Capturing defensive towers

[andqui]

How do I get these to stop shooting at me!?

With the way that combat works in SS, it's sometimes difficult to push/kill enemies below the wall towers away from them- so even if my troops completely control the wall above and the wall around the tower, the presence of any enemies at all on the ground below the tower makes that meaningless as my troops are cut down by arrows from the tower.

Is there any way to go to the more realistic systim in Rome and Empire when running a unit through a tower captures it and makes it stop shooting at you? And if not, any ideas on how to limit the effects of this annoying feature?

thanks

[Caesar Clivus]

Is there any way to go to the more realistic systim in Rome and Empire when running a unit through a tower captures it and makes it stop shooting at you?

No

[Gromovnik]

yeah, the thing they had in Rome was great, if you capture the tower, it's yours.

[bɑne]

Is there any way to go to the more realistic systim in Rome and Empire when running a unit through a tower captures it and makes it stop shooting at you?

Concerning realism:
Imagine that the towers and gatehouses could be shut and barricated from inside by the defenders,
not enough to prevent units from moving through it but enough to keep them from getting control.

And if not, any ideas on how to limit the effects of this annoying feature?

No. It doesn't work with gates either - btw this is a M2TW feature, not a SS feature.

[SirRobin]

Also, the casualties from towers are quite few. You will lose a few troops to them, but in the larger scheme of things it's negligible.

[andqui]

I know that this is a M2TW issue, I was just wondering if SS had anything done to mitigate or fix it.

Anyways, is it really negligible? I'm playing a campaign as Genoa, and my crusading army is trying to seige Baghdad. I've tried twice- each time I get inside succesfully, and get pelted with arrows as I work my way down the streets, even though I have complete control of the walls. I guess I'll just try to book it as fast as possible and set up a perimeter in the center streets out of the way of the towers.

On a similar note, how am I supposed to get cavalry or other reinforcements into the city through the main gate without it dumping oil on me? It kind of defeats the point of a battering ram? It's just irritating having full control of the gate and the walls above it yet still being unable to move things through it without risking 15-30% casualties.

thanks

[SirRobin]

Anyways, is it really negligible? I'm playing a campaign as Genoa, and my crusading army is trying to seige Baghdad. I've tried twice- each time I get inside succesfully, and get pelted with arrows as I work my way down the streets, even though I have complete control of the walls. I guess I'll just try to book it as fast as possible and set up a perimeter in the center streets out of the way of the towers.

On a similar note, how am I supposed to get cavalry or other reinforcements into the city through the main gate without it dumping oil on me? It kind of defeats the point of a battering ram? It's just irritating having full control of the gate and the walls above it yet still being unable to move things through it without risking 15-30% casualties.

When you have "full control of the walls" the arrow towers stop firing. So basically you have to kill all enemy units close to the wall and the gate to stop the arrows and the oil.

Assaulting the gate by ram is supposed to be deadly and difficult, but since the game is unbalanced, you can just use ladders to assault and neutralize the walls and gate before moving in.

Huh? I don't know about that. I've suffered about 40% of total 60% casualties in a siege mostly from arrow towers. If you can't get past them quickly it is like having a unit of levy archers that never run out of arrows firing all the battle long. Usually even making it past the walls quick you can suffer 10% minimum casualties if you have average level of armor units.

Well I don't know how you lose so many troops from the arrows - do you march your entire force into arrow range and let them stand there while the towers/ladders deploy? Even in that situation, most arrows from the towers will either miss or fail to kill, due to the shield.

If you get bogged down fighting on the walls, the tower arrows become more of a threat, but usually it's just a couple of your soldiers who get struck. And the arrows also hit the defenders by accident sometimes.

[Ichon]

Well I don't know how you lose so many troops from the arrows - do you march your entire force into arrow range and let them stand there while the towers/ladders deploy? Even in that situation, most arrows from the towers will either miss or fail to kill, due to the shield.

If you get bogged down fighting on the walls, the tower arrows become more of a threat, but usually it's just a couple of your soldiers who get struck. And the arrows also hit the defenders by accident sometimes.

Hmm... maybe it is difficulty level that giving these different opinions because I always play on VH and then the arrow towers fire more quickly and also the enemy almost always fight to the very last man and if you defeat 1 unit on the wall the AI rushes 2 more up so you stuck near walls very long time. You have to keep men nearby wall waiting for their turn on the ladder too because if you don't keep the wall solid with your men as they push enemy back you have to fight and reclaim that same portion of wall again.

Fighting through gate is even worse. Unless you have vastly superior units you will take large losses vs equal numbers doing a siege this way. I've tried a couple sieges both ways just to see and it was something like assault with 2,300 vs 2,200 and similar unit quality won mostly due putting crossbow on walls once gained a clear section but losses were 800 vs using siege artillery to open hole in wall losses were 300 and using spies losses were 120. Using ladders to rush multiple sides and opening side gates is somewhere between the casualties lost using spies and the siege artillery losses, I think just barely over 200.

