| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
waylander69 
Forum Warrior
Joined: 07 Mar 2010
Location: spain
Status: Offline
Points: 316
|
 Topic: More defense options
Posted: 06 Jun 2010 at 17:42 |
At the minute we only have the castle wall to protect us in the event of an attack, how about more defense options such as Moat with Drawbridge Barbican, Bastion, Gatehouse, Towers, Arrow loops, These are just a few ideas to extend your defense options. Suggestions and improvements as always more than welcome 
|
 |
WildBill
Greenhorn
Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 50
|
Posted: 06 Jun 2010 at 18:40 |
|
i do want a moat
|
|
Mandarins31
Forum Warrior
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 418
|
Posted: 06 Jun 2010 at 20:33 |
|
I find that's a good idea but walls are already really stong defense (adds more than 100% defense to your city troops at lvl 20).
In spite of it, i think it would be interesting if defense on the walls were specific of each type of soldier. 1 kind for spearman, 1 kind for soldiers, ...., 1 kind for siege engines. And that each city could only choose 1 or 2 of each city defenses.
I explain:
For exemple your city is in a forest. This already penalize attacker's archers and cavalry. But spearmen and swordmen are not penalized. Then u choose to construct specific defense against spearmen and swordmen to enchance city defence.
Edited by Mandarins31 - 06 Jun 2010 at 20:35
|
|
col0005
Forum Warrior
Joined: 20 Apr 2010
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 238
|
Posted: 07 Jun 2010 at 01:45 |
|
I posted a suggestion about improving the variety of siege mechanics a couple of weeks ago but it got no response. If an improvment to wall mechanics was implemented then a variety of cheap(comparitavly to current) siege options could be implemented as well, such as siege ladders, battering rams, and siege towers (would require re-naming current siege units),
This would open up even further defnce options as well, as upgrading the gatehouse would reduce the effectivness of the battering ram, and a possible options of further reinforcing the gate by dumping stone and clay behind the door (cuts off all trade for a period of time too) etc
|
|
CranK
Forum Warrior
Joined: 27 Apr 2010
Location: Holland
Status: Offline
Points: 286
|
Posted: 07 Jun 2010 at 14:57 |
sounds good :) and btw col0005, battering rams are allraidy in the game:
|
|
xilla
New Poster
Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 36
|
Posted: 07 Jun 2010 at 18:28 |
|
I think he means actual battering rams though, as in the use of a battering ram would reduce the city wall or gate only. So like use of certain siege engines would reduce effectiveness of each defence for attacks, and other engines to level the city in a siege encampment
|
|
col0005
Forum Warrior
Joined: 20 Apr 2010
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 238
|
Posted: 09 Jun 2010 at 03:16 |
|
Xilla is right if you'll look at my perviouse post you'll notice that I did say (would require re-naming current siege units) i believe that siege tower is already in use too. For the battering ram I was thinking that it would only be used against the gatehouse level, gatehouse level would have no impact on siege ladders/siege towers as it would be used against the wall level etc. The game mechanics would work out the path of least resistance for the sieging army in terms of choosing to go over the wall or through the gate
|
|
HonoredMule
Postmaster General
Joined: 05 Mar 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1650
|
Posted: 09 Jun 2010 at 13:20 |
|
The trouble with separating walls and gates is that you would need both to reduce defenses, and that doesn't make sense in terms of realism or game design. If I raze the walls to the ground, what does it matter that a few spattered gatehouses still stand? Yet they would continue to contribute their full defense and be untouchable by the siege equipment that flattened the walls...that just doesn't make sense.
If anything, defense could be split into multiple structures, but then existing wall siege should be able to hit any of the structures, with varying per-structure effectiveness. It would increase variety, then we'd also have to address the issue of which structure the siege tries to hit and why. Without careful tweaking, the assault mechanic could be easily broken by such development.
|
|
Mandarins31
Forum Warrior
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 418
|
Posted: 09 Jun 2010 at 15:02 |
|
I agree with you HonoredMule, any siege engine could hit any part of the wall but with different effectiveness.
Engines that can destroy the walls may destroy the gates too. Like rock launchers are really effective against wall and less effective against gates (because of accuracy). And at the opposite battering rams are very effective against gates but less against walls (because made with wood).
And like i said previously it could be the same for defenses on walls.
For exemple we have archer tower. good for killing ennemy's archers, medium for infantry/cavalry, weak against engines.
On the other side we can have rockfalling and/or lunber falling that is good against engines, medium against infantry, weak against archers. etc...
|
|
waylander69
Forum Warrior
Joined: 07 Mar 2010
Location: spain
Status: Offline
Points: 316
|
Posted: 09 Jun 2010 at 15:31 |
|
True but as it stands a level 11 wall could be down in 11 hours if im looking at it the right way so a person could be off the game for 2 days, giving no notice of an attack then return just to see a flattened wall and city, a wall is not enough of a defense hence castles developed over time to provide extra walls and to make it harder for attackers, moats were developed with draw bridges to make it harder for troops to assault the castle even if the walls had been smashed down, once a players reaches 100% of his wall more defense options should be opened up.
|
|
Tweet
More defense options
