• If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
  • Please note that we've updated the Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord save file system which requires you to take certain steps in order for your save files to be compatible with e1.7.1 and any later updates. You can find the instructions here.

Do ladders work better right now than siege towers?

Users who are viewing this thread

CrazyElf

Sergeant
Siege towers need a platform over the drawbridge level that can be manned with archers shooting at the defenders.

Yes this would be a cool idea. One option would be to have levels of siege towers, with a more advanced one manned by archers and that is taller than the enemy walls (yes siege towers were at times built taller than the enemy walls).



I still think they should change back siege towers to use ramps like in Warband, sure it would mean infantry can rush up on the wall but I feel like that's the way its supposed to, now the only benefit the towers really gave was that it provides slightly more protection for troops and some more dumbness from the enemy climbing down them.

In theory, if the AI used all 3 ladders of a siege tower, using the siege tower would be an better than ladders, but that isn't happening right now.

I do agree the siege AI needs work.
 

Dabos37

Sergeant Knight at Arms
To be honest, aside from fixing bugs, I think that anything should be added to make sieges easier for attackers but defenders. Settlements are currently too easy to take in real battles.
 

Julio-Claudian

Knight at Arms
To be honest, aside from fixing bugs, I think that anything should be added to make sieges easier for attackers but defenders. Settlements are currently too easy to take in real battles.
Hopefully they still plan on fully utilising the siege maps making it so that you have to fight your way through the city, take inner walls and the keep etc.
 

CrazyElf

Sergeant
To be honest, aside from fixing bugs, I think that anything should be added to make sieges easier for attackers but defenders. Settlements are currently too easy to take in real battles.

Right now they have to work on both making it more realistic for attackers and defenders.

They said they were working on siege maps. We'll see how it goes. Historically it took often 4-5x as many troops to take a settlement that was fortified compared to the enemy's defenders, which is why direct assaults were often a last resort.
 

black_bulldog

Knight at Arms
WBWF&SVC
Hopefully they still plan on fully utilising the siege maps making it so that you have to fight your way through the city, take inner walls and the keep etc.
I'd be ok with something akin to what we had in WB were you took the city then had to fight in the keep with a limited amount of men. It would be better than what we have now.
 

Julio-Claudian

Knight at Arms
I'd be ok with something akin to what we had in WB were you took the city then had to fight in the keep with a limited amount of men. It would be better than what we have now.
I want defenders to spawn in the streets, archers on the inner walls etc. before the keep fight.
Right now taking the city just means overrunning the gatehouse and outer wall, even if there is a huge secondary wall or fortified citadel. Just feels like a waste of these awesome maps.
 

William7667

Regular
I just had a quick look at the newest patch, the issue of poor siege engine performance isnt addressed and as far as I could see wasnt in the known issues section either so I assume it wont be addressed any time soon.
 

TechnoSarge

Veteran
Along with everyone else, I await, anxiously, improvement in sieges.

I start off by wondering: why do I build my siege engines within range of the enemy engines?? If I can move them, ahem, TO RESERVE - why not build them there and move them up only when they are all built, or an assault is made?? (Yeh, I know they aren't showing them on wheels, but they're getting moved in the game already, so what the heck?)

Anyone EVER set a fire of longer duration than 1 second with a flame ballista or catapult? Yeah, me neither. And why aren't the defenders trying to burn my approaching towers and rams? Because they can't set fires either.

I'm dismayed but not surprised when enemy rocks take out a tower or ram. (Fortunes of war, and all that.) I'm dismayed AND surprised when my own siege engines break them, especially when loaded with troops. Why can't they be targeted counterbattery, instead of at the stretch of wall I am assaulting?? Happens too often.

I always bring at least 2 quivers and usually 3 for my character. I usually use all my arrows up, then scour the battlefield for individual shafts to send back. WHY THE HECK DON'T ATTACKERS BOTHER TO BRING ARROW BARRELS??? I normally wait until my guys clear the local war to make it reasonably safe to mount the ladder/tower and ransack enemy arrow barrels on their ramparts. That may include "stirring the pot" as another has mentioned. Just shouldering back and forth thru the crowd at the base often gets the flow moving again up the ladders.

Personally, I often see 2 ladders in a tower in use at once, and occasionally 3. I agree it would be a sad thing if only one is being used.

As a high-skill archer, I rather like it when the enemy assaults the tower head and appears at the top of the ladders. They're easier to snipe there than trying to hit among the Brownian motion on the ramparts, from below. But I'm grateful for enemy archers, who seldom take cover when I plunk my first arrow into their bodies, and I need not reset my aim to hit again and finish them off. Oh, and I'm very good at face strikes, which usually one-shots them.

