Towers aren’t built much faster than castles, which I believe is a flaw in of itself, but the tradeoff for that slow build time I believe is that they should gain bonus damage against villagers, such as you get castle dropped and build a tower around the same time as the castle starts going up, there should be a window where the tower itself has the advantage, namely where it will have an advantage by having bonus damage against the villagers building the castle. as is villagers seem to take way too little damage even after researching the first arrow upgrade and you’d practically need two near fully garrisoned towers just to deny the castle.
I would also suggest that the build time be somewhat increased.
secondly, keeps, as they do in the description but don’t actually have, should gain the extra range that it states they gain in the description of the upgrade - keeps + 1 range essentially upon upgrading to the tech.
yes because feudal towers isn’t probematic as is with regards to koreans and poles, let’s give them bonus vs villagers to really ice the cake and make tower rushing an issue.
In terms of getting the tower up and following it up with garrisoning and the proceeding to attack villagers building a castle, yes. it takes way too much time to kill a single villager and by the time you take down half a group of villagers the castle will tend to go up, or perhaps even without taking down a single villager if you spread out each shot barrage to most of the villager group to slow the build speed.
How about this - the first arrow from towers has no bonus damage, but the second and up arrows do contain bonus damage, that should take care of half the early issue. @MatCauthon3
You’re right the in Game description is wrong and should be fixed.
I didnt notice because i use the “improved extended tooltips” Mod.
When its activated you have better description and the actual stats you gain with Upgrades.
I really wish you would stop making balance suggestions solely with your playstyle in mind. Obviously everyone makes suggestions based on their subjective experience, but if you have a super niche playstyle that’s drastically different from how most people play, or enjoy playing the game, it just doesn’t seem fair to alter how they have to play for your benefit, at the expense of most other people. This comment would fit better on one of your full balance change threads, but I’m going to post it here anyway.
I don’t think towers are ever going to be the overall best tool vs castle drops. There are certainly situations in which a tower can work or help, but if you can comfortably build a counter-tower in the imperial age the opponent has the same problem you’re having: there’s not enough military present to control the area. In castle age on Arena that can still happen, a castle drop with barely any military being present on either side, but in “I’ve got the keep upgrade”-deep imp? I figure sending in your army should most of the time be your best reaction. Any military unit at this point eats villagers for breakfast, and unless you’re already mostly defeated you should have tons of them.
But it does? You shoot the villager, the villager walks away before trying to return. It’s a very good option in some cases to deny castles. Towers should not be able to one-shot villagers if that’s what you’re asking for.
And if it gets to Guard Towers, I find the bonus damage against villagers sort of meaningless anyway. It might make tower rushes excessively obnoxious, though.
it’s moreso a fully garrisoned tower of 5 should be able to one shot a villager, while a garrison of 10 should be overkill. specifically after the first arrow attack is researched, in any case.
I strongly disagree with adding bonus vs villagers to towers. this will just bring back more tower rushing strats.
I think it’s good that towers can be used to punish someone who is trying to go for an FC build or to break into the base on hideout, but it shouldnt be the go-to strategy on most maps. towers are in a good place atm, where they are not overwhelming and still useful.
I’m not strongly opposed to adding +1 range to keeps but I also don’t really see the point. It would mean that keeps have higher range than castles though, which feels strange. Korean keeps would even have 14 range…
The easier solution seems to be change the description, since this is a legacy issue
I believe that if any tower is to match turk bombard canons for range, it is the korean tower which I believe is reasonable to be able to outmatch the Teuton castle range and give turks a run for their money.
A tower alone is much weaker than a castle, garrisoned or not - I find it reasonable that a korean tower would outrange a turk bombard tower by 1 to be an even match for a single turk bombard canon in terms of range.
Heal, I’m actually legitimately trying to help you out here.
your ideas are wildly unpopular with the community. On top of this, your balance changes you proposed in your last thread show that you are very out of touch with the state of the game. Your best bet to see your changes actually making it into the game in any form at all, would be to make a mod with the changes you like, so you, and the few who enjoy your type of playstyle, can enjoy them (if only in single player).
Towers outranging castles could lead to a variation on the “Teuton Death Star” issue. I wasn’t really around for multiplayer in that period, but way before the conquerors expansion Teutons used to have +5=11 range on their TC’s, and apparently it was very helpful for taking down basically everything up to and including castles.
To be fair, even if they’re outside of the range of the castle they’re still inside of the range of trebuchets, so I figure the main problem was actually that the extra range (and +2 attack on top of that!) made them ideal for town center dropping. So I wouldn’t say extra range on keeps is a complete no go. Towers after all already outrange TC’s, and that’s not a big deal. But it is something to keep (pun retroactively intended) in mind when looking for potential issues.