Boiling Oil

[Veridious]

Am I missing an animation file or something? I never see boiling oil pouring down from the top of the gatehouse, smothering my men in black liquids of death.

[Revan The Great]

They took boiling oil out, probably because of how overpowered it was.

[smitty]

They took boiling oil out, probably because of how overpowered it was.

Which is exactly why they used it back in the medieval times! I too was sad to not have the option of pouring boiling oil down upon my raiding enemies. That way I'd have given them reason to come prepared with a couple of backup towers/ladders! IMO the gates to a town would be terribly hard to breach because of how much defense was focused on it. However playing the LTC mod I've found that my rams seem to catch fire more often than they did in vanilla. It's kind of fun because I have to come prepared to a siege with about 3 rams ready, as well as 4 or so ladder battalions. There go my one-turn sieges, now I have to legitimately prepare!

[Fetchez la Vache]

Boiling oil not exactly readily available in those times mind you. You wouldn't have been able to spam it as it did in RTW. I hated it in RTW. More interesting this way imo.

I'd like to see siege sapping brought back in somehow. Not as it was in MTW (lol at those digging speeds), but as a 'siege engine' that needs a fair few building points to build and then can then be used to weaken sections of wall during the deployment phase. Utterly impossible with this game engine I think but still I can dream can't I?

[smitty]

[quote=Fetchez la Vache;1446119]Boiling oil not exactly readily available in those times mind you. /quote]

I agree completely. I thought it would be wise to have it only available on citadels or very advanced towns. Also, to have maybe 1-2 pours of it available, no further as this would seem much more realistic. It would also provide incentive to bring artillery along as you could just blow up the gate ramparts and render the defenders atop useless.

[Shazbot]

They took it out for balancing issues.

Edit: Damnit Revan...

[Veridious]

Oh, okay thanks guys

[mic111]

That is pity, I really miss it.

[parvus]

same here. but i think the towers on walls are more accurate. it's also generally easier to set fire to enemy seige

[Ippius]

It's just a strange thought that after the Romans were destroyed the concept of boiling oil had completely disappeared, although the balancing issues due to the presence of boiling oil were not to be laughed at.

[Frederick]

I hate it when boiling oil did not destroy battering ram. It seems tower easier to destroy.

[MrMerisi]

I hope someone mods boiling oil back in. I mean, what's the point in touting siege battles if so many cool features of sieges are missing:

Defenders
- no boiling oil (which could also be poured on battering rams and set alight with fire arrows)
- no hot ash
- no moats and drawbridges
- no ditches or earthworks to slow infantry
- no battlement-mounted trebuchets/catapults/ballistas if you have them in your garrison
- can't put archers on top of towers/turrets for extra range
- no pitfalls
- no rock-strewn approaches to break up siege weapons
- no pitch-covered approaches to set alight with archers
- no rocks to toss down on attackers' heads
- no long poles to push away ladders
- attackers get over battlements too easily from ladders (many should be pushed down as soon as they get to the top)
- spearmen (attackers) fight too well as soon as they get onto the battlements, whereas they would have had no room to maneuver IRL. Swordsmen should get a bonus defending walls vs non-élite spears/polearms.
- can't garrison the castle/keep itself (only a couple of flags come up on the keep when you're in the square)
- archers don't fire straight down at defenders, but in an arc
- walls clear away completely when broken down (usually the attackers would have to climb up over the rubble through the breach)
- defenders lose battle if more attackers stay in central square for 3 minutes, which gets gamey (there should be a "fight to the death" option for those who want it, like there is to switch off the battle timer)
- no upgrade to polygonal fortress design once gunpowder is discovered
- can't surrender and pay ransom later...so your 10-star general is doomed to die; the attacker may want the option of capturing and ransoming him.


Attackers:
- no option to just bombard settlement without having to then withdraw and lose battle. Should be able to bombard every turn of the siege, which increases chances of garrison surrendering. This was historically done quite often, and the populace would negotiate their own terms if the garrison wasn't willing to, esp if there was little chance of relief.
- no sapping/undermining
- no placing of powder kegs under the walls once gunpowder's been discovered
- no portable shields (made of reeds and wood) for archers/gunners
- only portions of the walls/towers can be broken down
- knights can't dismount to attack
- swordsmen should get a bonus fighting against non-élite non-swords on walls
- cavalry have difficulty charging in cities, even in wide squares
- routing units flee down ladders while the next attacking unit has to wait for them to climb down. A continuous upward flow of attacking troops would make this impossible. Combined with the 1-ladder bug, this can get annoying!
- if there is a settlement nearby that has the plague, attackers should be able to lob in diseased bodies to get the garrison to surrender

While I still enjoy the sieges, it would have been great if they could have incorporated some of the better features from games like Stronghold, as well as real life. The fact that longbowmen deploy stakes gives me hope they'll add more battlefield "engineering" features down the road.

