City warfare

[Mustakrakish]

What ideas do you have about city combat? Or are you happy with how it is right now?

Me, I'm not satisfied with it. There's a lot of things that bother me about it.

First of all I hate ranged capability at the start before even inventing archery and without units inside. Second I want walls and the unit inside to seriously matter.

No ridiculous base strength that can stand on it's own without walls or unit inside or nearby against 3 or so units with ease.
Hit points consisting from walls, castles etc. plus the unit inside. So no walls, no unit = cakewalk in. However if there are walls etc., walls first need to be breached, once breached (hit points reduced to zero), the next attack will ensure battle with unit inside, a kind of urban warfare. Unit inside when fighting "urban" battle after walls have been breached, receives boosts from arsenal, military base. (additionally urban warfare promotions could exist?)
No ranged in city without range unit. City receives ranged ability when ranged unit stationed, which boosts with walls, castles etc.

I know that many won't agree with this, but anyway what's your thoughts?

 

[Mustakrakish]

Well, ok then

 

[4N4C0ND4]

I do agree that I find basic city strenght too high: having units inside or walls does too small of an impact to make it mandatory.

In some games, I find myself never building walls nor leaving units in cities since they can defend themselves too efficiently.

Defensive buildings should be buffed a lot, and basic strenght halfed or something like that.
I also liked someone's idea to make the bombard city option only available after building walls.

The city strenght also makes 3 range units mandatory, and artilleries/bombers the only valid option latter on.