the deal with archer-line is that is has range and high damage while not having to trade HP like all melee units, but has low HP AND low speed in return as a weakness.
Siege towers would remove these weaknesses in one form or another, including garrisoning/ungarrisoning ranged units to get a quick volley off and go back into the protection of the tower, and even if the tower fired a 5-damage arrow + 3 to 4 1 damage arrows, this is a ranged attack from a unit that has massive HP and the speed of a Knight roughly.
It’s kind of like putting several units worth of train time and pop space into one, creating a unit that could be comparible to several cav archers, or maybe a faster elephant archer.
cav archer is already a borderline problematic unit, as it requires no food, and is also nearly uncounterable. It has mobility vs Skirmishers, and beats basically anything else. Only Scorpions can tank enough shots and chase them off.
Anyway, Cav Archers are probably balanced but like I said they are borderline a no-counterplay unit, I don’t think going in this direction is the right call, sure you can balance the Siege Tower by giving it 0.5 speed when firing and whatever… but the core idea is flawed, because archers are meant to be fragile, and garrisoning them in a siege tower goes against that idea.
If you guys wanna see how broken Siege Towers could be, there is a video of TheViper garrisoning like 10 Gbeto in a Siege Tower and doing a tour of enemy base, killing vills, idling eco etc.
Reduce the speed of the Siege Tower to their original speed, garrisoning units doesn’t increase the speed.
Minimum Range: 1
Melee Armor: -3
Pierce Armor: 100
Speed: 0.80 (does not increase with garrisoned units)
cost: 200w 160g
This seems OP to you? any unit can catch it and destroy it easily, and it would turn an almost useless unit into a kind of fun one, that’s super expensive and not worth making anyway but at least it would do something lol
But you can do this already. Hop Archers for protection, and out for fire. Also, Archers dont speed up Siege Tower, only Infantry do this. So speed of ST with garrisoned archers will be still 0,8, what would make them possible to catch by literally every meele unit.
This was with Infantry. And also - you can do this already. Are people doing this? No.
Can be a civ bonus then instead of general game change
the unit has a use, it’s niche but not useless, and we don’t need more clownery “just because the unit is not a mainstay as it should be”. I really fail to see the benefit, both from a fun and from a strategy perspective, that a firing, moving 220 HP tower would bring to the game. I fail to see what strategies it would enable and how it would make the game more fun and diverse (as opposed to less).
Else there are tons of units that aren’t spammed every game and waiting for buffs, including Long Swordsmen, Gbeto, Battering Rams, Light Cav etc., since these units aren’t spammed every game, they should be buffed also.
Well, just because you don’t see it, doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be a good change that’s just an opinion, like my opinion is nothing more than that, an opinion. Honestly i think it would be very interesting to see what strats people would come up with, i’d like to see that happening. Pretty sure it would be meme strats but nonetheless it would be interesting.
Light cav isn’t spammed every game? Dude what games are you playing? xD And Gbetos too i might add, whenever i play Malians Gbetos always make an appearance Next time i’ll add a siege tower as well.
We already have 280HP moving fireing tower, with even bonus vs buildings, half the cost and 2/3 creation time. Is called “Elephant Archer”. And with Husbandry is even faster
Ability to fire for Siege Tower would give very important buff for ST. It would make harder quickwall behind Arena walls. Now once spoted, ST rush is laughably easy to stop, by simply walling. With ability to fire, this would force other player to wall further behind, and maybe even cut down forward resources.
I kinda like this, but it would have to have its movement speed slowed down to an absolute crawl. You cant have a tower that just shoots around the map like a taxi for troops that also shoots arrows. It would also make sense, after all its a giant freakin tower that is pushed by men, so it wouldn’t exactly be fast. In fact the more people you put in it the slower it should become (opposite to rams where the more people you put in it the more people there are pushing it).
Another thing I thought of which would actually make this interesting and introduce a risk vs reward mecahnic is that troops that are inside the towers die if the tower gets destroyed while they are in it. You can kinda justify this by reasoning that they get burnt in it when it catches fire. It would kinda be like a transport ship in that sense.
