Ambush missions are a feature to destroy enemy siege engines such as Towers and Rams as there is no way to destroy them before the actually siege battle starts.
When you are going for an successful ambush, an attack by the enemy was triggered and the siege begun - until 1.2.0 has been released - .
So i reached out to the support section and reported the missing attack as a bug, thinking the attack was intentional - it wasnt. here is the reply:
The ai not attacking is turning ambush missions into a trap for the player, at least for most of the cases:
The besieger is not attacking after an ambush anymore - he continues to prepare the siege, all the time. That results in a longer ongoing siege.
All the enemy units which are wounded and not killed will replenish faster as yours so you dont really harm the enemy by limiting the units during the ambush - you more likely harm yourself.
It's also very rare that allies will come to aid you in a siege defence, so playing on time is the same like playing with fire as in many of the cases the settlement is having less food than the besieger or the besieger is getting helped out by allies - starvation & more besiegers is more likely than a beneficial outcome.
Basically you will find yourself in an endless loop of ambush missions until your city is starving or you get dunked by 3000.
The more time you spend in a siege the more likely you are not able to react to anything else which is happening during the siege: War declarations, other sieges, other battles + As a kingdom leader you can not make any proposals.
What i want as a defender is to make the siege as fast as possible - to make the enemy run into a trap -
you dont want to sit there for years for given reasons.
Ambush missions leave you in a paralyzed status without any useful or reliable outcome.
Iam concerned because i think it's obvious and i wonder how on earth the QA is coming to such evaluations. Am i missing the point?
When you are going for an successful ambush, an attack by the enemy was triggered and the siege begun - until 1.2.0 has been released - .
So i reached out to the support section and reported the missing attack as a bug, thinking the attack was intentional - it wasnt. here is the reply:
QA team informed me that the goal of ambushes is that destorying battering rams and towers and retreat. You can't destroy them with siege engines while on siege. There is no feature for AI to attack after ambush. AI will only attack when it thinks they got the upper hand. There are no bugs here.
The ai not attacking is turning ambush missions into a trap for the player, at least for most of the cases:
The besieger is not attacking after an ambush anymore - he continues to prepare the siege, all the time. That results in a longer ongoing siege.
All the enemy units which are wounded and not killed will replenish faster as yours so you dont really harm the enemy by limiting the units during the ambush - you more likely harm yourself.
It's also very rare that allies will come to aid you in a siege defence, so playing on time is the same like playing with fire as in many of the cases the settlement is having less food than the besieger or the besieger is getting helped out by allies - starvation & more besiegers is more likely than a beneficial outcome.
Basically you will find yourself in an endless loop of ambush missions until your city is starving or you get dunked by 3000.
The more time you spend in a siege the more likely you are not able to react to anything else which is happening during the siege: War declarations, other sieges, other battles + As a kingdom leader you can not make any proposals.
What i want as a defender is to make the siege as fast as possible - to make the enemy run into a trap -
you dont want to sit there for years for given reasons.
Ambush missions leave you in a paralyzed status without any useful or reliable outcome.
Iam concerned because i think it's obvious and i wonder how on earth the QA is coming to such evaluations. Am i missing the point?
Last edited: