I just tested it. You can unload your units wherever you want.
Ok, good argument, but there should be at least some kinds of ST related civ bonuses to make them more viable for some specific civs.
They can transport petards, so potentially they can be a threat to buildings
although in this case the petars could explode the wall, but you can always want to destroy one other particular building, like TC
Flattered to see my original thread quoted here. Tbh I’d be shocked if there were any changes.
That being said I still stand behind my original post even though #3 wasn’t very popular:
- Reduce the wood and gold cost
- Allow vaulting over other buildings than walls. Potentially contiguous buildings (would ruin Black Forest for certain people though).
- Make possible a hard-to-pull-off castle conversion that requires garrisons of Militia-line infantry.
- Never make them shoot projectiles again.
1 Like
i think it should fire 0 arrows but when garrisioned with a lot of archers shots 2 or 3 arrows.
Then I’ll try them again, it could have been modified with a patch and I miss it.
Thanks
Well, both celts and slavs would have good infantry bonuses (speed and free supplies) that would work nicely with their siege bonuses (more wood+faster SW and cheaper ST).
Also all meso civs would benefit from the ST, since they could raid with eagles, especially aztecs.
I think that in general all civs that usually rush could benefit from some cheaper ST.
Also, teutons ST could be affected by their double towers garrison capacity bonus, plus ironclad.
1 Like
I was thinking in the following direction. If our goal is to see the ST being used more often, then the two things that should make it a viable choice are price and usefulness. So, dear developers:
- Make it not more as expensive as a ram, since the ST will never be more used than the siege unit.
- Add another feature to the wall jumping. Either shoot arrows (which I personally don’t like) or give it an attack only against towers and castles, when the ST is garrisoned, so that its original idea as a “taxi” is fully embraced.
Since I want to play it, but don’t, there aren’t so many ideas how to balance it and make it interesting to play.
What would you say, folks?
1 Like
Vaulting over other buildings than walls would not only look and feel weird, I think it could also be game breaking. I would rather support @FlorianOpel’s suggestions: make them a bit cheaper and give them a another purpose besides wall hopping.
200 wood for siegeworkshop+200 wood+160 gold for the siege tower plus adding the cost of the army you are creating, makes this unit not worth in early castle age and for late castle age other than being a taxi it is not quite useful.
They can only work for early imperial with husk or champs sneaking into the enemy’s base, but at that point it is quite predictable.
It doesn’t need to shoot arrows or having more hp or speed, just decreasing the cost, otherwise it would always be better to make mangonels or rams to break in.
1 Like
decreasing the production time could also make it situationally more useful than a ram
One thing to add - if a second layer of buildings prevents the wall hopping, this will give the defending side a motive to put more resources in buildings behind the walls. This will force them to spend more wood/stone. Just putting every building you have behind the walls could cause a serious inconvenience, if you lose them later, so it will force a decision making action, which is the core of this game.
Do you invest in doubling down on the defense or do you risk too much, by putting everything you have on the front?
Imagine how funny it could be for the aggressive side, if they actually don’t make STs but rams 
1 Like
Agreed! Example: the Bulgarian m@a rush is scary, not so much because it saves them a lot of resources, but simply because it is lightning fast. Everyone has m@a, but it is important, when do you have them available.
If the ST becomes cheaper and fast to produce, then putting your feudal age army into the early castle age ST and hopping them behind the wall could be way more surprising for the opponent than upgrading what you had earlier.
Let’s admit it - how many of us have used or fought the ST! Seeing it being deployed is a jaw dropping moment in the game.
True, and in maps like arena, they are good for counter attacks and for surprise attacks that allow to reduce the civ advantage gap.
First they should change the siege towers height stats to be able to block more castle and tower fire similar to mangonel (see original discussion from link above and twest video).
That change alone is just for qimmick fun and it also makes sense.
Secondly decreaaing the cost needs to be done with care. It can’t become a trash unit for example. Rams are there to soak up archer fire. If siege towers become too cheap they might replace rams and significantly alter the game balance by replace/competing rams as the traditional anti arrcher meat Shied.
I would change the cost to 140 wood and 90 gold.
1 Like
if you make them trash units, you’d have to reduce the pierce armour. That would neutralise your concern. I see no way a 200 wood 220 hp 0 PA arrow shield would be OP.
Feels wrong for the unit bring so vunersble to arrows. I would rather change nothing then.
Siege Towers should have an arrow attack when there are Archers loaded inside.
This would not be OP at all, and would ensure civs with weak Archers like Spanish and Bulgarians, could actually still use them as Ranged Support.
3 Likes
I think that lowering the price a bit is enough. Just to 170w, 135g. If they ever shoot arrows, they should have low attack and range and maybe have less HP otherwise could be abused. I think they should also work on double-wall (two tiles maximum to work)
1 Like
In my opinion, making the Militia line see more use would do more for seeing more Siege Towers than a Siege Tower buff. I think the Bulgarians will demonstrate this if they keep their upcoming buffs on patch day. Their current bonuses combining with the possible new Blacksmith bonuses ought to give them a strong Fast Imperial > FU 2HS + Siege Tower strategy on Arena.
3 Likes
I mean, a bunch of cavalry can take it down quickly
I think its a good idea but i think it would require a fair amount of balance. Either it could be useless. Or OP.
Problems could arise having it do decent damage but essentially making the archers super resistant to their hard counter the mangonel… On top of making it easier to shield the archers from cav, nevermind skirms…
Also if it works the same way as how twrs calculate extra arrows it will still favour better archer civs.