In addition, faction leaders should have a trait increase if they are good at relieving sieges, and a negative trait if they fail to relieve sieges. If the faction leader is famous for coming to the rescue, that should boost public order and garrison morale during a siege, and help it hold out longer than the base calculation.

[zxiang1983]

I hope someone mods boiling oil back in. I mean, what's the point in touting siege battles if so many cool features of sieges are missing:

Defenders
- no boiling oil (which could also be poured on battering rams and set alight with fire arrows)
- no hot ash
- no moats and drawbridges
- no ditches or earthworks to slow infantry
- no battlement-mounted trebuchets/catapults/ballistas if you have them in your garrison
- can't put archers on top of towers/turrets for extra range
- no pitfalls
- no rock-strewn approaches to break up siege weapons
- no pitch-covered approaches to set alight with archers
- no rocks to toss down on attackers' heads
- no long poles to push away ladders
- attackers get over battlements too easily from ladders (many should be pushed down as soon as they get to the top)
- spearmen (attackers) fight too well as soon as they get onto the battlements, whereas they would have had no room to maneuver IRL. Swordsmen should get a bonus defending walls vs non-élite spears/polearms.
- can't garrison the castle/keep itself (only a couple of flags come up on the keep when you're in the square)
- archers don't fire straight down at defenders, but in an arc
- walls clear away completely when broken down (usually the attackers would have to climb up over the rubble through the breach)
- defenders lose battle if more attackers stay in central square for 3 minutes, which gets gamey (there should be a "fight to the death" option for those who want it, like there is to switch off the battle timer)
- no upgrade to polygonal fortress design once gunpowder is discovered
- can't surrender and pay ransom later...so your 10-star general is doomed to die; the attacker may want the option of capturing and ransoming him.


Attackers:
- no option to just bombard settlement without having to then withdraw and lose battle. Should be able to bombard every turn of the siege, which increases chances of garrison surrendering. This was historically done quite often, and the populace would negotiate their own terms if the garrison wasn't willing to, esp if there was little chance of relief.
- no sapping/undermining
- no placing of powder kegs under the walls once gunpowder's been discovered
- no portable shields (made of reeds and wood) for archers/gunners
- only portions of the walls/towers can be broken down
- knights can't dismount to attack
- swordsmen should get a bonus fighting against non-élite non-swords on walls
- cavalry have difficulty charging in cities, even in wide squares
- routing units flee down ladders while the next attacking unit has to wait for them to climb down. A continuous upward flow of attacking troops would make this impossible. Combined with the 1-ladder bug, this can get annoying!
- if there is a settlement nearby that has the plague, attackers should be able to lob in diseased bodies to get the garrison to surrender

While I still enjoy the sieges, it would have been great if they could have incorporated some of the better features from games like Stronghold, as well as real life. The fact that longbowmen deploy stakes gives me hope they'll add more battlefield "engineering" features down the road.

In addition, faction leaders should have a trait increase if they are good at relieving sieges, and a negative trait if they fail to relieve sieges. If the faction leader is famous for coming to the rescue, that should boost public order and garrison morale during a siege, and help it hold out longer than the base calculation.

Haha, I think TW series just cannot handle such complicated system. You must be a Stronghold game fan, are you?

[Condottiere SOG]

I hope someone mods boiling oil back in. I mean, what's the point in touting siege battles if so many cool features of sieges are missing:

Defenders
- no boiling oil (which could also be poured on battering rams and set alight with fire arrows)
- no hot ash
- no moats and drawbridges
- no ditches or earthworks to slow infantry
- no battlement-mounted trebuchets/catapults/ballistas if you have them in your garrison
- can't put archers on top of towers/turrets for extra range
- no pitfalls
- no rock-strewn approaches to break up siege weapons
- no pitch-covered approaches to set alight with archers
- no rocks to toss down on attackers' heads
- no long poles to push away ladders
- attackers get over battlements too easily from ladders (many should be pushed down as soon as they get to the top)
- spearmen (attackers) fight too well as soon as they get onto the battlements, whereas they would have had no room to maneuver IRL. Swordsmen should get a bonus defending walls vs non-élite spears/polearms.
- can't garrison the castle/keep itself (only a couple of flags come up on the keep when you're in the square)
- archers don't fire straight down at defenders, but in an arc
- walls clear away completely when broken down (usually the attackers would have to climb up over the rubble through the breach)
- defenders lose battle if more attackers stay in central square for 3 minutes, which gets gamey (there should be a "fight to the death" option for those who want it, like there is to switch off the battle timer)
- no upgrade to polygonal fortress design once gunpowder is discovered
- can't surrender and pay ransom later...so your 10-star general is doomed to die; the attacker may want the option of capturing and ransoming him.