You could make it very vulnerable to being burnt. Infantry and villagers could be a major risk.
Maybe a 0.1 speed reduction for each archer garrison in it.
Am i the only one thinking that would barely make this unit stronger? I mean whats the point of this unit on arena if it shoots arrows? It would still only help to get over walls.
If the unit has a minimum range like mangonels i see no Problem at all…and it should move slower than infantry. It shouldn’t be a hit and run unit
In fact now the siege tower is already slower than the archer, and archers in it does not increase its speed, only the infantry could.
Therefore, firing and speed increase are difficult to balance, which tests the player’s matching ability.
Even garrison archers do not increase the speed, they feel like stronger elephant archers with multiple projectiles at once.
would make the siege tower the first sorta-trash siege unit a bad idea? like maybe very low gold cost for a siege (like 50), to make it appear in later stages of the game and give siege civ a unit to play with when gold runs out, or would it be too messy?
The other main problem with this is a more hidden issue, and that is that in this game most things are just very fiddly and micro intensive, so adding in a unit that just adds additional micro elements (putting units in it, getting it up to a wall, taking units out etc…) is just not an easy way to play the game. I feel it is already much simpler to just batter walls down with battering ram than to screw around with all the clicking required to get units into the tower and over the wall. This I think is one of the main reasons this unit never really gets used. To counter this issue, you would have to seriously nerf battering rams and make them ONLY able to knock down gates and make it impossible to target walls with them. This would then create a need for the tower to get over walls. Ofcourse this is a controvertial suggestion and I don’t think there is any way the devs will make such a huge change in the core mechanics of the game. Put simply there is already other things in the game that do what siege towers do more effectively, and unless the abilities of those things are taken away I can’t see the siege tower ever becoming a popular choice.
I do like this idea. If you examine every unit in the game, I would say that each one gets more use than the siege tower (even flaming camels).
However, there are some inherent issues with giving siege towers the ability to fire arrows.
As has been mentioned above multiple times, this has been tried in the past and was considered very OP. You can imagine why this would be a nightmare for economy raiding:
- Load up a couple Siege Towers with Xbows
- Send them into the enemy base as a raiding force
- Have your main army attack elsewhere
- Enemy has to chase down both siege towers (that are shooting arrows at villies) … kill them
- Then has to chase down all the xbows that were inside.
So the question remains, should the Siege Towers be given another role other than the few times they appear to be used in maps like Arena or Fortress as a surprise attack use case?
I would like to remind everyone that Siege Towers could be used in the castle age on open maps where the opponent has walled. However, this is not done … why?
I think this is largely because of the cost and the one-time use. Why make a Siege Tower than can do only one thing, when I could make a ram or mangonel that will destroy the wall and then also be useful for destroying other stuffs.
So with all that in mind, I believe that something should be done to give the Siege Tower another continued use. Because after its one use – the siege tower will sit there unable to contribute – it is a waste of resources. Even petards or flaming camels, that are a one time use, do their job cost effectively and well and even then remove themselves from the map
So I suggest the following:
- Make the siege tower the only unit in the game that is unable to be moved unless there is a unit garrisoned inside.
- When a unit is garrisoned inside, the siege tower can be moved.
- If the unit is a group of archers, the siege tower can fire arrows.
- If the Siege Tower is destroyed, the unit inside also dies.
- (Optional) Allow healing of garrisoned units
- (Balance Changes based on Play Testing) Change the speed of the Siege Tower to be slower
- (Balance Changes based on Play Testing) Change the rate of fire of garrisoned archer arrows from the Siege Tower to be slower
Just some food for thought
That’s exactly what I was talking about. To make it even worth considering you’d have to make rams not be able to take down walls. Simply put, rams already are a better unit at doing what a siege tower allows you to do, and that is breaching a wall. The surprise factor is really not that big a deal in a game like AOE2 for it to be worth the investment.