So the difference is roughly from 5% on least losses using spies to 40% on fighting through walls and gate. Often in sieges I have better quality close combat troops than enemy but lower overall numbers so I might lose 60% of my attacking force but defeat 2x the numbers. Even with good armor troops the arrow towers add up over a decently long battle near walls.

[SirRobin]

Hmm... maybe it is difficulty level that giving these different opinions because I always play on VH and then the arrow towers fire more quickly

Probably you are right. I play on the medium difficulty level, and there, arrow towers are not very effective.

Just now I finished defending in a siege battle, and the number killed by my towers was low, despite having most of the enemy army standing in range for a long of time while trying to assault one section of wall through one single siege tower. That is, the perfect situation to maximise the towers' kills.

Enemy army was made up of spearmen, viking raiders and light cavalry, with one general unit.

Defenders: Spearmen on large city walls (no ballista towers)

Results were as follows:

Enemy deployed 973 men, and lost 749 (incl. prisoners). I killed 693 men total, and adding up the kill scores of all my units in the battle gives 552 kills. So we can assume the difference is the number killed by tower fire - no boiling oil was used.

Total lost to tower fire: 141 men out of 973. That is 14,5 pct of his army, or 20,3 pct of his total sustained causalties.

While 20 pct is not a negligible casualty figure, it only came to be because of the extreme stupidity of the AI, and I find kill rates from tower arrows should be much higher in this "shooting fish in a barrel" situation.

[Ichon]

Also, the casualties from towers are quite few. You will lose a few troops to them, but in the larger scheme of things it's negligible.

Huh? I don't know about that. I've suffered about 40% of total 60% casualties in a siege mostly from arrow towers. If you can't get past them quickly it is like having a unit of levy archers that never run out of arrows firing all the battle long. Usually even making it past the walls quick you can suffer 10% minimum casualties if you have average level of armor units.

I usually avoid fighting through gate if I am forced to siege because between the burning oil and the arrows you can easily take 2 or 3x as many casualties as avoiding it. Rush various parts of wall with ladders and open a gate to let some fast cavalry in to central square usually leads AI to pull back from walls. If you can march enough infantry in you can hold the streets leading to the central square and get much less costly victory.

Best is to use spies and basically same strategy as above if the AI has much army in the city you are attacking.

2nd best is to break wall with siege artillery as it avoids gate and you can also usually take out the nearest towers to the breach. I don't like siege artillery because #1 it makes every battle take an extra 10 minutes or something of real time and #2 it slows down armies quite alot.

[Tears of Destiny]

I dunno... on VH/VH the tower walls are practically machine guns...

[Mega Tortas de Bodemloze]

To help cut down on the effects of tower fire, I went from the normal unit size to large. The extra men soak up the balista fire.

I dunno... on VH/VH the tower walls are practically machine guns...

Ouch!!! On M/M setting, large unit size, if you don't get totally stuck trying to take the walls, the tower fire is acceptable.

[worldsdead]

i concur with ichon with the vh. the walls and enemy units kick major ass. all his idea's help. another one is to deploy a ladder on the right, ladder on the left and ram in front, then pick your spot for mojority of your ladders. this essentiall splits up enemy so you can get more of your units in quicker. not only does oil make ram pointless (except as distraction) but towers are no good since they always burn and collapse. i use only ladders.
if your lucky you can get archers on undefended wall close to center and bombard enemy with flamming arrows.

i'll play all battles that the enemy has at least 4-5 units in the city (for realism/challenge) but if say there is only a general in city i will auto resolve. i do this because that one general and the walls will usually kill at least 50 men (if not more depending on your soldier type) i highly doubt that a city garrisoned by a unit of 18 horse could or would with stand and kill 100 plus soldiers. that unit would most likely flee or surrender, but alas, limited by game. useually with auto resolve the losses against one general is only around 30.

[midget_roxx]

The biggest problems I find with the towers is when you climb up the ladders and the enemy troops hold off your men and the arrows go into your men's backs.

[Cyprexinia]

I've lost heavy knights and units like that to mostly arrow towers. You can win by pinning enemies just by arrow towers. There can be 1-10 guys with you having 300 on the wall and both tower sides will fire.

[Mega Tortas de Bodemloze]

Question: I wonder if the AI suffers friendly fire from the towers the way we do?

[nickname]

I would say yes. Like my units while defending the enemy units where shoot in the back by there own towers while defending. But the worst case are cannon towers. They will not hit very often. But they will shoot at units at the wall too >.< Sometimes I loose more of my defending men on the wall to my cannon towers then to the enemy. And at the gates it is the same game.

[Tacitursa]

Id like to be able to capture them, hate it when enemy Tower shoots your siege tower once and set's it on fire, Most of the time i shoot enemy towers 50 times and they still dont burn.

AI tower have hax

[Gromovnik]

Id like to be able to capture them, hate it when enemy Tower shoots your siege tower once and set's it on fire, Most of the time i shoot enemy towers 50 times and they still dont burn.

AI tower have hax

yeah, that's why I use only ladders, until cannons are available of course...

[Diversus]

I didn't read all the post's, but my idea is to use assassins to sabotage towers, well i didn't tried it myself, but i think it should stop them.