>fall for the hype and buy Warhammer Total war
>seems okay and everything working nice
>first siegebattle comes up
>only small area to deploy your troops
>when battle starts notice that ranged towers with unlimited range are everywhere
>forced to attack immediately even though you've used to break walls and kill enemies with ballistas first
>towers make insane damage and destroy siege equipment faster than ever
Seriously, is it going to be like that for whole game? This is even worse disappointment with siege battles than I had first time playing Empire Total war. Feel like dropping whole game since they totally sieges.
They attack in a fairly small cone so rushing next to the wall limits the firepower you receive as only the closest tower can fire at you.
I don't really like the sieges either considering how awkwardly "game-y" they are in execution but I think CA decided "after a decade we still can't make sieges good/functional so let's at least make them fun and easier for the AI to handle" and I wouldn't say that's a fundamentally unsound design way to approach the situation. You certainly can understand where they are coming from after a decade of mediocre sieges (actually, I think Fall of the Samurai is actually pretty good). It does go overboard in some regards like super-powered towers or units just teleporting down from the walls (there isn't even jump animation, it's super awkward and unintuitive) but I do understand some of the designs like simpler siege map architecture (some only offer one front, and it's easier to make the AI put up a fight when it can't be tricked to run around all over the map).
>>340037107
New siege battles are literally the best addition to TW.
>>340038473
Didn't play warhammer yet but the changes seem interesting. It's true that siege battle often sucked, particularly in Rome 2 where the maps were far too big for an immersive battle.
>>340038473
>let's at least make them fun
Fun? Are you serious? There's nothing fun in new siege battles.
>>340038537
Casual plebs usually like simplified solutions.
>>340039850
I'm saying that's what CA was thinking, my personal opinion was
>I don't really like the sieges either
Anyone else having problems with loading times? Previous games loaded everything nicely, but this one takes more than a minute every single time and it's really annoying when you have to fight constantly.
>>340037107
>WAHHH I can't sit back and spend 20 mins picking apart the siege defences anymore!
Are all sieges that tiny area like in the image and not entire cities?
Whatever happened to sieging a city with four armies for a few turns while each built its own towers and ladders and then assaulting from each side at once?
>want to fight for the Lady
>can't play as king leoncour in the campaign
>can only play in multiplayer
>unit roster is super limited and the worst in the game
Fuck this shit
>>340040383
Well, that at least has some relevancy to how you'd expect sieges to function.
Besides, there are other solutions to the problem than making towers outrageously strong. For example, you could make fortifications actually protective (for example, limiting the shooting arc of archers such that they couldn't shoot over the walls, at least not easily).
>>340040383
>waa I don't even like strategies and planning my attacks I just want to throw all units to the walls at once like a total pleb
>>340041023
These are the devs who let armies walk on walter because they couldn't properly program the ai to move them onto ships and limited units to stacks with a general present because they couldn't get the ai to stop splitting its armies into dozens of tiny ones.
If it's a simple solution, but makes game play worse it's a safe bet that CA will take it.
>>340041086
>Telling your artillery to target the walls, hitting the fast forward button, and waiting 10 mins was tactical.
>>340041348
Νο, it was strategic, because it was worth making your armies slower to bring over artillery in order to have an easier time sieging.
>>340041348
You have no idea how sieges really worked on history? You say it has no tactical aspect to decide what you target with artillery?
>>340039850
>simplified solutions
>sitting back and destroying walls and killings units off without any counterattack is better than having to make a move and actually play a siege battle
>>340041483
I wonder why the fuck someone would speak about historical realism in a Total War thread
>>340041023
You can still sit back and pick off units without taking any damage. After 6 turns of sieging they start losing units. Same shit, it's just done on the campaign map instead.
>>340039850
>Casual plebs usually like simplified solutions.
Are you retarded? Take out a tower with artillery and proceed to bombard the enemy for however long you want.
>>340041086
>letting a game run itself as the entire enemy army dies is strategy
Ok
I'm not even a fan of the new sieges but stop pretending they were better before. Shogun 2 they were probably the worst since they all stand there and take it and the castle design is so bad
>>340042363
>castle design is so bad
how so?
