Reverie World Studios Forums

Reverie World Studios Forums (http://www.reverieworld.com/forums/index.php)
-   Public Suggestions and Proposals (http://www.reverieworld.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Can the siege be more than a siege (http://www.reverieworld.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2199)

olane123 01-29-2011 02:18 AM

Can the siege be more than a siege
 
Hey guys,

Im just wondering when besieging a castle does it have to be direct and instant from the moment you press attack or can it be a gradual seige where you attempt to starve the castle and the civilization eg cutting off supply routes and pilliging trade ships this i believe could add to the tactics of the game and give seige more depth

myashin 01-29-2011 05:42 AM

Yeah a great idea, also if i might add will there be more hero type units or our lord will be the only one? Also If we can hold siege to smoke enemies out, could we simply pillage and then destroy the stronghold? or do we HAVE to take it over?

TriggerHappyNDB 01-29-2011 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by myashin (Post 41608)
Yeah a great idea, also if i might add will there be more hero type units or our lord will be the only one? Also If we can hold siege to smoke enemies out, could we simply pillage and then destroy the stronghold? or do we HAVE to take it over?

I don't think there are mechanics in place for the citizens of a city to need to eat (that would require some monumental management in the first place, unless built as an independent, siege-only mechanic), so the likelihood of a "starving out" mechanic is pretty low. My understanding is that sieges are designed in such a way that the ultimate goal is killing the city's ruler. Note that the ruler isn't your hero--he's more akin to your military commander--but rather a governor or king who resides in the central building of your city.

The goal of the besieged is to use their defensive advantage to keep the enemy out of the walls and destroy their troops while taking minimal casualties.

The goal of the besieger is to successfully bring enough force to bear against those walls or their weak points to break or overcome them, and then tactically outmaneuver the city's owner.

In essence, against anyone but elves you are breaking supply lines, though. If you destroy an enemy's local hunting, farming, mining, and lumbering operations before attacking the city proper, they will have to rely on what resources they have to defend against you. If they run out, they can't train any more units or shore up any more defenses, and you've all but won assuming you have enough of your forces in tact.

Luxus 01-29-2011 11:20 AM

I am not a programer but I don't see how it would be hard to set up a system where if a castle is under sige you have to fall back to food stocks of what you have just set up a number of food lost per day baced on the population of the place. and to that have wether they are fully cut off like access to sea is still open or not. just my thoughs on it

Cyneric 01-29-2011 10:53 PM

I think it would be interesting to see at least some kind of food mechanic, like say for instance instead of just having the town die of starvation, make it into a debuff where if the town runs out of food, the units get some kind of minus because of hunger. I agree that such a mechanic would add a lot of depth, since it does create another layer of strategy and tactics to the equation, since say you didn't have a big enough army to take them head on, you now have a new option of trying to slowly cut off their food supply to even the odds.

joppe99999 01-30-2011 09:13 AM

I don't think that a food mechanic would work in such a game as this.. If your not online for a couple of day's, and your people are dying because there is no food, when you come online you have no army's anymore, is it than fun to play the game after such a thing happens? I played a lot of Settlers 7 and the online matches are very very long.. But even if you don't pay atention for a coulpe of minuts, everything is compleetly messed up..

So I think its better to have an AoE style of food (gather the food, spend it on units and tech) then such a mechanic. And siege would work with this system also.. Because if you have no food, you can't train anymore units, so your lost..;)

Joseph Visscher 01-30-2011 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joppe99999 (Post 41691)
I don't think that a food mechanic would work in such a game as this.. If your not online for a couple of day's, and your people are dying because there is no food, when you come online you have no army's anymore, is it than fun to play the game after such a thing happens? I played a lot of Settlers 7 and the online matches are very very long.. But even if you don't pay atention for a coulpe of minuts, everything is compleetly messed up..

So I think its better to have an AoE style of food (gather the food, spend it on units and tech) then such a mechanic. And siege would work with this system also.. Because if you have no food, you can't train anymore units, so your lost..;)

I agree with you, we have to take a simplistic route on this one.



But some siege engines that shoot projectiles, such as Catapults require stone to fire. If the stronghold is unable to mine more stone from outside, his wall mounted siege equipment will run out of stone.

You can prevent/siege him from collecting new resources, you will also be able to start dynamic wildfires to set some resources ablaze, such a wheat fields and mills, and entire forests.
You can also secure surrounding Stone and Gold Mines to keep him from them and keep a steady supply of ammo(stone) to your besieging siege equipment.

Braveman 02-09-2011 02:09 PM

I would mostly always start my attack on a enemy by first rading there resource gathering facilites then once they lack the funds to continue the war I'd more in with an army and finish them.

Incivility 02-10-2011 07:55 PM

Breaking Siege
 
Is it possible to break siege? For instance, disrupt your enemies trade for awhile then back off? It could be a frustrating tactic... Eventually pushing your enemy to come to your walls.

Joseph Visscher 02-10-2011 10:58 PM

You must also remember that not everyone wants to play for a 4 hour game.... not everyone, not many at all can do that period.

So a siege battle needs to be between 10-60 minutes at most, otherwise not everyone can or wants a battle to last that long; so we do need to keep a pace up.

I'm sure really good players will learn to invade the walls in mere minutes once they set up their tactic.
Get a battering ram on your north end with 50% of your army, while a few minutes ago the remaining 50% of archers and a few siege ladders go around on the south side,,, ooo your entire armies sitting at the north end defending your gate as I climb your walls on your south side and set up all my archers on your own walls to aid my army coming through your front north gate! What good is a Swordsmans' shields if they got Halberdiers hitting him infront and arrows flying at him from behind! Along with a speedy army of Macemen all over your walls whacking the crap out of any archers and siege equipment you had!

I love doing this that tactic on Thorndale, they don't know what hit them.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:54 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2001-2011 Reverie World Studios INC. All Rights Reserved.