Siege Tower clarification

[Smoo]

So, the siege tower claims that it allows melee units to deal damage directly to the city, bypassing the walls. I had assumed that "melee units" meant the line of Warrior-Swordsman-Musket-Infantry-Mech.Inf. only. But last night I was trying it out and my Horses and Knights were also dealing their damage directly to the the city, bypassing the walls.

So, what then do they mean by "melee" units?
All land units?
All non-ranged non-siege land units?

I had archers in the mix as well but I can't remember if they were primarily damaging the city or the walls.

Anyone tested this thoroughly yet?

 

[Draco84]

Melee units should mean anything that is not ranged.

I have not tested, but maybe even boats (even though it makes no sense... just like horses probably don't climb siege towers)

 

[Magil]

What's even crazier is that battering rams and siege towers seem to work until the very end of the game, with infantry and tanks... even though you lose the ability to produce them at some point.

Pretty much what Draco said though, any unit that attacks with its "melee" strength should be affected, not units with ranged/bombard strength.

 

[Smoo]

That's what I figured. But when they name a single category of units "melee", it's easy to make an incorrect assumption.

 

[criZp]

The game something use "melee" about non-ranged and something about the warrior-line, so it's sure to be confusing. Could've called them infantry or something.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

They probably should have gone with

Heavy melee
Light melee (anti-cav)

Heavy ranged (siege)
Light ranged

Heavy cav
Light cav

then the siege tower could say it allows "melee, or heavy melee, or melee+cav" units to bypass walls and it would be clear.

Same problem with civ5

 

[DonPato]

This is exactly one of the problems that I was talking about in the Niter thread over on the Strategies forum. There is this ambiguity between what "melee" and "ranged" means in this game across a variety of different circumstances. Apparently the siege tower considers a horseman "melee", but the civics policies that grant production to melee units don't. Similarly, those same policies don't consider a spearman as melee, because they belong to the anti-calvary promotion line. However, I'd bet that they work just fine with the siege towers.

There needs to be a common language that the game uses to refer to these kinds of units. I think that the best fix would be to refer to all units who engage in hand-to-hand combat as melee, but then to have promotion-class specific names such as "anti-calvary" that are referred to in the civics policies and in other areas where such a distinction is needed. Similarly, all units that attack at a range will be referred to as "ranged", and a different name will be needed for the promotion class of archers, etc. to differentiate them from siege units.

 

[skyclad]

I will join the choir and say I agree it's very confusing they use one word to mean two different things.
So the +production for melee and range means +production for warriors/swordmen/etc and archers/xbows/etc? Not for spearmen or catapults?

 

[DonPato]

I will join the choir and say I agree it's very confusing they use one word to mean two different things.
So the +production for melee and range means +production for warriors/swordmen/etc and archers/xbows/etc? Not for spearmen or catapults?

Correct.

 

[Heklios]

Since we are on this topic :

The Anti-Cavalry line has a promotion that "doubles Combat Strength when occupying the same tile as a Support Unit".

The Siege Tower is clearly labeled in the Tech Tree as Support Unit.

I couldn't get this to work. I couldn't see any modifier or any damage increase when linking Spearman with Siege Tower.

Anyone ?

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Since we are on this topic :

The Anti-Cavalry line has a promotion that "doubles Combat Strength when occupying the same tile as a Support Unit".

The Siege Tower is clearly labeled in the Tech Tree as Support Unit.

I couldn't get this to work. I couldn't see any modifier or any damage increase when linking Spearman with Siege Tower.

Anyone ?

If the spearman attacks, it is moving off of the tile, so it doesn't benefit.
(Its still really weird as it means an anti-cav unit is basically invulnerable when on a support unit...ancient spears at 50 strength, medieval pikes at 80+)

 

[DonPato]

Melee should mean anything that doesn't have a ranged attack.
Warrior/swordsmen/ect... should be called Shock.
Light cav/heavy cav makes enough sense as it is in my books, as does anti-cav fo the spearmen line

Ranged should be anything with a ranged attack
Catapults/bombards/ect... should be called siege
Archers/Crossbows/ect... should be called ... I don't know about this one actually. Tricky.

How about the archer line are called "bombard" units? I like everything else that you've written here, makes a ton of sense to me.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

How about the archer line are called "bombard" units? I like everything else that you've written here, makes a ton of sense to me.

Except you have a "bombard" unit..and its in the other line.

Light and Heavy (for ranged, melee, and cavalry) should be fine

 

[DonPato]

Except you have a "bombard" unit..and its in the other line.

Haha, good point

 

[Heklios]

If the spearman attacks, it is moving off of the tile, so it doesn't benefit.
(Its still really weird as it means an anti-cav unit is basically invulnerable when on a support unit...ancient spears at 50 strength, medieval pikes at 80+)

Oh. So it's a Defensive Bonus only ? Inconsistent with the nature of the Siege Tower which otherwise provides bonuses to Attacking Units on Cities therefore following your explanation they would also move off of the tile to hit the city and lose the "full damage to walls". Unless in that case the siege tower moves with them. Or they dont move off the tile to attack cities. Also inconsistent. But I suppose it is not the only inconsistency we can encounter in Civ

Anyways. Got it. Defensive Bonus only.
Thanks for your reply.