And the ram is the most basic and cheap siege weapon that can EASILY destroy the keep.
There are still several other siege weapons namely canons and trebuchets can utterly melt a keep within a few seconds.
Trying to argue that rams needs nerfing goes to show how under powered a keep is that even the most basic siege weapon completely dunks on it.
Perhaps that should be indicative of how much of a buff the keep needs that even basic siege weapons poses a huge threat.
I feel like you donāt understand the significance behind siege engineering. Once again, Iāll quote from my post:
Cannons and trebs canāt be built from siege engineering. Only rams. Which is why I made the recommendation for nerfing siege engineering.
Rams should never reach your keep. You have a very generous amount of time to kill them with infantry, cavalry, or springalds.
Also keep in mind that 3 rams are a larger resource investment than a keep so all other things being even the rams should win. This ignores the relative rarity of stone a bit but itās balanced by rams being anti building specialists.
I feel like you donāt completely understand the point being discussed here.
What is a Keep?
It is supposed to the strongest and more defensible structures you build.
You cannot make anything stronger than this unless its some sort of civilization specific landmark structure.
However this ultimate defensive building is usedā¦ to guard faraway resources that you donāt want to bother with. Yeah sounds about the perfect use for this structure rather than you knowā¦ being the cornerstone of your defences.
Yet here you are arguing that the keep functions fine and the only problem here isnāt that it folds on itself like a wet piece of paper when you sneeze on it but that the ram speed should be nerfed. lmao.
Its a Ram. Not an M1 Abrams tank. And if the Ram is the anti structure specialist then what are the trebuchet and canons for? Anti Air?
A ram shouldnāt be able to fully destroy a keep, like a trebuchet or a cannon can (taking some realism liberties, of course).
If we try to edge slightly towards realism, what I wouldāve liked to see is rams being specialized in taking down gates, both in walls and keeps. You then would be able to take control of said keep with your own army and then repair the gate if you want.
That way we wouldnāt see the cheap rams being OP and overutilized vs expensive keeps (like it happens now), but if you do manage to approach the gate and keep the ram alive (a harder task), you would get a better reward.
I was speaking from a gameplay perspective. Not from a perspective that is based on how realistic units and buildings are. We all know rams canāt destroy entire keeps in real life.
As far as Iām aware, the OP was also speaking from a gameplay perspective. Iām tired of this conversationā¦
And it never will if you have even the most minimal of defense forces. Your current argument is like saying knights are OP because a single knight can kill 20 vills without dying, that will only happen in a world where you ignore all counterplay.
What are you talking about? Everything I am saying is based on gameplayā¦
The current problem is imagine a knight that kills villagers so fast that by the time you click your knights and have them run at the enemy knight the guy has already killed 20 villagers before you had a chance to stop him.
The current problem with siege weapons from the humble ram to the amazing canon is that they simply kill your Keep too fast. And since the Keep is so expensive it makes it useless.
This quote suggests otherwise.
Trebuchets and cannons are anti building units as well but they remain viable against opponents who are actively defending their buildings with anti siege and units.
Then work on your reading skills. I donāt know what else to tell you.
What you are saying is mostly agreeing with what I said. Rams need nerfing but you can do so without resorting to simply reducing attack or hitpoints. You can be way more creative.
Thatās why I proposed an alternative: Have keeps include āhardpointsā, even if itās just the gate. If you have rams, you canāt put 10 around a keep like you do now, you need to target just one at the gate and micro to defend it. High risk, high reward. You donāt destroy the keep, instead you get to take it (and if you really want to obliterate the keep, you have other siege for that).
Thatās of course not going to happen with the game 3 weeks away, but one can dream.
I really really like the idea that you can take an opponentās keep. I think you can ātakeā an opponentās wall via siege tower. In real life, these structures lasted centuries and for gameplay purposes, ācapturingā an opponentās defensive wall or keep would make for more interesting battles.
I think one reason the Keep is so weak in AoE4 is that Keeps are meant to be used in conjunction with walls. Unfortunately, the range of the keeps are quite limited, making them difficult support structures to wall defenses.
If Keeps are really meant to be a support structure rather a full functioning defensive structure that can stand on its ownā¦
Perhaps it should grant surrounding units buffs? Like it would heal them, boost their damage and range. And make it possible that small group of defenders can use the Keep not only as a base to fall back to but as something that makes them more effective.
Agree with the keep weakness issue. Iāve seen in the beta how literally any army with a few bombards and some units to defend them for long enough can literally destroy any wall or keep in a matter of few seconds. Keeps should be far more resistant, specially in the Imperial Age. A few bombard shots and they are only ashes, it feels kinda ridiculous tbh.
Btw, I agree with it being called keep instead of castle. Castle is the classic term in AoE II and we are used to it, but keep does make more sense, since castles were not a single building or small fortification. In fact, a castle would be what we can build with walls, wall towers and keeps, instead of a single something. Maybe more depth when building this kind of fortifications will add more to the sense of a ātrue castleā.
The cost of a keep is dramatically reduced from its AOE2 counterpart. You donāt have to research murder holes to kill melee units, ballistics to get it to track moving targets and thereās a lot more stone available to the player along with infinite sources of food and gold to make buying stone easier.
On top of that the keep can be upgraded with cannons to double its firepower and everyone effectively gets crenellations.
Several keep defensive upgrades are limited to the keep you are upgrading and their cost is in stone, completely negating any advantage of having a slightly cheaper initial build cost. This was also true with towers which I rarely āupgradedā. Most of the times I simply used them as villager garrisons, unless they were defending a choke/key point.
Top it off iāve used some of the upgrades and honestly, theyāve been pretty underwhelming.
Strong siege comes so early in the game and keeps just donāt have enough hp or dmg to properly deny space.
Somebody mentioned that walling around the keeps might be helpful so Iāll definitely take a look at it.
I believe Oil is already in the gameā¦ At least I remember the HRE having that upgrade for their keeps.
Yes this was showcased in the showmatch between Rus and French