I agree with you: I do not like the siege vs. siege matchups, either. However, this has gotten much better with each patch.
I also do not agree with you: I have found horseman to be a viable (and sometimes game-saving) late game unit. In a pinch, a horde of expendable horseman will help save your more expensive (gold) units. Their relatively low cost (food/wood), speed, and utility in countering counter-units (i.e. they trade relatively well against crossbows that might counter your knights or MAAs) make them relatively useful.
If you read correctly, more than one and more than 2 have said that a ball of horsemen falls against a ball of mangonels. This is false.
If you talk about an almost perfect mix between mangonels and spearmen, there would be less mass of mangoes and Springald would have to be used, which is what they are for.
In every match, to protect Mangos from springalds, players make springalds and the result is āSIEGE FESTā.
as the cavalry canāt do anything cost-efficiently when it is protected by hand cannons and/or spears.
What if you increased the minimum distance of all siege weapons? Would this potentially reduce SiegeFest? That way, any unit that closed the distance would be an effective counter to any siege.
Just my 2 cent, but idea came from PUP that warship get less grouping distance, so what about clearance area for siege to unpack: siege canāt unpack if there is unit, tree or building in x tile radius? (affect only seige that need to unpack/set up)
With this:
it will force seige to spead out more, make it harder to concentrate attack in one area
4-5 Bombards in small area to siege building down will reduce to 2-3, give building and wall more chance to hold. itās also to add treb to combine with bombard to siege faster due to different range.
it make siege help guard other siege harder as thereāre more likely to out of range.
To guard more spread out siege, more units is needed, result in less unit cap for siege unit. (unless narrow terrain come in play)
That has a big potential downside of being very clunky in practice. People complain now about getting their siege in position to fire with elevation in the way, now add random trees and rocks and things preventing unpacking.
Not sure what Iām doing wrong or right, but I never seem to run into the mangonel fest that Iāve seen mentioned so oftenā¦ maybe if both parties just turtle, idk, but mangonels are very expensive.
Out of like 60 games so far Iāve only had one game where someone tried to mangonel spam to victory. My man built like 30 mangonels at the least before the game was called at like 28 minutes. Literally all it took was a few springalds running around with greased axels to win. Granted I had to pull out the cav out in early castle because I just played like trash booming 24/7 but still.
Iām sorry, but how community want siege to act? Does community want it to unpack easily at any place anytime and fight against anything come after them? Wasnāt this a part people complain about?
Wasnāt siege unit more about positioning to best hold position and maximize in sieging? If so, choosing position to unpack siege unit to not get blocked by elevation should be one of stratigic decision, along with sending army ahead to hold take good position for siege. As for issue of elevation block, maybe need more graphic hint to told player that it would likely to get blocked and make player get better judgement in choosing location to unpack.
Also, being clunky is one way to nerf seige units and put in more play in army units.
In my idea, this is how units should be:
army units: cheaper, flexible, fast to response, low in destroying enemy group of units or defense position.
Siege units: expensive, hard to use, need time to set up properly, but using properly would destroy any enemy group or defense position at ease.
I tell you one thing, if it were up to me, put friendly fire on the area siege so that low elo players stop complaining. That and that they reduce the team maps.
