Just an idea to see if this unit could see some more play.
If count as an building like an actual tower, units inside ST would start healing slowly.
It could benefict and be affected by building effects, building +x% life or extra damage to buildings.
It could help militia line against arrows by giving some room.
Thoguhts?
I also want to see more siege towers but not really a fan of them becoming ambulances since that is not their use and it doesn’t make sense. I feel the only way to encourage siege tower use is to either massively buff walls so they cannot easily be breached or to massively nerf rams damage to walls. At the moment there is just very little utility for a siege tower because all the other siege weapons deal adequately enough with walls in addition to being useful against buildings.
they will perform worse against civ with bonus against building like sara or hindoustanis. Inf in general and a lot against ranged inf. Siege aswell since they have more bonus dmg against building than siege.
Yeah i understant that an ambulance is not the main goal of a ST but i dont think is going to outperform other siege elements so may be a new porperty could help. Can be other thing of course mine is just an idea.
Also if taking building damage is too much then just heal ###### ### be?
Or count as building but increase base defenses.
Point is just that little bit is worth use it.
But it makes no sense and is immersion breaking. A siege tower is not a place of rest so unit healing inside it doesn’t make sense. Just like how units healing inside rams doesn’t make sense. In a castle it makes sense in a tower it could make sense at a ####### ### inside a siege tower?
Wtf? Why does this forum censor words that are not even offensive???
Because they use a chain of characters detection algorithm that far too broad. And they don’t want to loosen it…
The siege tower should instead be more offensive, but its efficiency is already limited by the fact units cannot go on walls so there is no need to climb the walls.
I rather think the siege tower should have some ranged attack on top of transporting troops, as some had a top platform with archers, putting more pressure on enemy troops behind the wall. The siege tower however should be relatively slow, it’s not supposed to be a modern APC to quickly move infantry around.
Honestly, I think it was dead on arrival precisely for the reason you outlined and some other general game design issues that simply cannot be changed now because you’d have to make a completely new game at that point. I mentioned some of these in other topics a long time ago, but basically you need to completely remove the ability to ram down walls and I don’t think anyone would do that. My proposal would be, make rams only able to batter down gates (which is what they did historically) and not stone walls. Then the seige tower would actually be needed to jump over walls in castle age (trebs and cannons should still be able to breach walls in Imperial age).
Give archer units the ability to shoot from the top of the unit but also make it super slow when it is loaded with other units so people can’t use it to taxi units around the map.
Also if walls blocking line of sight was a thing in this game then the addition of a siege tower could help with seeing units and being able to target them from the other side of the walls as well, giving them a purpose.
As it stands they just serve no real purpose. They are a solution without a problem so they need to redesign aspects of the game to create a problem first.
The game indeed never was built with the siege tower in mind, the unit only appeared after 15 years. Contrary to AOE4.
Even if accurated and slowed, i fear good archer civs that can shoot in movement and tanky.
If it have some minimun rangue it could be ok.
Just whatever to see some use.
Maybe siege towers could gain the ability to fight garrisoned units?
For example a garrisoned castle with 2 archers can be fought by a siege tower containing 8 skirmishers, killing the 2 garrisoned archers.
Besides this to make siege towers more friendly to use, maybe have them be more of a gate function so instead of garrison and ungarrison the units, once you place them next to a wall, if you select units and move them to inside the wall they will automatically use the siege tower?
This is super weird mechanic and i wonder how you make that realisable.
Too devastating in regicide. Especially if some players don’t get the info, we wouldn’t be talking about the militia line of some civs getting +1 pierce armour, that can be quickly taken into account ingame.
Out of regicide it would be too situational, even if the engine allows that.
if you give a unit many situational effects does it not become useful eventually 
I mean you should always pay attention to your king in regicide, if you dont see a siege tower coming its kinda your fault. If they are attacking the castle with regular units you’d be moving him away as well no?
They need to fire arrows. That’s what they were used as - mobile towers to fire down on enemies.
This is a fanstastic idea.
This is an interesting idea too. But shouldn’t be able to attack a king, only “fighting” units. As you’d think the king would be somewhere deep within the castle and unreachable.