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 needs to be done for sieges

drogarito#2548drogarito#2548 Registered Users Posts: 1,816
Most of us agree that the current state of sieges in WH3 is the worst in the entire series. So this is what should be done in order to make sieges epic:

The walls need more HP. Only siege engines/artillery should be able to damage it. Not all LLs have siege attack. Infantry takes a lot of time to destroy the gates or the wall. Walls have a anti-magic layer on both sides of it so that the casters cannot one click kill all the blobbed units in front of the gates for example. If you destroy the walls, the anti-magic barrier in that area is destroyed, meaning that both attacker and defender can use AOE spells there. Walls should be wider, and units can only get on it through doors, and not from everywhere, you click. The walls are wider, but the units can fall down the walls. You can also use your infantry units to kick down the ladders.

The three-layered settlement as in Shogun 2 where you have the citadel in the middle. Each wall of defense broken gives + 10 leadership to the attacker and -10 to the defender. Some races like dwarfs should be able to fight till the death, with no leadership penalty in their cities. You capture the main citadel, and the city has fallen. No capture points are scattered around the map, just the leadership buff/penalty for destroyed layers of walls. Only 1 capture point at the citadel means that the AI would work more easily.

A bit smaller cities (but not too small, most of the settlements are ghost towns and are unable to defend with 20 units only)
360-degree cities

The main problem is that ladders/siege towers/battering rams is 20 years old formula and it simply does not work anymore. Therefore, CA should make unique siege engines and unique siege defenses.

Ladders, battering rams and siege towers all take turns to build. The same thing goes for unique race-themed siege engines and unique siege defenses. Some races have better siege engines as the attackers, while others have better siege defenses. The problem of sieges now is that the attacker is heavily disadvantaged, because of walls, walled towers, poppables. Now, battering rams are useless because some units can destroy the gates before you bring the battering rams. Battering rams have more HP and cause a lot of damage to the gates (that have a lot of HP). Ladders can be kicked off the walls.
For example, skaven and dwarfs should be able to sap walls via underground tunnels. Or they can just,make tunnels on the other side of the cities. Or you can bring forth Dwarf Zeppelin to bombard the walls, or some gobbo catapults that catapult + parachute gobbos inside the city. Or Bretonnian trebuchet that spread the plague after being used during the siege. Siege engines should be BIG, like LOTR Gondor style big. Without them being big, sieges will never be epic spectacles.

All races have burning oil at the gates. Unique siege defenses are also race themed - for example, nurgle has walls with eyes that protect them from stealth units capturing artillery or gates. Nurgle also has corrosive bile at the walls. They also have living walls with eyes + living towers - a bunch of tentacles with big range that fight in melee. Tomb Kings have Archimedes' Death ray that burns down everything on its way. WoC have molten lava around cities as the means of defense, while human factions have water ditches that must be filled with sand in order to cross. Vampires have a passive ability to make zombies out of the fallen enemies' units. Lizardmen have jungle rot that debuffs the enemy, while Kislev has some frost debuff.

So depending on the city you are fighting in, there are advantages and disadvantages, so some races might find it easy to besiege X race's city, while the other is struggling. Or vice versa. But the main point is, cities should give you a feeling that you are fighting in a certain race's territory which has consequences for both sides.

Poppable towers are removed from the game!!!! No need to elaborate on that.
Defensive supplies mechanic is expanded. You have a lot more options when it comes to defenses. You can spend supplies to stop the attrition (by spending it as food for your troops), or repair walls and towers, or upgrade towers on walls, or have access to WALLED ARTILLERY, stronger walls/gates, stronger burning oil, water/lava ditch around walls, spend it on ammo for your ranged units. So basically, you have a lot of choices to choose from, but with limited amounts of defensive supplies, you need to spend your supplies carefully, depending on what your aim is during the siege. Traps are pre-deployable, and there is around 8 of them. They can even be made to be race-themed to make races feel more unique. Example: Bretonnian archers have anti-cavalry stakes. Flaming balls are a thing for ambushes. Each race has a hero or ll that gives you access to certain siege defenses/siege engines. They also give you bonus defensive supplies, or supplies replenishment for the settlement.

Another thing would be sally forth night battles . So basically, as the attacker takes for instance 3 turns to build some unique siege engine, you can sally forth and try to sabotage his new big guns. You can either destroy the damn thing, or let's say damage it 33% (which is equal to 1 more turn for the siege engine to be built). These missions are being carried out with cavalry or strealth units during the night battles, and the attacker is not fully prepared, with most of his units scattered around. Same thing can be done to destroy some ranged units of the attacker.If you destroy the siege engine and come back to the city gates, you are victorious. if you fail to do so, the attacker can instantly attack your city in retaliation. You literally choose should you attack the city or call it a day and continue with siege attrition.