>>340037107
Stop being a fucking pussy. You're commanding a huge zombie army, you feel no fear, no pain. Just CHARGE.
>Once you're at the wall, the towers can't fire
durrrrrr
>>340042363
>letting the game run itself
Confirmed for not even playing total war games.
>>340039089
Naval battles were and still are the worst thing about Total War Rome 2 and Total War Attila. It's almost random whether or not you'll actually win naval engagements. They're not even historically correct ships. They just threw trireme vessels at every faction and said, "this looks accurate yeah?" despite the fact that triremes would've already been obsolete by the time of total war.
>>340042363
Shogun 2 did have a problem with archer-heavy armies actually being advantaged by enemy fortifications, but I think Fall of the Samurai had the best sieges since firearms not firing in an arc made this an unviable tactic, which made the fort layout make sense (by invading a lower tier of the fort, you exposed yourself to gunfire from upper level, in some fort layouts even from multiple sides, kinda similar to how star forts worked) and it became a matter of systematically taking over areas one by one, decision of if you wanted to reinforce the areas where you had gained ground or making a new assault etc. And unlike Empire, units actually did follow orders smoothly when issuing commands like deploying them on the walls. Not perfect by a long shot, but it felt like a siege where fortifications did matter, and it wasn't a mindless meatgrinder at the gates.
Even if you cheesed it with artillery spam (which, as anon pointed out, is a strategical consideration: you exchange significant reduction in mobility to better ability to capture towns), the troops deployed on the walls enjoyed some protection and particularly in larger forts the AI would spread their forces out so you couldn't completely destroy the defenders without overwhelming investment, and the remaining forces, no matter how softened, still posed an obstacle when you had to take the fort with infantry.
Dunno why you're so bad at the game, but the sieges are better than ever. Now it actually feels like you're attacking a heavily fortified city. They only need to make the AI more likely to play out siege battles and it'll be perfect.
>>340043503
The problem with FotS is that it had in total 3 different siege maps, which were essentially the same with the only difference being if it had 1, 2 or 3 tiers.
>>340037107
They didn't remove the rock,paper,scissors unit countering bullshit?
>>340043642
As opposed to what?
It's kinda badly implemented, but you need to have a tower manned, the icon will be red, and then if you hover over it you will see the attack cone. If you want to be a dickass and just wail away with artillery, then deploy your units so only one or two towers can attack you, then focus down the towers first. They break pretty quickly.
>>340043147
Confirmed for being bad at TW games. All of them involve either cheesing AI by having it waste ammunition and spamming ranged on it until they are all dead. Except Warhammer, really.
>>340043503
Mobility isn't really an issue on a landmass the size of Japan, or at least not to me, but FotS is certainly very good. Don't get me wrong, I love the franchise but I'm not averse to trying it in a different way considering up to now many cheese tactics and sieges in general were the same.
>>340043642
Thats actually their main gimmick since 1st shogun
The new sieges are fine. OP is just a baby that can't figure out to just destroy the towers with artillery so he can sit back and use his old strat, or get close enough to the walls that the towers can't target you.
The new sieges are more entertaining than the old ones.
>>340043545
How does this have anything to do with being bad in the game? Since when casualization has been making games harder?
>>340043642
Isn't that what happens in real life too? Even if you are a heavy cavalryman with the thickest armor, you normally wouldn't try to charge at a pike square
>>340043889
>cheesing AI
Try sometimr playing against human, pleb.
>>340044210
Because you're complaining about towers doing some actual damage and that you actually have to use some tactics rather than just sitting back while letting your artillery batter down the defenses for 20 minutes.
>>340044271
Siege 1v1 is pretty disgusting unless it's helms deep LotR MOD, pleb.
>>340044401
Confirmed for not understanding a single thing about real sieges.
>>340044271
Yeah I bet knocking down the manned towers that are actually have your army in range is hella difficult. I mean that could be like 3 whole towers.
