• 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.

Siege Towers are Useless

Users who are viewing this thread

bbaydogdu

Veteran
What is the purpose of using a siege tower? Creating mass on a high platform to attack the walls with larger force or adding just a few more ladders? Developers must have been thinking it's the second. That's why the first goddamn soldier who climbs up to top lowers the bridge while others are still on the ladders. So what happens when our little recruit fella does that? Enemies charge and capture the platform and cause many casualties on your climbing men one by one. They should wait untill atleast 8-10 men reach to top before lowering the bridge. Also they should use all three ladders to climb up, not just the middle one ffs.
 
Last edited:

pTivo

Recruit
yeah you're right dude, it seems like the Ai is very hard to configure for that job. Devs almost gave us 2/3 patch with this bug "fixed" but it doesn't work yet.
Better do 4 trebuchets > move to reserve when one is finished > spawn and hide 4 trebs > pause game > instal the 4 trebs at same time > break walls > lead assault without any engines > turn F6 off and go fight
 

Maximum997

Squire
Better do 4 trebuchets > move to reserve when one is finished > spawn and hide 4 trebs > pause game > instal the 4 trebs at same time > break walls > lead assault without any engines > turn F6 off and go fight
Better do 4 fire onagers and kill whole army solo XD
 

TheShermanator

Sergeant
yeah you're right dude, it seems like the Ai is very hard to configure for that job. Devs almost gave us 2/3 patch with this bug "fixed" but it doesn't work yet.
Better do 4 trebuchets > move to reserve when one is finished > spawn and hide 4 trebs > pause game > instal the 4 trebs at same time > break walls > lead assault without any engines > turn F6 off and go fight

Exactly. Right now, this is such a clearly better strategy than any alternative (e.g. siege towers) that it is almost always worth the trade off of the longer time to execute. Ideally, the trade off should make it more of a tough choice to go trebs vs. siege towers / ram.
 

pTivo

Recruit
You can also rush ram but it depend of the garrison and of your archers. If you have goods archers, and the opponent few troops, you can rush the ram. F6 turn off AI, (place archers in F3 F3 Loose formations and F1 F1 Holding in front of walls if u want to cover your elite infantry), let the infantry Holding position behind. Normally they will stay back and just 6 mens will move the ram, as AI still command RAM but not ladders in manual setting.
 
I've never comprehended how when we decide to build towers the siege ladders magically disappear. We should have ladders in addition to the towers IMO.

Just give the player commanding the siege the option to hold ladders till the Towers hit the wall. I suppose AI would have to hold ladders as well or they'd just be slaughtered likewise before towers ever arrive.
 

Lesbosisles

Knight
If the castle/town's walls are level 1 - siege towers can be useful since they look and function as the ones from Warband. Troops don't have to climb up the ladders, they just run up and start fight.

If the wall level is 2 or 3 - nah, better build some onagres/trebuches and turn walls into ashes or just assault with ladders - AI still doesn't know there are 3 ladders, not one in the siege tower and very often they start running around it instead of actually climbing.
 

Veli-Matti

Master Knight
WBNW
Also why the hell are the siege defenders nice enough to conveniently place ladders right outside their walls for the enemy to use? :lol:

Shouldn't the ladders be one of the things we can choose to build for the siege and then our troops carry the ladders to the walls just like a ram or siege tower? I don't understand why this isn't the case, kinda ruins the immersion tbqh.
 

TheShermanator

Sergeant
Also why the hell are the siege defenders nice enough to conveniently place ladders right outside their walls for the enemy to use? :lol:

Shouldn't the ladders be one of the things we can choose to build for the siege and then our troops carry the ladders to the walls just like a ram or siege tower? I don't understand why this isn't the case, kinda ruins the immersion tbqh.

I think what’s supposed to be happening is your army quietly, and under cover of darkness with low numbers, puts them there before the assault. Kind of like the archer screens, which are also of course within easy archer range. Realistic? Honestly don’t know.