Another main thing is stealth units being able to climb walls. Their role in sieges would be to open the city gates without the defender even knowing it, or to destroy siege defenses, or even use walled artillery against the defender. Some units like spiders climb walls, while for example death runners have ninja hooks that make them across. In order to defend yourself from stealth units, you have to place a unit on wall, or you have to make unique siege defense (aka watchtower) that only gives you line of sight against stealth units.

Regarding the minor sieges, I think that land battles is a terrible idea. The distance between settlements should be bigger, and therefore, the map needs to be stretched. The main frustration with sieges now is that when you are attacker. Momentum mechanic simply doesn't not work as intended and cannot compensate for all the power you get from poppables, walls and walled towers.

The main approach should be that neither side has the advantage, and that the win/lose ratio should be 50%-50% for the attacker/defender. Now, it is heavily favoring the defender, like 80%. CA should just look at siege of Gondor / Minas Tirith / Helm's deep. Or just go to good old Stronghold Crusader and see how many traps and siege engines you have there. Kingdom of Heaven can be another great reference.
Tagged:

Comments

  • Wyvax#7456Wyvax#7456 Registered Users Posts: 6,264
    I regret that I can only give one like/agree to this post. The Warhammer setting is the perfect excuse to expound on preexisting features and mechanics, not to regress upon them. Sieges and assaults on settlements could be incredibly in depth and diverse, yet they decided to simplify them to such a sad degree. Same goes for many other simplified game mechanics such as terrain advantages and the neutering of the power of tactical manuever. At least it hasn't been fully cut like naval battles, but with the way the franchise has been heading with each recent game (not just the Warhammer trilogy) I don't expect them to ever exceed their past work except in the field of graphics.
  • Maedrethnir#1968Maedrethnir#1968 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 17,377
    Great ideas. The more flavour the better. Sieges are at their lowest point in TW:WH, in fact, they are more of glorified urban warfare than actual sieges.
  • drogarito#2548drogarito#2548 Registered Users Posts: 1,816
    edited October 2022
    But the probelm is that I was literally talking about these things and was getting downvoted by the fanboys who only admit there is a problem if a big youtuber points it out. Just lame.
  • drogarito#2548drogarito#2548 Registered Users Posts: 1,816


    This is what we need in sieges. Look at those stone balls and the head-cutter machine on the walls. And the moment when they use Siege Tower to destroy the gates and then make a bridge out of it to get across.



    Or pitch set up to be enflamed while the siege engines approach.



    Helm's Deep - kicking off ladders, bomb, throwing rocks at the enemy




    Minas Tirith - huge siege engines, GROND, Nazguls throwing ppl off the walls, catapults bombarding the defenders with human heads



    Siege of Isengard - epic Treants attack



    Stronghold Crusader - more advanced siege mechanics than Warhammer 3, 20 years ago.

    Cow Trebutchets that spread plague, shields for siege artillery, water moats around castles that can be filled with sand to get across, burning pitch, spike traps, caged wolfs, burning oil at the gates, fire brigade that prevents the fire from spreading across the city, apothecary to stop the spread of the plague, Gates with falling bridge and water under it, ladders, NINJAS WITH ROPES that can climb walls, ppl with torches that can set the entire city on fire (if they manage to survive up to that point), Nafatun bombers, etc, oil smelter (boils oil for siege defenses), tunnelers that sap walls, mangonels and balistas on walls, etc.

    And what did we get from all of these historical and fantasy elements? Poppable tower defense nonsense.
  • HarveyJames#1968HarveyJames#1968 Registered Users Posts: 376
    edited October 2022
    nurgle walls = could have corrosive moat and sticky walls making it hard too climb for stalk/climbing units
    Tzeentch walls = eyes on walls detecting stealth/stalk units nearby + barrier on gates
    Khorne walls = blood moat
    Slaanesh walls = maybe writhe making it hard too climb it for stalk/climbing units

    gates could have their own faction specific defences too
    giving more unique defences too each faction for deployables /walls /gates would make them much more interesting once the AI gets fixed and multi layers of hard too break walls/gates.

    i think infantry units needs too be much larger though for sieges cos 160 units die too fast under proper siege defences..
    i would also suggest the 3kingdoms way of recruitment 3 chars - 6 units each this has nice side effect of adding a unit extra into armies and keeping the number of SEM's down making sieges look more Epic.. you could then specialise the chars more into what they recruit and bonuses towards that line in particular an range/Siege char..
    CA please give us Shogun Multi layer wall Sieges back along with Roles/Fog of war we want EPIC sieges!! 'personally i think the 3 kingdoms style of building armies is the best for balance alongside stronger unit roles and larger unit sizes' also allowing Chars too specialise in range/siege in particular in skills/traits..
  • drogarito#2548drogarito#2548 Registered Users Posts: 1,816
    edited October 2022
    Actually I really like the idea of monogod walls. But other races should also have unique walls/defenses/artillery on walls. Nurgle walls should poison you when being hit and have giant tentacles melee towers. Slaanesh walls could be slippery and therefore hard or impossible to climb,maybe only stealth units with ropes such as deathrunners could do that. Also slaanesh walls should have some thorns that deal damage to the attacker (pleasure of pain or something like that)
  • Maximum998#7045Maximum998#7045 Registered Users Posts: 9
    edited October 2022
    You missed main problem: defender has a HUUUUUGE disadvantage in siege.

