Big Issues with city defence/defence buildings!

[Nutteria]

Well as the topic goes.

I start playing some 1v1 with my brother and I keep geting the same treatment in my besieged citys.No matter how much defence they have they still die VERY quickly reguardless of the strenght of the attacker.2 siege units no matter the era can devastate your city HP in 2-3 turn MAX and then even a spearman can just bump the last HP point and take over.

There is IMO HUGE problem with the scaling of the city Health/defence between eras.Its like my City HP is a constant number(say 10) and that is driving me INSANE!

Few glating problems shortlisted :

1) Building on hills does not bring anything to the table - siege units do X amount of damage reguardless
2) Having extra health resources nearby (eg fish sheep cows etc etc) is not bumping your City HP thus making it withstand longer sieges - a BIG logical gap in design imo.That backed up with the FACT that those health special tiles don`t have ANY specific use outside of providing +1 food/hammer points that they can actually be converted in to very strong strategic resource for Fortress citys and shuffle up the gameplay abit.
3) No matter what defence buildings you have and STR the city has it does not seem to co-work with the City HP/endurance.Don`t belive me? Try tribusheting a modern city - you will be amazed when his HP falls to 0 after 2-3 rounds of bombardment.
4) Citys need EXTRA defence against arrow/gunpowder(excluding modern ones ofc) units when castle is build.Currently this building adds exactly nothing for its cost.
5) Military buildings such as rax-armory-workshop should add a small bonus to the garrnisoned unit so that you can actually have a shot at retaliating with it.
6) Your military buildings also should add a moderate buff to the city attack damage modified by the garnissoned unit STR. Srsly 68 defence city dealing 2 damage to musketmen?! SRSLY!? YOU SURE ITS OK????
7) There needs to be some form of better anti naval city defence building that bumps the range of the city from 2 to 3 in the industrial era. It is very annoying when I can`t do Jack against naval bombardment.
8) There needs to be some upgrade of the city ranage for land attacks in the industrial/modern era.Getting 3 artillerys surrounded by a band of infantry is borderline overpwered and the city has 0 chance to retaliate in any shape or form.
9) There is a DIRE NEED of big + defence AND HP upgrade to the city defence in the modern era.Steamrolling citys with tanks is just stupid ESP in multiplayer.You sacrifice everything you go to kill the defensive army and then steamroll 5 citys with 3 tanks.What a joke.

I know it is a ranty post to say the least but those GLARING issues are breaking the Multiplayer and singleplayer(providing the AI learns to play that is) beyong hope.

 

[André Alfenaar]

I am sorry, but I don't agree.

In one of my latest games one of cities was threatened to be captured, so I bought a city wall which raised the strength from 8 to 13. This saved the city. This was in the beginning of the game.

In modern times it is correct that city walls would contribute less. Still a fixed amount of 5 strength, but usually a city in that time has a bigger defence on it's own. And it wouldn't be realistic if city walls would stand against artillery, would it? Winning one extra round to counterattack is already a pretty strong advantage.

 

[dannythefool]

In modern times it is correct that city walls would contribute less. Still a fixed amount of 5 strength, but usually a city in that time has a bigger defence on it's own.

Don't forget that the city walls enable you to build a castle, for another +7.5, that the Kremlin wonder will add +50%, and that a city on a hill will get the defensive bonus from hills.

Between these we're looking at a difference between 12.5 and 22 strength, which can still be quite significant in the modern era.

 

[Nutteria]

You dont get the point.Once siege units kick in Your defence raiting means nothing.If you don`t belive me test it yourself.Adding walls and castle will make you waste one more turn on bombardment at MOST while it should add ATLEAST that much.

Also I`d appritiate some comments on my City health/tiles/defence suggestion.I may be a bit overdoing it but I`d appritiate some oppinions in order to correct my shortlist.