Attackers:
- no option to just bombard settlement without having to then withdraw and lose battle. Should be able to bombard every turn of the siege, which increases chances of garrison surrendering. This was historically done quite often, and the populace would negotiate their own terms if the garrison wasn't willing to, esp if there was little chance of relief.
- no sapping/undermining
- no placing of powder kegs under the walls once gunpowder's been discovered
- no portable shields (made of reeds and wood) for archers/gunners
- only portions of the walls/towers can be broken down
- knights can't dismount to attack
- swordsmen should get a bonus fighting against non-élite non-swords on walls
- cavalry have difficulty charging in cities, even in wide squares
- routing units flee down ladders while the next attacking unit has to wait for them to climb down. A continuous upward flow of attacking troops would make this impossible. Combined with the 1-ladder bug, this can get annoying!
- if there is a settlement nearby that has the plague, attackers should be able to lob in diseased bodies to get the garrison to surrender

While I still enjoy the sieges, it would have been great if they could have incorporated some of the better features from games like Stronghold, as well as real life. The fact that longbowmen deploy stakes gives me hope they'll add more battlefield "engineering" features down the road.

In addition, faction leaders should have a trait increase if they are good at relieving sieges, and a negative trait if they fail to relieve sieges. If the faction leader is famous for coming to the rescue, that should boost public order and garrison morale during a siege, and help it hold out longer than the base calculation.

DUDE! YOU ROCK!

Not to mention, why can't you access the whole castle and have a last ditch defense in the Keep. I feel cheated when it comes to sieges. Why is it the AI can successfully attack or defend its holding and Player AI can defend but lacks when it comes to the attack. I usually set aside one unit to attack on its own( that unit being theone I control ) so the rest of the force can attack like the AI attacks and I don't have to micromanage the whole affair. Its a good way to see some great action. Also, why is it the battle for cities and castles is always a linear action instead of taking place all over the city/castle

[MrMerisi]

DUDE! YOU ROCK!

Caro Condottiere...sì, sì, sono davvero un mito.

It's not every day that the party pooper gets appreciated.

Also, why is it the battle for cities and castles is always a linear action instead of taking place all over the city/castle

I'm not sure what you mean here. I usually attack from all conceivable angles...sometimes 12 units rushing the walls from all sides with their ladders. I also bring in a second army to lay siege and then assign them to the AI, so when the assault starts, they come in through the opposite end of the settlement. I've had 5,000 friendly troops battling 2,500 defenders plus their 2,000 off-map reinforcements (I assaulted after 1 turn of siege because even more relieving AI armies were on their way). That's nearly 10,000 men slogging it out over a relatively small area. Do this against a fortress and it's absolute mayhem (not to mention really slow frame rates).

As the mods get better you'll see more and more full garrisons composed of swordsmen, xbowmen and archers, and hopefully someone will figure out how to get the AI to use the walls in the inner defenses to fire on attackers who have breached the outer ring. Right now they retreat to the square where they reform to attack out again, and my archers run along the walls, through the outer keep and onto the inner battlements, where they rain death on the crowded units in the square who've faile their morale test and just huddle there, waiting for Godot.

[Condottiere SOG]

Caro Condottiere...sì, sì, sono davvero un mito.

It's not every day that the party pooper gets appreciated.



I'm not sure what you mean here. I usually attack from all conceivable angles...sometimes 12 units rushing the walls from all sides with their ladders. I also bring in a second army to lay siege and then assign them to the AI, so when the assault starts, they come in through the opposite end of the settlement. I've had 5,000 friendly troops battling 2,500 defenders plus their 2,000 off-map reinforcements (I assaulted after 1 turn of siege because even more relieving AI armies were on their way). That's nearly 10,000 men slogging it out over a relatively small area. Do this against a fortress and it's absolute mayhem (not to mention really slow frame rates).

