Sieges battles are easy and boring, here's my suggestions

[likenedlightsmah]

+1

 

[Gnawlidge]

Both the siege tower design and the battering ram design are truly awful. The ram offer no protection from arrows fired at it's front. The siege tower is a weird design that doesn't resemble any drawing of a siege tower in history. It's more of a mobile ladder system than an actual siege tower. I assume these two pieces of equipment were made flawed intentionally for balance reasons. Whatever the intent, as siege equipment goes, they are truly awful.

Why did the sieges in the 2019 Gamescom demo seem to work so much better than what we have in game now?

type siege tower into google. that design is everywhere.

 

[Feffo]

My opinion: there are simply too many ladders. That's it.
With so many ladders (why are there ladders there? nobody died for placing them? cam we maybe play the part in which we place them?) the attacker can easily walk in from different direction (with basically 0 hurts) and the defender do not have time/force to move between the many entrances, therefore the attacker will eventually enter from the least guarded point.
This is not how a castle worked, this is basically a castle with many tiny entrances.

A real castle should hold forces up to 10 times greater, right now castles can barely hold 2 times, making them slightly more efficient than a river (which does actually give advantage to the arrows, unlike the walls)

 

[stevehoos]

My opinion: there are simply too many ladders. That's it.
With so many ladders (why are there ladders there? nobody died for placing them? cam we maybe play the part in which we place them?) the attacker can easily walk in from different direction (with basically 0 hurts) and the defender do not have time/force to move between the many entrances, therefore the attacker will eventually enter from the least guarded point.
This is not how a castle worked, this is basically a castle with many tiny entrances.

A real castle should hold forces up to 10 times greater, right now castles can barely hold 2 times, making them slightly more efficient than a river (which does actually give advantage to the arrows, unlike the walls)

Yep, if you wanted to storm a keep you needed to come with many more men. They don't call them murder holes for no reason.

 

[vicwiz007]

Dont have much new to say, just wanted to echo this because ive never lost a siege offense. Aside from all the siege battle issues, they need to get lords to defend more. I cant seem to remember a lord ever being present in the siege defense

 

[brognar]

Dont have much new to say, just wanted to echo this because ive never lost a siege offense. Aside from all the siege battle issues, they need to get lords to defend more. I cant seem to remember a lord ever being present in the siege defense

either militia needs to be increased or there needs to be some mechanism to encourage bigger and better garrisons. Every siege is a complete rollover and while it's cinematic at first it becomes quite boring

 

[vicwiz007]

either militia needs to be increased or there needs to be some mechanism to encourage bigger and better garrisons. Every siege is a complete rollover and while it's cinematic at first it becomes quite boring

It's not even that cinematic though. The attacker makes like one siege tower or ram, and they attack immediately because they know itll be no issue. Once you get in, half the defenders will not even move to important defensive positions. The guys at the gate sit in shield wall and get slaughtered. So many issues...

There's actually a whole mechanic for knocking down walls and having your own siege engines destroyed by the defender's on the map, that I'm pretty sure most players never use or even know of because it's useless.

 

[R4MPZY]

So you want 100 defenders to win against 300-400 attackers?

So what if there are 1200 defenders which i have had a couple of times, you cannot make a 3000 army....

Some points are interesting,but that is just insane.

 

[Goethe99]

I have also found that attackers win almost all the time. This seems pretty on par with history, once the "assault" part of the siege took place, the defenders would already be in pretty dire straights.

My biggest issue is the attackers just take so few casualties, especially when those heavy infantry with 100 pounds of armor are climbing a rickety wooden ladder while some guy with a crossbow puts a bolt through their eye at point blank range, or drops a boulder on them. What I would like to see is a moat or ditch that has to be filled before my mighty ladders reach the walls, where my guys just have to be sitting ducks. I would be ok with a simulated version of this where the attackers take more casualties while building the siege camp. Might even bite into the snowball effect if attackers took 30% losses at a siege.

 

[Narduiran]

It all comes down to the AI's inability to engage the siege equipment properly. I'm quoting myself but it's highly relevant. The only reason that particular siege was won by the attackers was because of my Battanian fian champions sniping the defenders on the walls. If they hadn't been there, I know we'd have lost.

I'm not so sure. Yesterday I was on the attacking side where there were 300 defenders and 1000+ attackers. The defenders destroyed both the ram and the siege tower before they got to the walls, then they slaughtered around 700 attackers trying to climb up the ladders before the town was taken.