 

[kaltorak]

Training units for defense > building defense buildings

Maybe because in previous civs all defending untis were inside the city and now cities can attack, you thought you should be able to resist attacks just with a garrisoned unit and defense buildings. But that's not the case. You need field units for defense. A city can't win a battle against several units by itself. Even less if it's siege. I think it makes sense.

 

[dannythefool]

Also I`d appritiate some comments on my City health/tiles/defence suggestion.I may be a bit overdoing it but I`d appritiate some oppinions in order to correct my shortlist.

I agree that bonus food tiles aren't useful right now. I will go so far as to say that all they're doing is preventing you from building more useful improvements on those tiles. I think making them improve city HP is a great idea. It would make sense if it took longer to siege a city that has more food sources available.

 

[Nutteria]

Training units for defense > building defense buildings

Maybe because in previous civs all defending untis were inside the city and now cities can attack, you thought you should be able to resist attacks just with a garrisoned unit and defense buildings. But that's not the case. You need field units for defense. A city can't win a battle against several units by itself. Even less if it's siege. I think it makes sense.

Don`t get me wrong I fully understand the CiV 5 concept.However you need to consider something else.Due to maintenance issues that limit your army numbers you can`t have offensive army a deffensive army AND garnissons+ defensive buildings because you will go bankrupt.Having a defensive army only is a viable "workaround" but in my mind a city esp fully equiped for withstanding sieges should have its maintenance costs thrown in those buildings to cover the alternative spendings(aka building more units) .Having a 60+ defence rennesance city being one-turned by 3 cannons and two rifles is..just BAD design.

 

[Nutteria]

To further support my thesis I present you this very nice Walkthrough in a AW game :

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=383153&page=1 - therat vs the world.In his game you can clearly see how easly single units can take citys with way higher defence number then the attakers.And how those citys do measly 1 or 2 damage...

 

[Schuesseled]

I'm gonna jump in here and let you guys know that city Hp has nothing to do with stocks of food.

 

[dannythefool]

I'm gonna jump in here and let you guys know that city Hp has nothing to do with stocks of food.

No, but it's a good idea -- real medieval sieges were decided by how much food they had more often than by how strong the walls were.

 

[Ravenal]

Cities have 20 HPs, always.

 

[Nutteria]

Cities have 20 HPs, always.

And you think this is OK?

So its the same for a pop 4 city to have 20hp while pop 20 City with walls castle armory granary and 3 food resourses to have 20hp?!

This is false logic no matter how you look at it.

IMO if the food tiles(sheeps cows fish - etc etc etc) had the ability to add HP to the city they will make the map and city placement quite more interesting and tactical decision because right now they are not.

ALSO I suggest for the that the great general to have the option to build CItadel IN the city - for the cost of 4 GPT.(same goes for the rest of the GPs too! this can really make GP farming from useless to actually benefitial)

 

[Lightzy]

dl a mod called 'active city defense'.


defensive buildings are still crap and not worth the time to build, but at least you get some psychological return on investment

 

[Nutteria]

dl a mod called 'active city defense'.


defensive buildings are still crap and not worth the time to build, but at least you get some psychological return on investment

I will give the mod a shot but it sounds like it will avoid the problem at best not fix it.

THERE NEEDS TO BE A MODIFIER FOR CITY HP.I can`t put it in a more simple way then that.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I didn't see any gameplay reasons here. Cities fall after few turns of bombardment? Just don't allow enemies to bombard your cities so easy. The city defense is intended to work well against barbs and early rushes. You need units to fight modern war.