>>340043732
I was hoping for a more varied unit roster. Example an empire swordsmen is a Sword unit but they shouldn't be able to bulldoze a high-elven spearmen.
I thought they'd at least go easy on due to Warhammers rule of cool fantasy setting.
>>340044401
I'm not op and I don't think sieges are hard, they're just more casual than ever before. Even more than in shogun 2 which was the most babbyTW before this.
>>340044654
This is Warhammer not real life, nobody waits to starve their opponent out in WH you fucking faggot shut your bitch mouth before my balls fall out.
>>340044654
>My fantasy game isn't like reality!
Also real sieges are boring as shit. Don't get me wrong I love artillery and logistics, but they don't translate well to a fun sort of gameplay in a real time format.
>>340044231
Actually at the height of Cavalry armour technology. Heavy cav demolishes everything in their way. That's why medieval armies integrated crossbowmen and musketry to the pike formations.
>>340037107
The ai works well in sieges at least. It's actually hard to cheese a full ai stack when defending this time.
Overall they might have been dumbed down, but they work fine and are fast paced, which makes them fun imo.
Medieval 2 sieges sucked and there were to many of them so it's better than that at least.
>>340044757
Armor and defense ability and other stats are a proper thing in this now. It isn't a straight up case of rock/paper/scissors anymore. Those are still the general idea, but not the guarantee they once were.
>>340045025
Well fuck it, i'll see it for myself when i buy it at December. It should have some good add-ons by then.
>>340044757
There's no high tier spear units in the game as of yet to compare them against, though. There's only the Empire and Goblin spearmen which are very basic units.
well in my first siege battle I just completely ignored the towers whilst I picked their defences apart.
maybe you should look at what level the defences you're attacking are before you actually siege?
alright lads, which campaign should I finish
Empire - 86 Turns
Chaos - 280 Turns
Dwarves - 140 somethin Turns
or should I start a new one?
>>340045135
I was pretty skeptical myself given the price and how they wanted to break it into 3 games. However after buying it I am actually pretty sold on the whole thing.
I can't wait for whichever one will be in Lustria and have the Lizardmen and Tomb Kings.
Also Skaven will be some fun shit.
>>340044860
>tfw real sieges took for fucking ever to do
>the most efficient method was to build a dirt ramp outside their walls
>however that method took so long to accomplish that the defenders had enough time to build another wall inside of the wall of that area they would breach
I'll take my vidya sieges over any "realistic" ones. Because mucking about in camp for months while some people shovel dirt doesn't sound super fun.
>>340045337
How is a 280 turn chaos not done? Dwarves should be almost done, and Empire is like 40-50 turns from being done.
H-Help
>>340044757
What are you even talking about? There are no elven units in the game so far.
And this time around every unit is still useful regardless of how high in the tech tree you've gone. I still use based Swordsmen fighting Chaos at turn 100.
>>340045391
Razing every part of the map
>>340045365
> Because mucking about in camp for months while some people shovel dirt doesn't sound super fun
Well, there's sieging, where you have to wait a few turns before they either starve out or sally forth, and then there are full-on siege assaults. In my opinion, there should be an option where you have to option to build basic siege equipments such as rams on the field if you really are planning to assault
>>340045402
Just don't fight it.
Grimgore alone could take on your army.
If all of those arrer boyz were gobis instead, it might've been possible due to easily being broken.
>>340037107
Sieges have always been hot garbage in TW. At least this way you can get them over with faster and won't have to deal with some asshole camping on the other side of the map with his trebuchets.
>>340045604
But that's exactly what you do? You can't assault a fortified city unless you have either some siege weapons such as Great Cannon or build siege rams and towers.
>>340046459
Ladders.
>>340045461
Its was an example brah.
I was pointing out the very big disparities between units of each factions when it comes to killing power in Warhammer.
>>340046585
Nigga the game won't let you assault the city unless you have either siege weapons or build them.
Have you even played the fucking game?
>>340046640
Oh I didn't know that actually. I just finished my first campaign yesterday and never bothered with siege equipment as I had cannons and ladders. Never assumed it wouldn't have let me attack without the cannons.