    1) Walls doesnt give you any advantage

    So as high elves i have no reason to take them. I can just shoot enemies for free

    2) City itself is a disadvantage.
    Becouse you have no space, no LOS, you cant concentrate your forces, you cant dodge magic.

    Playing melee faction in defensive siege is a nightmare becouse as melee faction you want open area and go wide to flank and surround
  • drogarito#2548drogarito#2548 Registered Users Posts: 1,816
    Defender has disadvantage? Are you kidding me?
  • Maximum998#7045Maximum998#7045 Registered Users Posts: 9
    edited October 2022

    Defender has disadvantage? Are you kidding me?

    In TWW3 - yes.

    Exept crappy towers defender has pretty much nothing. Walls are joke. Gates are joke. Defender has no space for units. Defender can loose becouse of one crappy flag.

    For example imagine Scaven\high elves(atacker) vs Melee faction(defender). In defensve siege Khorne or Slaanesh has no chances. In land battle they have far more chances.
  • drogarito#2548drogarito#2548 Registered Users Posts: 1,816
    You just need two poppable towers and that's it. And for some races, even the walled towers are enough of an advantage
  • Bloodydagger#9716Bloodydagger#9716 Registered Users Posts: 4,842
    Bring back WH2 sieges.
  • Maximum998#7045Maximum998#7045 Registered Users Posts: 9
    edited October 2022

    You just need two poppable towers and that's it. And for some races, even the walled towers are enough of an advantage

    You mean towers that archers can destroy in 2 shots?

    And I didnt see those towers in ANY videos that you showed there.
  • Maximum997#5036Maximum997#5036 Registered Users Posts: 30
    edited October 2022

    You just need two poppable towers and that's it. And for some races, even the walled towers are enough of an advantage

    City and walls itself should be advantage.
    Not some magicly spawned towers.

    That's why so much players hate tww3 sieges even more then Tww2 sieges

    Here you go.

    Good example about this
  • drogarito#2548drogarito#2548 Registered Users Posts: 1,816
    But the problem with poppables is:

    1) they are poppables
    2) they are tower defense nonsense mobile game thing
    3) they are overpowered

    But if you build two level 4 poppables, they win you all battles. Just absurd if you ask me. I hate them and they should be removed from the game.
  • Maximum997#5036Maximum997#5036 Registered Users Posts: 30

    But the problem with poppables is:

    1) they are poppables
    2) they are tower defense nonsense mobile game thing
    3) they are overpowered

    But if you build two level 4 poppables, they win you all battles. Just absurd if you ask me. I hate them and they should be removed from the game.

    Yes. CA wasn't able to give any tactical or strategical advantage to defended(or just remove disadvantage). So they gave defender those towers to force attacker move on
  • 4fourcztery#60764fourcztery#6076 Registered Users Posts: 564

    Defender has disadvantage? Are you kidding me?

    Province capital winning conditions are ridiculous. You literally have to defend 2 exposed points to win the siege, otherwise the stupid timer gets set and you lose when it runs out, no matter your progress with the balance of power.
  • drogarito#2548drogarito#2548 Registered Users Posts: 1,816
    There are some minor settlements that are easier to defend than the big ones, I forgot exactly which one, but some races have like a minor settlement on the hill. The easiest to defend really, and it's a 360 degree map. So it probably depends on the race you are playing with. But all in all, siege "rework" has utterly failed on so many levels, including minor settlements. I think Norsca has some minor settlements with some object standing right in front of your place for poppable towers. So even as much as I hate poppable towers, I have to say that in numerous cases you have random objects blocking them from being effective. A total mess.
  • Maximum998#7045Maximum998#7045 Registered Users Posts: 9

    There are some minor settlements that are easier to defend than the big ones, I forgot exactly which one

    Every single minor settlement is better then walled.

    Becouse it has 1 strategic point to defend instead of two.
  • drogarito#2548drogarito#2548 Registered Users Posts: 1,816
    Another big problem with sieges is how everything is compressed. You can't even drag units to the widest formation because the terrain does not allow it. This is something that frustrates me the most. These small streets where you have to go in some stupid deep formation.
Sign In or Register to comment.