 

[ChrisRoed]

citadel inside a city would be too overpowered, remember, it also does damage to the units around it on top of the huge defense bonus.
i do, however, agree that there should be a way to increase the HP of a city - be it from food resources or sheer population or something else, i dont know, but something.
if you increased the hp of a city by having food resources, you could argue that occupying those hexes with a unit would prevent the city from using it, as it would happen in a 'real siege', thereby reducing the city hp.
also, city bombard damage is too low considering you only have one attack/turn and i agree that defensive structures and/or population could increase the damage done or perhaps give another attack (as per the ranged combat promotion which name eludes me)
as it is now, having a melee unit garrisoned in a city is mostly pointless, the added city strength is neglible and being a melee unit it will be vulnarable to attack if/when you counterattack and actually kill the enemy unit - whereas any ranged unit can both kill attackers and contribute to the city strength. so i would propose that melee units contribute more to the city strength to compensate for the lack of ranged attacks or perhaps actually does something when melee units attack a city with a melee unit stationed. as i understand it, city defense is the civilians population rising up to defend their city, and any military unit stationed there should help the way it can - ranged = extra bombard, melee = extra hp to city, or extra unit to kill before you can capture town.

 

[Nutteria]

The problem with city defence is that when it is attacked by longsowrds(for example) or any other medival non ranged unit the city takes to much damage for its 20 HP even with walls and castle UP.On the flipside the city deals the same amount of damage reguardless of what you build in it.I mean COME ON 1 damage when on hill?! Most units heal FASTER then that.You can`t deny that.

On the flipside I am not argueing that city without support should hold entire armys.All I am saying is that if you make a city a fortress it should FEEL LIKE ONE.Also I can`t by the static city HP crap.It is ilogical in any shape or form.Try taking midleage Paris with one tribushet and a thousand swords - LOL you will get your ass handed on a plate not to mention the walls and caslte won`t feel anything.Or better yet - try taking Rennesance Vienna.Not even Suleiman with his 400 THOUSAND army siege could break the city.You know WHY?>! Because it was not supply blocked.Same thing should and must be implemented in the game.And we have the perfect easy and intuitive way to do it.Make special tiles like fish sheep and cow etc. to add HP bonus to the city.Easy no?

Edit: To stealth_nsk :

Also you miss my point on the subject at hand.I am talking about MULTIPLAYER. The place where your opponent attacks both by land and sea and spread and optimises his forces for the sole purpose of capturing your citys.And there you can see how UGLY BROKEN the city defence is because you can`t have a small army defending every city while he can choose his battles and one-turn snipe.

I want my fortress citys to "hold the line" for me.To give me those extra few turns that will make me bring reinforcements.Currently they provide jack Moderator Action: <Removed text> Don't use bad language
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

And you think this is OK?

So its the same for a pop 4 city to have 20hp while pop 20 City with walls castle armory granary and 3 food resourses to have 20hp?!

This is false logic no matter how you look at it.

IMO if the food tiles(sheeps cows fish - etc etc etc) had the ability to add HP to the city they will make the map and city placement quite more interesting and tactical decision because right now they are not.

ALSO I suggest for the that the great general to have the option to build CItadel IN the city - for the cost of 4 GPT.(same goes for the rest of the GPs too! this can really make GP farming from useless to actually benefitial)

A Warrior and a Mech Infantry both have 10 hp

It's not a measurement of ability to withstand sieges

Its a Combat Ability.... and that Combat ability is in ONE number, the defense.

Now they should probably increase city defense/defense buildings values, But

Keeping all combat ability in ONE number is Good.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I want my fortress citys to "hold the line" for me.To give me those extra few turns that will make me bring reinforcements.Currently they provide jack $hit.

From the moment the opponent gathered forces at your border to the actual conquer of your city will come no less than 4-5 turns. More than enough to bring forces from nearby if you have them in the region, especially if you react to enemy gathering forces near your borders early.

P.S. I don't play simultaneous move multiplayer, are there any difference?

 

[kaltorak]

I think city defenses are fine. A city shouldnt be a warmachine, you need troops to defend it. The problem is you want the defense buildings to be better. I can't comment on that because I never use them. But I've read that 1 single catapult defending is better than all the defense buildings togeather

Why don't you try to use the hammers and maintenance of those buildings in units?