That was on easy (1/3 dmg) difficulty, and my Battanian fian champions got 150 kills, half the kills of the whole army. On normal or hard, the attackers would have been utterly wrecked.

 

[badman]

really simple suggestion:

Siege commands that are relevant/unique to siege, and work.

 

[great_khan]

the difender unit behide the gates have no iq, they dont turn their face and you can kill them from side and behind.

 

[Imperialegacy]

I'm surprised no one mentioned different stages as we had in previous some M&B titles where you have to fight through the walls, alleys, city center and finally the keep. Focusing on fights on the walls is what makes it repetitive at least for me. Due to the old engine these fights had to be seperated and fought individually, but I'd really like to see a complete and seamless siege battle involving all areas of the town/castle in this one. For exmaple, the defenders can retreat to the next defensive position and regroup after losing the main gate while the archers provide cover fire. Since the devs have spent so much effort making these beautiful settlements it would be a waste if they're merely for sightseeing.

 

[Pejot]

Dont have much new to say, just wanted to echo this because ive never lost a siege offense. Aside from all the siege battle issues, they need to get lords to defend more. I cant seem to remember a lord ever being present in the siege defense

From what I saw AI tends to leave settlement s when lord is inside and goes only for the ones where there's only garrison and militia.

I leaded an army myself against last western empire town when all remaining lords and mercenaries where inside an it was a hell of a battle. I won but only 300 man of my 2300 survived (there was 1300 defenders).

 

[ileboii]

3 ) Add flamed arrows. The besieged just cant stop the besieger because archers cant shoot flamed arrows to destroy the battering ram or sieges towers. There's a reason if in history, besiegers used animal skins on these siege weapons, it was to make it fire retardant.

What a bunch of bull****. Please go outside, light up a stick and throw it. See how long it stays lit.

 

[Cèsar de Quart]

What do we prefer?

1- Accurate representation of siege battles.
2- Fun siege battles.
3- Cinematic siege battles.

I think we can have two, but not three.

 

[Ratvioli]

I reaaaaally agree on the fact that the siege are really not challenging. And boring , cause you just telle you army to charge and it's a win.
BUT, dude, do you reaaaaally think the dev don't know about flame arrows,boiling oil, and how a castle defense work? REALLY? How can you insult them this way. OFC they know everything, they build mount & baldes games for years, decades ! AND they are turkish, the ottomans history is based on castle sieges, just as Constantinople.

No really, if they did thoses choices, it was on purpose, and maybe we could just think of a way to balance it with other ideas?

Thanks for reading btw. Love.

Mount and bald?
LMAOOO

 

[stevehoos]

Warband sieges are better at this point, not potentially, but as of right now.

 

[Urbanski]

So you want 100 defenders to win against 300-400 attackers?

So what if there are 1200 defenders which i have had a couple of times, you cannot make a 3000 army....

Some points are interesting,but that is just insane.

I guess a factor nobody has discussed yet is the garrison troop tier. I don't know about everyone else but I tend to place lower lvl troops in garrisons, nothing above lvl 3 in a garrison because it gets expensive. I've noticed the same with AI castles / Cities, in sieges I tend to be fighting low lvl garrison troops with my elite fighters.

However if you did put all lvl 4,5,6 troops in the garrison I'm sure the enemy casualties would be much, much higher.

Perhaps a combination of some AI tweaks so both sides defend and attack properly and some higher lvl troops in the garrison. Some of the other ideas from the OP and this thread are also good.

Sieges should be a really risky undertaking for the attacker, right now it doesn't feel like that at all which is another reason why I think the snowball effect happens.

 

[R4MPZY]

I guess a factor nobody has discussed yet is the garrison troop tier. I don't know about everyone else but I tend to place lower lvl troops in garrisons, nothing above lvl 3 in a garrison because it gets expensive. I've noticed the same with AI castles / Cities, in sieges I tend to be fighting low lvl garrison troops with my elite fighters.

However if you did put all lvl 4,5,6 troops in the garrison I'm sure the enemy casualties would be much, much higher.

Perhaps a combination of some AI tweaks so both sides defend and attack properly and some higher lvl troops in the garrison. Some of the other ideas from the OP and this thread are also good.

Sieges should be a really risky undertaking for the attacker, right now it doesn't feel like that at all which is another reason why I think the snowball effect happens.

There are a couple of perks that allow siege defenders to have an 20% increased chance to spawn with elite troops, but maybe the perk isnt working yet which could help atleast a little