Print Page | Close Window

siege army attacking the town before setting camp

Printed From: Illyriad
Category: Miscellaneous
Forum Name: Suggestions & Game Enhancements
Forum Description: Got a great idea? A feature you'd like to see? Share it here!
URL: http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/forum_posts.asp?TID=4030
Printed Date: 17 Apr 2022 at 02:50
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: siege army attacking the town before setting camp
Posted By: Quackers
Subject: siege army attacking the town before setting camp
Date Posted: 18 Aug 2012 at 03:26
I'd like a use for defensive forces that are in your towns. Like siege armies having to attack your town first before they can set up their camp. If they lose they get wiped out and if they win they are able to set up camp. This in my mind will create a better balance to the game and take away some of the power siege has. Adding a major use for defensive forces, terrain and crafted armor while making it harder to launch a successful siege.  

-------------
Make it your ambition to lead a quiet life, to mind your own business and to work with your hands, so that your daily life may win the respect of outsiders and so you will not be dependent on anybody.



Replies:
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 18 Aug 2012 at 05:10
The fact that armies no longer defend the city on the raze/capture step is a very significant broken mechanic.  I really hope these fix this soon.  I know your proposal is somewhat different, but as things stand now, defending armies NEVER engage unless you send them in sally forth.  Makes the wall a lot less useful as well, although of course it can still help protect troops that are preparing to Sally from being wiped out as they are assembling.


Posted By: Gyreth
Date Posted: 18 Aug 2012 at 05:43
I guess you would need to see them headed your way, figure out which square they are going to occupy, and have your defense forces occupy that square first.  Why would they need to send troops into the town before setting up siege engines outside it?  Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of a siege?  For now defensive forces in the town mean that someone else can't just wipe out all the troops in your town with a small second army before the siege begins, no?

Maybe it would be more realistic to have some mechanic whereby your defense forces could be ordered to automatically position themselves to block an incoming siege, forcing them to attack you outside your town?  After all, your army should be able to easily see the direction of the approaching forces and set itself in their path, right?  You would still have the advantage of your sovereignty and a defensive force you could equip for the terrain outside of your town.


Posted By: Rorgash
Date Posted: 18 Aug 2012 at 11:22
as it is once the camp lands you can send you troops out normally.. so i dont get this..

-------------


Posted By: Garth
Date Posted: 18 Aug 2012 at 11:44
Originally posted by Rorgash Rorgash wrote:

as it is once the camp lands you can send you troops out normally.. so i dont get this..
Not much use sending out Spears and bows (unless you're an Elf...) on attack. The whole point is to be able to use defensive troops in a siege situation.


Posted By: Quackers
Date Posted: 18 Aug 2012 at 11:57
Originally posted by Garth Garth wrote:

Originally posted by Rorgash Rorgash wrote:

as it is once the camp lands you can send you troops out normally.. so i dont get this..
Not much use sending out Spears and bows (unless you're an Elf...) on attack. The whole point is to be able to use defensive troops in a siege situation.


And preferably before a siege lands.

Even like Gyreth's idea is suitable. Just something that will make defensive troops more useable.


-------------
Make it your ambition to lead a quiet life, to mind your own business and to work with your hands, so that your daily life may win the respect of outsiders and so you will not be dependent on anybody.


Posted By: tallica
Date Posted: 19 Aug 2012 at 17:11
I believe part of the pathfinding update will allow us to park an army on the incoming armies path. Of course we would have to calculate which squares that army will march over and choose an advantageous one to set up on. Of course we're still a long ways from pathfinding and currently there is little use for defending units besides protecting your attack armies in your towns.


Posted By: Rorgash
Date Posted: 19 Aug 2012 at 20:06
well i for one as a commander wont order my siege to attack before setting up camp :P so if im not stupid and does that why should the defender be smart enough to not charge out?

makes no sense


-------------


Posted By: Binky the Berserker
Date Posted: 19 Aug 2012 at 21:09
I agree with rorgash. shouldn't siege be worked out as realistic as possible? In real, when a town gets sieged people don't run out and fight the attacker, because it is easier to defend from within the town. And it's the same in Illy I think. It's easier to kill a siege army with some good placed cavalry then with an army of spears, waiting to be trampled by the attacker. Makes sense imo. Defense units work perfect against raids,and to defend a plot/siege. That's where they are made for.


Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 19 Aug 2012 at 22:18
Originally posted by Binky the Berserker Binky the Berserker wrote:

I agree with rorgash. shouldn't siege be worked out as realistic as possible?