Despite all the difficulties, it's exceedingly rare for me to lose as many dead as the defenders, and I often have fewer wounded, too. I've read how to cheese the AI with retreats, etc., but I don't care to give up entirely on the game as simulation.
 

Ganeic

Recruit
Along with everyone else, I await, anxiously, improvement in sieges.

I start off by wondering: why do I build my siege engines within range of the enemy engines?? If I can move them, ahem, TO RESERVE - why not build them there and move them up only when they are all built, or an assault is made?? (Yeh, I know they aren't showing them on wheels, but they're getting moved in the game already, so what the heck?)

Anyone EVER set a fire of longer duration than 1 second with a flame ballista or catapult? Yeah, me neither. And why aren't the defenders trying to burn my approaching towers and rams? Because they can't set fires either.

I'm dismayed but not surprised when enemy rocks take out a tower or ram. (Fortunes of war, and all that.) I'm dismayed AND surprised when my own siege engines break them, especially when loaded with troops. Why can't they be targeted counterbattery, instead of at the stretch of wall I am assaulting?? Happens too often.

I always bring at least 2 quivers and usually 3 for my character. I usually use all my arrows up, then scour the battlefield for individual shafts to send back. WHY THE HECK DON'T ATTACKERS BOTHER TO BRING ARROW BARRELS??? I normally wait until my guys clear the local war to make it reasonably safe to mount the ladder/tower and ransack enemy arrow barrels on their ramparts. That may include "stirring the pot" as another has mentioned. Just shouldering back and forth thru the crowd at the base often gets the flow moving again up the ladders.

Personally, I often see 2 ladders in a tower in use at once, and occasionally 3. I agree it would be a sad thing if only one is being used.

As a high-skill archer, I rather like it when the enemy assaults the tower head and appears at the top of the ladders. They're easier to snipe there than trying to hit among the Brownian motion on the ramparts, from below. But I'm grateful for enemy archers, who seldom take cover when I plunk my first arrow into their bodies, and I need not reset my aim to hit again and finish them off. Oh, and I'm very good at face strikes, which usually one-shots them.

Despite all the difficulties, it's exceedingly rare for me to lose as many dead as the defenders, and I often have fewer wounded, too. I've read how to cheese the AI with retreats, etc., but I don't care to give up entirely on the game as simulation.

There are actually arrow barrels for defenders on a Few maps. But not for a lot of them that's for sure.

I laugh myself to death using a polearm from below the point where they can hit me and bashing heads xD...

My battles on normal difficulty usually come down to about an equal amount, sometimes less deaths losses on my side during attacks. Thought I shall try stirring the pot more perhaps.

The Splash from the fire catapult is fun when you see like 10+ enemies get killed in one shot, somewhat still better than the multishot normal version if you get the aim right into those blobs. Its fun killing 40+ enemies using the cat, kill a few more using arrows and finally riding into through the gates on your horse and charge the big blob xD
 

Teslanbenz

Recruit
I had a battle yesterday where the defenders didnt directly defend the walls. My guys would climb the siege tower- one at a time, run to the enemy, and be killed before the next guy could climb the ladder. It continued 1 at a time until i retreated and used ladders.
 

Yukmouth++

Squire
Honestly using ladders and siege towers is just a way to lose units. The only 2 things that are effective is Battling Ram and straight up digging holes in the walls before leading the assault. Your unit going up ladders just end up facing a 6 vs 1 and they would still get REKT even if they went 1 by 1.
 

CrazyElf

Sergeant
Honestly using ladders and siege towers is just a way to lose units. The only 2 things that are effective is Battling Ram and straight up digging holes in the walls before leading the assault. Your unit going up ladders just end up facing a 6 vs 1 and they would still get REKT even if they went 1 by 1.


The problem is that not all 3 ladders are being used.

Other than that, it should not be too easy to take the castle without overwhelming force. Sieges should be difficult for the attacking army.
 

Dabos37

Sergeant Knight at Arms
The problem is that not all 3 ladders are being used.

Other than that, it should not be too easy to take the castle without overwhelming force. Sieges should be difficult for the attacking army.

Agree with that.

As far I have seen, sieges are currently easy for attackers due to two factors:

1- The main gate is pretty easy to take down and once it happens, defenders are pretty much defeated. The defender formation is shieldwall is pretty ineffective and usually gets destroyed easily. Plus there should be more ways to punish men attacking the main gate, these men should be really vulnerable and the attackers should get massive losses when trying to break the main gate but this is not happening currently.
2- If the player spam high tier archers. Archers are again pretty damn deadly and the AI is not able to defend properly if the player brings +150 T5 archers or so. The AI keeps sending men to the walls who get massacred.