As the mods get better you'll see more and more full garrisons composed of swordsmen, xbowmen and archers, and hopefully someone will figure out how to get the AI to use the walls in the inner defenses to fire on attackers who have breached the outer ring. Right now they retreat to the square where they reform to attack out again, and my archers run along the walls, through the outer keep and onto the inner battlements, where they rain death on the crowded units in the square who've faile their morale test and just huddle there, waiting for Godot.

por AI, me parle............

They always go straight to the city center instead of enemy troops. maybe the focus of these battles is wrong. I set the city center hold to 5 minutes and may set it to 10 soon. I think the city square should be focused in the keep. I would like to see a better system of defense when CA also fixes player AI siege assaults. Also I want to take the keep. If its just to be eye-candy it makes it useless to even see, much less contemplate. If onnly I couldaccess this I would make it so I could add it in.

[skullman86]

@ MrMerisi

Why did you have to post that list? Sure, I know the game is somewhat.....dare I say it, "arcadey" (you all know it is, just admit it ) but I never really noticed how much cool stuff was actually missing.I have been disappointed with the siege towers not getting ballistas, no oil for castles, and no sappers for offense since day one but a lot of those other features are totally logical and would've been cool.You only mentioned siege features and I feel depressed.....I don't even want to think of the stuff that could have been used in the campaign portion .....but I know I will and I'm going to regret it.

Is it possible to mod even half of the things on that list?

[MrMerisi]

@ MrMerisi

Why did you have to post that list? Sure, I know the game is somewhat.....dare I say it, "arcadey" (you all know it is, just admit it ) but I never really noticed how much cool stuff was actually missing.I have been disappointed with the siege towers not getting ballistas, no oil for castles, and no sappers for offense since day one but a lot of those other features are totally logical and would've been cool.You only mentioned siege features and I feel depressed.....I don't even want to think of the stuff that could have been used in the campaign portion .....but I know I will and I'm going to regret it.

Is it possible to mod even half of the things on that list?

Sorry man, but I'm a little disappointed m'self. That said, I try my best to make sieges a spectacular slog fest. Look at the post above and add to that trebuchets raining fireballs down on the defenders and you can still have fun.

I'm not sure how much of this stuff can be modded, but I have (unfounded) faith that both an expansion pack plus some great mods will significantly enhance sieges.

If the expansion pack deals with the 15th to 17th centuries, which I hope it does, then we'll have to see more "field engineering" as earthworks and prepared defenses started to become a part of a general's arsenal, as did advanced siege techniques to overcome the monstrously difficult star-shaped fortresses such as those designed by the Spanish in Italy (the fortress at L'Aquila is a good example).

As for field battles, IMO they are actually done quite well, despite the issues with the AI. The varying terrain on the maps makes some areas much harder to attack and there are chokepoints that can be used. The AI tends to overuse siege artillery in field battles, but on the whole the battles can be fun at the highest difficulty if you don't use the usual exploits against the AI.

[UhOhIt'sAnArrow]

I hope someone mods boiling oil back in. I mean, what's the point in touting siege battles if so many cool features of sieges are missing:

Defenders
- no boiling oil (which could also be poured on battering rams and set alight with fire arrows)
- no hot ash
- no moats and drawbridges
- no ditches or earthworks to slow infantry
- no battlement-mounted trebuchets/catapults/ballistas if you have them in your garrison
- can't put archers on top of towers/turrets for extra range
- no pitfalls
- no rock-strewn approaches to break up siege weapons
- no pitch-covered approaches to set alight with archers
- no rocks to toss down on attackers' heads
- no long poles to push away ladders
- attackers get over battlements too easily from ladders (many should be pushed down as soon as they get to the top)
- spearmen (attackers) fight too well as soon as they get onto the battlements, whereas they would have had no room to maneuver IRL. Swordsmen should get a bonus defending walls vs non-élite spears/polearms.
- can't garrison the castle/keep itself (only a couple of flags come up on the keep when you're in the square)
- archers don't fire straight down at defenders, but in an arc
- walls clear away completely when broken down (usually the attackers would have to climb up over the rubble through the breach)
- defenders lose battle if more attackers stay in central square for 3 minutes, which gets gamey (there should be a "fight to the death" option for those who want it, like there is to switch off the battle timer)
- no upgrade to polygonal fortress design once gunpowder is discovered
- can't surrender and pay ransom later...so your 10-star general is doomed to die; the attacker may want the option of capturing and ransoming him.


