So I don’t know if I’m the only one thinking like that, but castles are to weak I think.
Thats because once you hit castle age, everybody will run around mostly with armored units and siege. So a castle fireing arrows, doing nearly zero damage to armor and siege, isn’t quite the use I expect from a building coming at a high ressource cost and unlocked in that age. I mean, castle with springal upgrade and full mounted = 1500-2000 ressources. And it gets downed by 3 rams, coming at the cost of 900 with 2 of them surviving.
My idea would be that it will fire the weapons of the unit that mounts it.
If you put in a melee or villager it should stay arrow, if you put in a longbow, it should be the longbow fireing, with all his upgrades/attackspeed, same with crossbows and so on.
Just doesn’t make sense that a crossbowman will throw aside his weapon and grap a super weak bow.
With that “buff” you would also strengthen the use for triboke which noone uses right now. And also would nerf mangonels because they cant wipe out your whole backline in a single shot, still crossbows etc would stay usefull.
So you would have a “go to” siege for every age:
Feudal - Ram
Castle - Triboke
Imperial - Bombard
It also would slow down the pretty fast games, because a castle would become a real threat you can only face with range siege and not just ignore.
What are your thoughts on that? Please dont roast me xD
Castles in AoE haven’t ever served as the shell of the turtle, but for the price they’re a little more lackluster than usual.
Their primary use is to assist in the defense of a particular spot that you’re trying to keep, such as a sacred site, a hill, choke-point, forward-castle push near enemy town, etc., in such cases you’d have other units around acting as a deterrent to things that would be crashing them down. Of course, against bombards they’ll be completely useless (most late-team games), so I’m ignoring that.
Making them particularly useful in taking care of themselves could be a clunk-maker fix by the Devs.
But as always, I’d happily try out anything in a mod/map to see how it affected gameplay.
There are no “castles” only keeps
Keep that in mind.
I don’t think they need to be made any stronger
They serve their purpose as area denial and take a serious effort to bring down, with few exceptions
The things trivializing them the most right now are things that will hopefully get nerfed - bombards and fire lancers
I would say that they should do more damage to knights who can just laugh them off right now
I think castles are weak as well compared to other some games. 1st of all, as mentioned, anyone can make rams so it’s easy to deal with undefended castles in 3rd age.
Bombards are the other problem since they destroy castles in a few shots while outraging them.
I haven’t paid much attention to castle arrow damage so I don’t have an opinion.
My suggestion would be to just nerf bombards: less hp, less building bonus damage and increased mounting time and maybe buff the boiling damage tech to castles and towers to deal with rams and units.
I think the castle is very cheap because it only needs 800 stones
Equivalent to a technology or 3.3 camel shooters
What needs to be rectified is the cannon
I would make them out of gum, so the flipping bombards get killed by their own projectiles comming back.
Aside from that, I think they are mostly fine. They take some effort to take down but are not unbeatable. Don’t forget boiling oil and cannon emplacements do aoe damage wrecking anything but rams. And the moment they get sieged, you need to support them, as it should be.