Plus the AI should be able to use siege machines more effectively and try to target attackers men blobs to try to cause big losses.
 

five bucks

Squire
There should be a direct correlation between how much time/effort it takes to get siege equipment, and how much it negates the enemy's defensive advantage. So siege equipment should look something like this.

Ladders: Quick to build and breach with. Defenders have a large advantage against this strategy (attackers climbing ladders are vulnerable and ladders can be removed).
Rams/Towers: Medium time to build and breach with. Defenders have a small advantage against this strategy (towers/rams can possibly be destroyed by defenders' siege engines as they approach, but if they reach the walls or breach the door they put attackers on even footing).
Trebuchets: Long time to build and breach with. Defenders have no advantage against this strategy (Once trebuchets have breached wall, attackers going through the breach are on an equal footing).

How can this be achieved?

Ladders are pretty much fine right now other than the massive AI issues. Battering rams are also roughly okay, maybe give gates a little more HP.

Siege towers should not drop their bridge/wall until a group of allied troops has gathered at the top. Then they would be worth using instead of being a liability.

Trebuchets should start built in special positions in the rear, from where they can fire on enemy positions but cannot be fired on, forcing a defending AI or player to sally out if they wish to stop them. This would make trebuchets a more surefire option for reducing defenses, but in exchange trebuchets in rear positions would do less damage, so you could also deploy them in forward positions where they can take fire but do more damage faster.
 
Last edited:

**Iphicrates**

Sergeant
Historically, the main advantage of using trebs was their range - bombardments from trebs could reach the walls, while staying out of range of defending catapults. Which is not the case in game. TWcould try making trebs available only after reachng certain engineering perk. Also, trebs could take the siege tower slot - so player will have to choose between "2 trebs/0 towers", "1 treb/1 tower" "0 trebs/2 towers". This way smaller siege engines could be built to counter catapults and balistas of the defenders (while still being vulnerable to counterfire), while trebs could focus on crushing the wall (but with fewer trebs this would take a lot of time). Right now there is no point building anything other than trebs.
 

Earth Dragon

Sergeant
Have they finished adding all castle and town maps? When they are done with that, that’s when I’ll worry about this. It’s been stated that pathing fixes tend to only apply to a single map, so if they get all the maps in, then they can apply blanket solutions.

So again, I feel the priority should be to finish all the maps then fix the pathing nightmare
 

**Iphicrates**

Sergeant
If the pathing issues have to be fixed on the map level, they can as well start right now. After all, if several castles share single map design, fixing one map pathing will fix many castles at once.
 

five bucks

Squire
Historically, the main advantage of using trebs was their range - bombardments from trebs could reach the walls, while staying out of range of defending catapults. Which is not the case in game. TWcould try making trebs available only after reachng certain engineering perk. Also, trebs could take the siege tower slot - so player will have to choose between "2 trebs/0 towers", "1 treb/1 tower" "0 trebs/2 towers". This way smaller siege engines could be built to counter catapults and balistas of the defenders (while still being vulnerable to counterfire), while trebs could focus on crushing the wall (but with fewer trebs this would take a lot of time). Right now there is no point building anything other than trebs.
Yeah, compared to catapults/ballistae the trebs should be better for wall killing while the catapults/ballistae/onagers can pick off troops much better.
 

Apocal

Grandmaster Knight
Also, trebs could take the siege tower slot - so player will have to choose between "2 trebs/0 towers", "1 treb/1 tower" "0 trebs/2 towers". This way smaller siege engines could be built to counter catapults and balistas of the defenders (while still being vulnerable to counterfire), while trebs could focus on crushing the wall (but with fewer trebs this would take a lot of time). Right now there is no point building anything other than trebs.

There isn't really a point to 1 treb, 1 tower though. If you're building trebs, you're going for a wall knockdown, in which case you can't field the siege tower. If you're not confident the treb will create a breach though, it makes more sense to just build another. If you haven't got time for all that though, you might as well go with two towers (assuming they actually work as advertised).
 

CrazyElf

Sergeant
2- If the player spam high tier archers. Archers are again pretty damn deadly and the AI is not able to defend properly if the player brings +150 T5 archers or so. The AI keeps sending men to the walls who get massacred.

Plus the AI should be able to use siege machines more effectively and try to target attackers men blobs to try to cause big losses.

The AI needs to have their archers dodge and the accuracy of archers, especially at higher skill levels, needs to be improved.
 
Top Bottom