Attackers:
- no option to just bombard settlement without having to then withdraw and lose battle. Should be able to bombard every turn of the siege, which increases chances of garrison surrendering. This was historically done quite often, and the populace would negotiate their own terms if the garrison wasn't willing to, esp if there was little chance of relief.
- no sapping/undermining
- no placing of powder kegs under the walls once gunpowder's been discovered
- no portable shields (made of reeds and wood) for archers/gunners
- only portions of the walls/towers can be broken down
- knights can't dismount to attack
- swordsmen should get a bonus fighting against non-élite non-swords on walls
- cavalry have difficulty charging in cities, even in wide squares
- routing units flee down ladders while the next attacking unit has to wait for them to climb down. A continuous upward flow of attacking troops would make this impossible. Combined with the 1-ladder bug, this can get annoying!
- if there is a settlement nearby that has the plague, attackers should be able to lob in diseased bodies to get the garrison to surrender

While I still enjoy the sieges, it would have been great if they could have incorporated some of the better features from games like Stronghold, as well as real life. The fact that longbowmen deploy stakes gives me hope they'll add more battlefield "engineering" features down the road.

In addition, faction leaders should have a trait increase if they are good at relieving sieges, and a negative trait if they fail to relieve sieges. If the faction leader is famous for coming to the rescue, that should boost public order and garrison morale during a siege, and help it hold out longer than the base calculation.

Hats off to you, although I wouldn't add anything to attackers, mainly because it makes it more simplistic. But yeah comon add some zazz to the castles, moats, boiling oil, terrain difficiencies anything. Just make it look a little more interesting [rep+]

[Condottiere SOG]

I hope someone mods boiling oil back in. I mean, what's the point in touting siege battles if so many cool features of sieges are missing:

Defenders
- no boiling oil (which could also be poured on battering rams and set alight with fire arrows)
- no hot ash
- no moats and drawbridges
- no ditches or earthworks to slow infantry
- no battlement-mounted trebuchets/catapults/ballistas if you have them in your garrison
- can't put archers on top of towers/turrets for extra range
- no pitfalls
- no rock-strewn approaches to break up siege weapons
- no pitch-covered approaches to set alight with archers
- no rocks to toss down on attackers' heads
- no long poles to push away ladders
- attackers get over battlements too easily from ladders (many should be pushed down as soon as they get to the top)
- spearmen (attackers) fight too well as soon as they get onto the battlements, whereas they would have had no room to maneuver IRL. Swordsmen should get a bonus defending walls vs non-élite spears/polearms.
- can't garrison the castle/keep itself (only a couple of flags come up on the keep when you're in the square)
- archers don't fire straight down at defenders, but in an arc
- walls clear away completely when broken down (usually the attackers would have to climb up over the rubble through the breach)
- defenders lose battle if more attackers stay in central square for 3 minutes, which gets gamey (there should be a "fight to the death" option for those who want it, like there is to switch off the battle timer)
- no upgrade to polygonal fortress design once gunpowder is discovered
- can't surrender and pay ransom later...so your 10-star general is doomed to die; the attacker may want the option of capturing and ransoming him.


Attackers:
- no option to just bombard settlement without having to then withdraw and lose battle. Should be able to bombard every turn of the siege, which increases chances of garrison surrendering. This was historically done quite often, and the populace would negotiate their own terms if the garrison wasn't willing to, esp if there was little chance of relief.
- no sapping/undermining
- no placing of powder kegs under the walls once gunpowder's been discovered
- no portable shields (made of reeds and wood) for archers/gunners
- only portions of the walls/towers can be broken down
- knights can't dismount to attack
- swordsmen should get a bonus fighting against non-élite non-swords on walls
- cavalry have difficulty charging in cities, even in wide squares
- routing units flee down ladders while the next attacking unit has to wait for them to climb down. A continuous upward flow of attacking troops would make this impossible. Combined with the 1-ladder bug, this can get annoying!
- if there is a settlement nearby that has the plague, attackers should be able to lob in diseased bodies to get the garrison to surrender

While I still enjoy the sieges, it would have been great if they could have incorporated some of the better features from games like Stronghold, as well as real life. The fact that longbowmen deploy stakes gives me hope they'll add more battlefield "engineering" features down the road.

In addition, faction leaders should have a trait increase if they are good at relieving sieges, and a negative trait if they fail to relieve sieges. If the faction leader is famous for coming to the rescue, that should boost public order and garrison morale during a siege, and help it hold out longer than the base calculation.

the thing is that many a siege have been broken due to an heavy assault that had been broken due to the fact that hot oil and rocks being tossed on its its personnel such that all the men were too disgruntled to fight! Sieges now all to easily favor the sieger, nor does the sieger loose soldiers(from light assaults and defense probes) per turn of siege, anyone notice that difference from MTW.

Let's have the oil back and add some rock tossing!