Not necessarily.  I think that game mechanics should be designed to be as fun and interesting as possible, even if they are not strictly realistic.  I don't know whether the proposals outlined here would make things more fun and interesting, but I think that fun and interesting should be balanced with realism, hopefully with a tilt toward fun.


Posted By: dunnoob
Date Posted: 19 Aug 2012 at 22:34
Troops in an inactive town under siege doing nothing at all against the capture or raze attempt are no fun.Thumbs Down 

They should fix that asap, and enable blockades again.  @Quackers, I don't get your idea, doesn't sally forth already do what you want for active defenders?


Posted By: Quackers
Date Posted: 19 Aug 2012 at 22:59
Originally posted by dunnoob dunnoob wrote:

Troops in an inactive town under siege doing nothing at all against the capture or raze attempt are no fun.Thumbs Down 

They should fix that asap, and enable blockades again.  @Quackers, I don't get your idea, doesn't sally forth already do what you want for active defenders?

Yea I guess it does, guess I'm just trying to think of more ways defending troops can be useful. (before pathfinding) :P


-------------
Make it your ambition to lead a quiet life, to mind your own business and to work with your hands, so that your daily life may win the respect of outsiders and so you will not be dependent on anybody.


Posted By: Salararius
Date Posted: 20 Aug 2012 at 00:27
Why are battering rams allowed to roll up to the walls and attack at will?  Rams suffer no risk when attacking walls even if the attacking force is vastly outnumbered by defenders.  Battering walls is an offensive action and should trigger some sort of combat.  Why don't the troops outside the wall need to successfully raid the walls each time (or once a day) the rams are used?  As it stands now, you can send rams with defensive troops and they work just as well as rams with offensive troops.  Then when the walls are down you can send in cav to wipe out the defenders.

What is the point of walls if the only way to protect the walls from rams is to sacrifice their advantage and attack the besieging force?

Along the same idea, why can't attacking troops destroy farms, quarries, mines, pits and lumberjacks without catapults?  Aren't those things outside the walls?



Posted By: Rorgash
Date Posted: 20 Aug 2012 at 00:32
hmm a raid destroying farms, quarries, mines, pits and lumberjacks sounds awesome, and makes raiding useful for more things.

and putting some loss in battering rams could be good, but im not sure how to do it with their cost being soo high, so really you could take the cost in upkeep as being the limiter.


-------------


Posted By: Bonaparta
Date Posted: 20 Aug 2012 at 01:46
Good strategist can use defensive troops against siege!

Siege armies move slowly so you have a lot of time to prepare.

Step 1: Scout attacking town with advanced scouts, to see army composition.
Step 2: dodge any direct attack on town (most players will try to wipe out any forces in defending town before siege lands)
Step 3: When siege army hits the town it will need around 10 minutes to set up camp. In that time you should send out your defenders to most likely siege position, based on scouting information. Your defenders move faster than siege army so they will be there first (occupy for 10 minutes). Usually there aren't many good siege positions, but if there are you can always split your army. With new map arrow movement indicators you may actually see where siege camp is going to land. I haven't tested this map arrow hypothesis though.

Inexperienced attacker will just sent siege army with many defensive forces and will not hit siege position with cavalry/infantry few seconds before siege lands. Such an attacker is easy prey for defensive forces...

But primary role for good defense force is to actually siege yourself. Good defenders are most dangerous in this game, since siege is ultimate attack and you need many defenders for sieging...


-------------
http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/95216" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Arctic55
Date Posted: 20 Oct 2012 at 04:14
Originally posted by Salararius Salararius wrote:

Why are battering rams allowed to roll up to the walls and attack at will?  Rams suffer no risk when attacking walls even if the attacking force is vastly outnumbered by defenders.  Battering walls is an offensive action and should trigger some sort of combat.  Why don't the troops outside the wall need to successfully raid the walls each time (or once a day) the rams are used?  As it stands now, you can send rams with defensive troops and they work just as well as rams with offensive troops.  Then when the walls are down you can send in cav to wipe out the defenders.

What is the point of walls if the only way to protect the walls from rams is to sacrifice their advantage and attack the besieging force?

Along the same idea, why can't attacking troops destroy farms, quarries, mines, pits and lumberjacks without catapults?  Aren't those things outside the walls?



I totally agree.  We should also be able to raid the city for resources and collect the res in our siege camp.  Then we send caravans to the siege camp to take the resources we took from raiding back to our city.  I hate the fact the when I go through the work of razing a city I get nothing from it.


Posted By: DeathDealer89
Date Posted: 20 Oct 2012 at 04:47
I suggest the ability to equip torches to troops.



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net