So, when you create a tower, it has the option of upgrading to arrows, springalds or cannons. Cannons are always the best choice here.
Anyways, why is this choice even a thing? Instead, I propose smart towers.
Age 1: Towers are unable to fire without a garrison, and cost 100 wood
Age 2: All towers get archer slits, and cost 100 wood, 50 stone.
Age 3. All towers get springalds, and cost 100 wood, 150 stone.
Age 4. All towers get cannons, and cost 100 wood, 300 stone.
Whenever you age up, your towers automatically upgrade. This ensures that players who build lots of towers early out of the gate get reimbursed for their early investment in strong defense. Also, you save player actions of manually upgrading towers.
On this note, wooden fortresses need cannons.
1 Like
Towers are great the way they currently are, Adding stone to their cost could be a thought when balancing around them. As of right now they’re fine
1 Like
I feel like the player should still upgrade each tower individually. Let players just improve the towers beyond their initial upgrade. This will give the desired effects while also having the player to pay some attention to their structures so its not a faceroll. It would be cool to get another tower hp upgrade beyond the initial stone towers for the imperial age, which also gives the towers another cool look.
This is a bad idea. When a player has just upgraded to a new era, he is rushed by the opponent. He wants to build some towers that only require firewood to protect the villagers and resource points, but he is surprised to find that the tower is automatically upgraded because of his era. It became more expensive. Then he went to the forum and said that the cost of the tower should always be fixed at 100 wood, and it is up to the player to decide which towers should be upgraded, and which towers are just outposts or shelters.
Towers are good as they are.
More then defending they give you mapcontrol due to their huge LOS + can watch over stealth forests. That high of a forced investment in later stages if i only want the LOS …
Also if the suggested mechanic of “autoupgrade” would be implemented i wont wanna know how insanely OP Towerrushes would be XD
The biggest issue with towers for me is that I cant mass upgrade them should I choose to do so.
But that’s a QOL fix.
I have to agree with some others too, as its meant to be an outpost that can upgrade to a tower, not a default turret.
Maybe consider this:
Reduce towers cost by 25 wood lowering it to 75 and make reinforcing only cost wood (but more?) rather then stone?
Then you won’t have OP Mongols, now you will have GODs Mongols…
I disagree with this change if only because frequently you want to outpost in the late game for vision to see up/over a cliff or through stealth forests for example so your siege can reach a fort, and you dont necesarily need the bombards
Allow us to upgrade the tower emplacements.
Not sure if this is the best idea or not. But for sure tower’s are very VERY weak. And needs of at least one guy to shot.
Would be great that they are some viable strategy. Like in AoE2