lol). Each city should have capture points on each side. For instance, each side of the wall has 4 capture points. Second level of the city has 3. Third level has 2 and the core of the city and the final capture point has one. Since the defender has the upper hand with all of these cool ditches, siege defences, lavas, etc, capturing points to the attacker should mean a big leadership buff and some vigor replenishment. The closer the attacker is to the core of the city, the bigger the leadership buff he gets. On the other side, the defender loses leadership once the capture points are taken. Re-capturing points would be a buff for the defenders for sure.

As for the flying units. Well, they should attack the walls if you ask me (at the cost of getting mowed down by the unique defense siege engines and ranged units). I think that flying units or legendary lords alone shouldn't be able to capture a point. Or the time for capturing point should be bigger to even the odds.

Unique faction cities would mean unique city planning. For instance, cavalry factions like Bretonnia should have city planned in a way that it favors cavalry (clear, wide streets for instance). Heavy ranged factions like wood elves should have a lot of choke points for ranged units etc etc. Skaven should for instance have muddy and slimey terrain that debuffs cavalry for instance or some other type of units.

City size is another thing we should put in consideration. They shouldn't be too big nor too small for 20 vs 20 unit sieges. However, on campaign map, things are bit more different since you often have 3 armies attacking a city. Maybe the best way is to have city size optimized for 1v1 multiplayer sieges.

Now, in multiplayer, since we have 12 400 gold for the army, we should have unique cash for siege engines and defences. That way. both the attacker and defender should make up their mind what should they bring in to the battle. SIEGE ENGINES AND SIEGE DEFENSES SHOULD BE PRE-DEPLOYABLES to make things trickier!


To sum it up, TOWER DEFENSE MODE (i.e. in-battle deployables) + wallbreaker ability was the cheapest and laziest way for CA to approach the sieges.
Tagged:

Comments

  • drogarito#2548drogarito#2548 Registered Users Posts: 1,817
    Also, Skaven undercities should be implemented in a way that you can launch attack on the city from it. It would be also cool for dwarfs to have the ability to attack cities from underground tunnels as well.
Sign In or Register to comment.