But yes, as recent posts have highlighted, there are certain subset scenarios in which a non treb approach is viable: the ram rush if the garrison is low or towers if walls are l1 and the garrison isn’t too beefy. (Even when walls are low, your men still don’t trade well w the enemy on towers compared to when they go through a wall breach.) In my experience, though, most sieges I fight are late game, so most walls are l3 and most garrisons + militia are several hundred strong, so I go trebs all day long.
 
So far the point of siege towers for me has been to confuse the AI so that they take about as long to approach as the ram and they don't all die on the ladders. Sigh. Siege needs so much work.
 

paladinx333

Sergeant at Arms
There are three ladders in the game's siege towers, yet the soldiers only seem to want to use the center ladder. That gives the siege tower worse throughput that the pair of simple ladders that they replace. The siege towers in the game differ from historical siege towers that actually offer some protection to the attackers.

Siege towers need to be redesigned and the AI needs to be smarter about using them.
 

Maximum997

Squire
I suck at fire onagers, I can't hit ****.
There is a guide:

1) Dont build towers
2) send all your troops near ladders. Your units should activate this ladders all the time. And enemies will blob on the wall to defend it.
3) find "sweet spot"
4) enjoy
4) retreat and do it again.
 

Ananda_The_Destroyer

Master Knight
yeah you're right dude, it seems like the Ai is very hard to configure for that job. Devs almost gave us 2/3 patch with this bug "fixed" but it doesn't work yet.
Better do 4 trebuchets > move to reserve when one is finished > spawn and hide 4 trebs > pause game > instal the 4 trebs at same time > break walls > lead assault without any engines > turn F6 off and go fight
How do you aim it and get so many kills?
There is a guide:

1) Dont build towers
2) send all your troops near ladders. Your units should activate this ladders all the time. And enemies will blob on the wall to defend it.
3) find "sweet spot"
4) enjoy
4) retreat and do it again.
Hmmmm okay it's looking better now.

My go to is just using a small force to get them to sally out, then run away and get a big force in case I get caught by a big army.
 

pegunCZ

Banned
WBNW
Maybe you are useless

That sounds like what the very first rudimentary medieval game probably would have done.

The problem with it is that parts of the body stick out beyond the shield, so it would be really easy for archers to shoot infantry past the shield when it's held straight towards them. It's very annoying to get shot in this way, even if the arrow doesn't kill you (although obviously it still can). It's enough to stop a lot of people from playing. Defending it by appealing to realism isn't going to help.

Although, I'd agree Bannerlord's forcefields extend quite bizarrely with the directional shield blocking.

The existence of minor forcefields protecting the entire front while a shield is held straight towards the archer is very easy to understand and roll with, from a game logic perspective. Archers can find other ways to land shots without shields being rendered useless against arrows.

You could make every shield incredibly large and human-shaped instead of having forcefields, but that would look really silly.

There is directional shield blocking in the game, if it was only made smoother one could block the incoming arrow by changing position of the shield. Getting hit by an srrow shouldn't be fatal anyway wearing metal armor. You realistically should only have to worry about your face when it comes to arrows unless you're dressed in cloth or leather.

Im tired of seeing these armor makes you a turtle arguments. Soldiers of the day carry more weight than a 14-15th century plate harness and that weight is mostly on their back, unlike a knight (or a catapracht) who would have the weight evenly distrubited on his body

Exactly. They seem to want everything to be perfectly balanced. Guess what, the Medieval battlefield wasn't balanced at all, wearing armor was objectively better than not wearing armor.
 

karijus

Regular
Best was when I was the sole person climbing the tower, the AI all decided to scatter to other entrances. When I got on top the enemy AI were all stuck by the side of the wall, not going in, so it was free xp for my 2h axe :mrgreen:

Generally though, I'd like the towers to start with men already on top or something.
 
Top Bottom