Question about Bombardment

[grumjug]

I am playing a game as the Romans in which I have started a war against the Dutch, who own the Great Wall. On the first turn of the war, I moved stacks of Legionaries and Trebs next to a bunch of small walled cities defended by Swiss Mercs. When I started bombarding the next turn, I was surprised that after 24+ tries I had not done a single point of damage to any of the defenders. I managed to destroy several buildings, but I am starting to think that it is going to be impossible for me to do any damage with trebs , and I will have to rely on my armies of Ancient Cavalry to do all the fighting.

So, in fewer words, is it impossible for a Trebuchet to damage a Swiss Merc fortified behind a wall?

ETA: only one of the cities is on a hill

 

[CKS]

It isn't impossible, but trebuchets will not do well in this situation. Your chances of winning are poor even if the trebs target the Swiss mercs. Are you playing vanilla, PTW or Conquests? In Conquests, artillery-type units preferentially target units, but in PTW and (I think) vanilla, most artillery attacks seem to be against population or buildings. This makes trebs a lot less useful for attacking cities.

 

[grumjug]

this is C3C

I really expected to be able to do some damage. I guess I never really understood how bombardment works.

 

[Bucephalus]

I think something else is going on here; are you familiar with the 'Great Wall' bug?

With the GW bug, if you bombard a city of a civ owning the GW, you can destroy all buildings in that city, including Wonders Great and Small. It's something to do with the fact that walls are the first structure to be targeted by bombardment; when the civ has the GW, those walls are not 'built' walls so cannot be destroyed.

Since it is statistically unlikely that 24 tries with a treb wouldn't do a single hitpoint of damage (trebs are not that bad), I'd say it's another facet of the GW bug.

 

[Fiddlin Nero]

In my experience trebs and cannon are only useful outside of cities. Between their poor chances to hit and their single move point they are just not worth the effort against cities.

 

[Spoonwood]

I disagree with Fiddlin Nero. Cannons and trebuchets DO come as worth the effort against cities.

 

[TheOverseer714]

Attack the city with the great wall with a pile of cheap disposable units. When you capture it, no more Dutch walls. If you can't hold the town, give it to someone you can whoop later, or burn it.

 

[Kaidonni]

I disagree with Fiddlin Nero. Cannons and trebuchets DO come as worth the effort against cities.

I second this. Okay, some of the times my artillery crews seem to be firing confetti, but when they do hit and inflict damage, I have less hit points to have to confront. In some cases, a lot less. It can make a big difference between losing just a few units or losing a whole lot.

 

[Delphi456]

In one game I bombarded the city with the GW and it destroyed the GW. Problem solved.

 

[CKS]

In PTW I would not bother to bombard cities with cats or trebs. With cannons I might try to reduce the population by bombarding it if it is over size 6 or if the enemy has a lot of culture. In Conquests I would, provided I had sufficient artillery units. (If I had only a few, I'd use them for picking off units in the open, as I'd likely be in trouble.)