City Defense

[hugojackson18]

So i've been watching all the new game play videos and I saw that you can bombard from Encampment districs and Cities only once you've got walls, but it seems you can't defend it at all before that. What's the deal with Cities before this then? I didn't find any explanation yet. Can you just go in and take it if there's no units or wall to garison it like before Civ V? Can someone shed some light on this please as I still have no idea whats the deal with city defense.

 

[Magil]

Cities still have health but they can't shoot back unless they have walls. So you can't take an un-walled city just by moving into it, you have to damage it down to 0 health first.

 

[hugojackson18]

Ok that makes sense now. Thanks!

 

[isau]

I assume the city still functions more or less exactly as it did in Civ V, it just lacks the ranged attack it used to have. It still has HP. It is unknown whether walking into it with a melee unit still drains HP from them.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

I really like this change. I did not like in civ5 how even a new pop 1 city that was just founded could instantly shoot back. I think players will definitely want to prioritize walls now in order to get that ranged attack.

 

[mrwho]

I'm very glad that cities still have HP. It allows you to explore more in the early game. Also, I think it should be difficult to take down a city, and I always enjoy the siege aspect in Civ V. I think the change to remove automatic ranged attack is a good one too, though. I turtle too much because cities are too powerful and defence too easy, and I should be punished for it more than I am. This change makes the early game more challenging and gives you yet another decision to make (which is good). I'm very optimistic about VI at the moment.

 

[Magil]

There's also speculation that melee units can't attack a city with walls at all unless they have siege support, as the battering ram says something like "allows melee units to damage walls". Though one battering ram adjacent to the city seems to be enough to allow any melee unit to damage it, even if they're not linked or next to the battering ram. I cannot confirm this bit 100% but it certainly makes walls stronger if true.

 

[stealth_nsk]

There's also speculation that melee units can't attack a city with walls at all unless they have siege support, as the battering ram says something like "allows melee units to damage walls". Though one battering ram adjacent to the city seems to be enough to allow any melee unit to damage it, even if they're not linked or next to the battering ram. I cannot confirm this bit 100% but it certainly makes walls stronger if true.

We've seen melee units attacking cities without using battering ram. Although battering ram makes it way more effective.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

There's also speculation that melee units can't attack a city with walls at all unless they have siege support, as the battering ram says something like "allows melee units to damage walls". Though one battering ram adjacent to the city seems to be enough to allow any melee unit to damage it, even if they're not linked or next to the battering ram. I cannot confirm this bit 100% but it certainly makes walls stronger if true.

I think melee units can attack walled cities without a support unit. It will just be a lot harder and the city will have a better chance at repelling the attack with its ranged attack. The battering ram grants the melee unit a full strength attack against the wall. The siege tower allows the melee unit to bypass the walls and hit the city's HP directly. So having these support units will make a city siege a lot easier, as it should be.

 

[Magil]

We've seen melee units attacking cities without using battering ram. Although battering ram makes it way more effective.

But have you seen melee units attacking a city with walls without battering rams? I haven't yet, but I'm happy to be proven wrong.

 

[rastak]

There's also speculation that melee units can't attack a city with walls at all unless they have siege support, as the battering ram says something like "allows melee units to damage walls". Though one battering ram adjacent to the city seems to be enough to allow any melee unit to damage it, even if they're not linked or next to the battering ram. I cannot confirm this bit 100% but it certainly makes walls stronger if true.

Yea, I think Quill indicated you need a battering ram to attack a city wall with a melee unit. He said you can link a battering ram to a melee unit. If you do not have a battering ram the melee units cannot attack a city with walls. He also said if you have even one battering ram then all melee units can then attack the city walls.

He also mentioned if you have a siege tower you can then ignore walls.


edit: So did Quill mis-speak? I see some other replies indicating he did.

 

[joncnunn]

Cities still have health ... So you can't take an un-walled city just by moving into it, you have to damage it down to 0 health first.

Which will be real easy to do if there's no walls.
But if there's walls, you'll probably need the support unit that specializes in destroying city walls.

 

[King Rad]

Also, unless it's in a video I haven't seen yet, I haven't seen anything to indicate a city can't defend itself against units attacking it just like it did in CiV. It's just that without walls it doesn't have a ranged attack.

 

[footslogger]

From what we have seen in the videos, the AI is as hopeless as ever at mounting city attacks - not enough units, outdated units, poor coordination - so defending a city, even if it's not very well prepared when an attack starts, will probably not be difficult. It shouldn't be that way. We should fear having someone like Montezuma attack us. We should fear that he might take our city if it is not well-defended. Unless there are big AI combat improvements before release, it looks like city attacks will just be an opportunity for our units to gain experience and promotions again - as in Civ5. So many good ideas in Civ6 and they can't sort out this crucial matter of combat. Ho-hum.

 

[isau]

From what we have seen in the videos, the AI is as hopeless as ever at mounting city attacks - not enough units, outdated units, poor coordination - so defending a city, even if it's not very well prepared when an attack starts, will probably not be difficult. It shouldn't be that way. We should fear having someone like Montezuma attack us. We should fear that he might take our city if it is not well-defended. Unless there are big AI combat improvements before release, it looks like city attacks will just be an opportunity for our units to gain experience and promotions again - as in Civ5. So many good ideas in Civ6 and they can't sort out this crucial matter of combat. Ho-hum.

Waaaay too early for this kind of pessimism. This was an older build, set at one of the easier difficulties.

In Civ 6 you'll have to defend not just the city center but all of your districts. AI that used to just pillage, say, a farm, can now come straight for your library. This is a whole different combat game. Even if the AI isn't great at taking the city (and we have no ability to guess about that right now) it will still be able to seriously annoy if it is even in the leagues of what the AI could do in Civ V.

 

[masda_gib]

There's also speculation that melee units can't attack a city with walls at all unless they have siege support, as the battering ram says something like "allows melee units to damage walls". Though one battering ram adjacent to the city seems to be enough to allow any melee unit to damage it, even if they're not linked or next to the battering ram. I cannot confirm this bit 100% but it certainly makes walls stronger if true.

The ram says with it meelee units do full damage to city walls. That sound like they will be able to damage walls without a ram but only do, dunno, 50% damage. So it takes much longer without siege weapons.

 

[footslogger]

'Waaaay too early for this kind of pessimism. This was an older build, set at one of the easier difficulties.' (isau)

I agree that district-pillaging opens up some annoying possibilities which the AI should be able to manage without too much difficulty. As for being an early build, well, the game has been in development for years, so leaving it to the last 2 or 3 months to transform the AI from a wimp to a conqueror when it comes to city attack suggests excessive optimism on your part I would say. Anyway, we shall see soon enough.