[Idea] Realistic City Siege

[Faustmouse]

Yeah, they dropped stones and burning oil and such on the attacker.
ANd I think Siege Rams need a lot more bonus against archers. They were practically immune against them. Also pretty strong against burning oil... And I think they can kill enemy units, right? Can't we make them withdrawn ALWAYS before the defender is killed?

 

[Hydromancerx]

Burning Oil building
requires Tar Pit
affect all foot CC + Gatecrashers
Other stats i leave in your hands

We already have this, they are called Murder Holes.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Yeah, they dropped stones and burning oil and such on the attacker.
ANd I think Siege Rams need a lot more bonus against archers. They were practically immune against them. Also pretty strong against burning oil... And I think they can kill enemy units, right? Can't we make them withdrawn ALWAYS before the defender is killed?

They have a combat limit of 50% so they can only take their enemies down by half before automatic withdrawal.

This is good idea. Like siege droids developed to destroy hitech fortifications.

@Hydro
Lets wait for TB idea how it should look like.

In meantime you can add

Burning Oil building
requires Tar Pit
affect all foot CC + Gatecrashers
Other stats i leave in your hands

I was going to say that gatecrashers are all foot units but they only are now. If we add gatecrasher designations to some horse drawn units like the siege carriage for example, then this could indeed be a good idea to specify them for such a trap.

We already have this, they are called Murder Holes.

Don't Murder Holes generally refer to the design of the region past the portcullis in a very advanced castle? What about the oil dropped down from the tops of walls that would come much earlier?

 

[Hydromancerx]

Don't Murder Holes generally refer to the design of the region past the portcullis in a very advanced castle? What about the oil dropped down from the tops of walls that would come much earlier?

No the portcullis that would be the Castle Gatehouse and City Gatehouse. Our Castle buildings are like this ...

I. Walls
-A. High Walls
--1. City Gatehouse
---a. City Gate
--2. Castle
---a. Castle Gatehouse
---b. Castle Drawbridge
---c. Castle Keep
---d. Citadel
---e. Balistraira (Arrow Slits)
---f. Moat
---g. Catacombs
---h. Dungeon
---i. Ballista Turret
---j. Castle Garden
---k. Guardhouse
---l. Throne Room

Hmm that's weird I can't find the Murder Holes.

 

[Taxman66]

Murder holes would be intrisic to any gate/entrance area.

 

[Hydromancerx]

Ok I found it, I guess it ws planned but never made.

Murder Holes:

• Any enemy units that enter the city during it's revolt period (right after capture) loses 1/2 it's health. (Only entering)

I will be posting more in the building topic to be assigned to Faustmouse after the release.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Well... you kinda made my point. Murder holes would be the holes in the ceiling INSIDE a gatehouse. That would be an advanced defense with a gatehouse prerequisite.

Meanwhile, many times cauldrons of boiling oil were set to swivel out all the oil down upon enemy invaders from the tops of walls. These would be differing defenses with similar yet perhaps even compounding effects.

 

[Thunderbrd]

ugh... double posted!

 

[Faustmouse]

Currently we have the following defense structures. I will give suggestions how they should be changed to make them more unique:

Walls: They should give defense (quite a lot) and have a minimum defense that can't be removed. Enemy troops can't enter the city unless the defense was somewhat decreased. So basically as they are now.

Moats: Should not give a ZoC (Zone of Control). They are just not big enough for it. They should give some defense, and they should also increase the minimum defense a city has since it is quite hard to fill up a moat to work over it as if it wasn't there. They also make attacking for Gatecrushers much harder, if not impossible. But since Trebuchets get a lot of Bombardment promotions fairly easy, it usually just takes 2-3 of them to get the enemy city completely down. And all that without risking their lifes. So Gatecrushers shouldn't get any furthers nervs. What where their many advantages so that they were used during medival war for such a long time? Are they cheaper/easier to construct/maintain? This could be reflected in the game easily.Not every unit in the same Tech-Column has to have the excact same costs!

Towers: Should hit units on adjecting tiles (well, maybe the first ones shouldn't) and the later (=industriell) can give a ZoC. Also, if we ever get that tag to work properly, it would be aweome if they'd increase the city line of sight. They should not give any defense; they are purely to see the enemy units and hit them.

Traps: They should not give any defense as well. They should hit only attacking units (as they are now) and also have some repel.

Fences: They should provide a little defense (not as much compared to walls), but they should slow down their enemies. For example, they could use up all of the enemies movement points, so that Mounted units with Blitz can't use this ability against the city for example). Some Fences could also damage the units (I'd say this makes only sense for attacking units, but this is an extremely powerful ability and must be used with care). Maybe even some repel.

 

[Faustmouse]

Double post

 

[Nimek]

What line gives defense against sad. I thought that towers did.

 

[Faustmouse]

Ah, I forgot about SaD! Yes, this would be really cool for towers! Maybe moats can give it too?

 

[Hydromancerx]

Isn't that Zone of Control? If so it was the Moat from Afforess' Castle mod.

 

[Faustmouse]

ZoC: The 8 surrounding tiles are also protected, so you can't move from one of them to the next one.

Bonus against SaD (Surround and Destroy): If your city is surrounded by enemies, this bonus is weaker for your units in the castle.

 

[Thunderbrd]

The term for Surround and Destroy defense is Dynamic Defense.

 

[Hydromancerx]

ZoC: The 8 surrounding tiles are also protected, so you can't move from one of them to the next one.

Bonus against SaD (Surround and Destroy): If your city is surrounded by enemies, this bonus is weaker for your units in the castle.

Yes I know this. But if you have Zone of Control then units cannot surround your city because it will not let you enter all the tiles around the city, just one. Thus its basically preventing you from using Surround and Destroy.

 

[Faustmouse]

Nope, that's wrong.
It just takes you more effort to do so. But you can still walk around the city (in a greater distance) and THEN surround it. So ZoC is very powerful since it makes SaD so much harder.

 

[Hydromancerx]

I thought Surround and Destroy only worked if you are adjacent to the unit your attacking. Such as a 3x3 block around a single tile. Most of the time around a city.

 

[Faustmouse]

Also true

If I had time I would paint it for you. Can you imagine a Chess Board?

If the city is on D4 and you come from D2, you can split to C3,D3 and E3. You can walk around the city if you keep the distance, until you reach D6. From there, you can also split to D5, E5 and E5, so you more or less surround the city. You can easily also occupie the remaining two tiles adjected to the city.

so a ZoC makes only sense if it would prohibit that units can walk so close to the city. For example, if there are machine guns that cause suppressive fire. But not a Moat (it's just too small, especialy if you think of a castle moat.)

 

[Yudishtira]

All Zones of Control do is prevent you from moving from one ZoC tile to another. This is true whether or not the two tiles are in the same ZoC (ie. can be exerted by a city and a fort, or two different forts).

The standard SaD exploittactic is to spread your stack out during your turn to attack and then restack it before your turn ends. A ZoC makes this much more difficult (but not impossible - and really not even hard with roads, 3-move Commando units etc.).

That's not a proper ZoC as I remember them (eg. from SPI cardboard-units-and-paper-hexmap games), but that's what we got...