Gate capture point. Can it be moved?

**Ivan_Moscavich** · July 23, 2014, 01:14 PM

I'm curious as to the elevation of the gate capture point can be moved. Say to put it on top of the gate within and between the two gate towers? That way it forces you to take the gatehouse to be able to open if you lose your ram/artillery.

And on top of that, is it possible to give the AI an automatic battering ram? I feel like the AI handled rams the best in the first Rome, and I've yet to see them have any difficulty using a ram in this one either.
Maybe unlock it via the siege tech, once you can build rams, you automatically get a free ram for your sieges.

**Dresden** · July 23, 2014, 02:50 PM

I am considering having rams be unlocked from the start for all AI factions.

**Ivan_Moscavich** · July 23, 2014, 04:46 PM

I think it's definitely at least worth a test. Or even a combination of one ram and one set of ladders for the AI.

**Cavalier** · July 23, 2014, 05:21 PM

For the Lvl. 1 settlements there is only one slot for siege equipment, right? So you'll have to choose between a ram or ladders, if that is the case.

**Ivan_Moscavich** · July 23, 2014, 05:51 PM

Originally Posted by Cavalier

For the Lvl. 1 settlements there is only one slot for siege equipment, right? So you'll have to choose between a ram or ladders, if that is the case.

I'm not sure if that's the case or not. I'm pretty sure you're just not allowed tortoises or siege towers unless the walls are high enough.

In either case, if you only had one siege weapon slot available, I think the AI would do better with rams. Not to mention at that point very few factions have units available that can use flaming things to try and take the ram out.

**WelshDragon** · July 24, 2014, 09:14 AM

Not sure if anyone else has also noticed that the defender loses control of the gate when pretty much any ememy troops get near it when defending in siege. This can be frustrating when the defenders are clearly winning and losing control of the gate anyway, resulting in loss of arrow towers and boiling oil. Perhaps this is intentional to give the attacker (usually the AI) a little help.

I will say the improvements in AI attacks on walled settlements has seen steady improvements. I tend to agree that a ram may be better for the AI other than sending 4 units to die on the walls, would have to test to confirm.

Cheers.

**Ivan_Moscavich** · July 24, 2014, 01:42 PM

What you stated is exactly why I suggested the cp location change WeslhDragon. I have gone so far as to position troops smack dab behind the boiling oil, half way through the gate itself, and still the few troops that push through during the fighting make the gate turn neutral. This disables the oil and arrow towers, which can make or break the defence of the settlement.

**Lieutenant Sharpe** · July 24, 2014, 01:54 PM

Yes I agree cap point needs to be moved so it isn't instantly shut down. Walled settlements could use some buffs all around. Provincial capitals should be extremely difficult to assault. Ranged units need more ammunition, arrow towers could use buffs, oil could be more effective, garrison and mobs could be buffed. Generally treachery and stealth were used to capture walled settlements. It would be awesome if spies or an internal faction could open a gate and the player could play a night battle where a small elite force secures the gate allowing the rest of the army to assault. In order to balance the strengthened settlements large armies should deplete food more quickly.

**Cope** · July 24, 2014, 02:09 PM

Just to raise a point relating to this issue:

Would it possible to have ballistae as a deployable (like spike traps) for siege battles only? That way you could unlock them in tech and then have them available as a deployable during siege battles instead of having them as an independent unit in their own right. They would then have to be crewed by any unit that you choose, just like other pieces of siege equipment are so that you could not exceed the maximum number of units allowed.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't imagine that any army would cart around a giant ballista with them, it would be virtually impossible. Seems more reasonable that they would construct it on sight, as was the case with rams, siege towers, trebuchets et cetera.

As to the point about Rams, I think that you should make them an instant piece of siege equipment Dresden. Personally I would prefer it if it were impossible to instantly attack a city - unless you had ranged siege equipment with you such as I have outlined above - but since torches are here to stay, I'd rather just have rams straight away than have to suffer those dreadful fire sticks.

**Mithridates II the Great** · July 24, 2014, 03:09 PM

Is it possible to direct AI's technology research in order to reach Pre siege tower sooner ?

**Iron_Duke** · July 24, 2014, 05:04 PM

If a default turn is three months I'm wondering why any reasonable amount of all types of siege equipment can't be made in that time.

**Ivan_Moscavich** · July 24, 2014, 05:15 PM

I miss the ability of all previous total war games to use a spy to open the gates before a battle. Why that was in FotS then removed for Rome 2 I have no idea.

I don't think they need a siege tower immediately, but definitely a ram.

Yeah if it is three months you probably should be able to have multiple pieces of siege equipment right off.