Siege Machines

[Joseph Visscher]

Long range Siege Equipment are quite inaccurate if you want to kill all those archers on top of that tower over there, better task like 10 catapults to them all at once, because odds are they will all miss and hit something behind or infront of that tower. Sure you can spam Siege Equipment, and he can also spam calvary and rush out and run them all into the ground; and if you spam Pikemen to defend them, he can spam swordsmen,,, guess what guys this is a strategy you gotta use tactics to win each battle.

Another thing, players can build their own tower Trebuchets, Catapults, or Bilista for their strongholds, which by the way do get a longer range due to greater height.

Again all projectiles are simulated, which should make them less effective against well managed armies.

[The Witch King of Angmar]

Question is still valid if anyone can answer it.

Thanks

[Darathor]

Originally Posted by The Witch King of Angmar

Now when you say balance, do you mean as far as warfare types such as siege and naval battles? I just hope that there will be enough field combat and not just siege making the game a Stronghold type game. Will the players be able to just go into a match and not have to choose a role as attacker or defender?

Thanks

Would that not be skirmish mode?

[Andy Joslin]

Originally Posted by The Witch King of Angmar

Now when you say balance, do you mean as far as warfare types such as siege and naval battles? I just hope that there will be enough field combat and not just siege making the game a Stronghold type game. Will the players be able to just go into a match and not have to choose a role as attacker or defender?

Thanks

Most of the battles will not be sieges.

[Darathor]

I glad that they aren't mostly going to be sieges, could get annoying. It wouldn't make sense either, would you wait in your castle waiting for the enemy to attack it, or would you go out and fight him before he potentially damages your city?
I also like fights in the middle, they seem to take more strategy and have more random factors.

[The Witch King of Angmar]

Thanks for answering my question. I'm glad to hear that. As stated before, I love a good siege but it would get old after a while.

[Joseph Visscher]

Originally Posted by The Huntsman

I've been wondering about that too, actually. I'm hoping that most battles will be fought in the open field, but I guess that mostly depends on each player's style.

In a field, on a wall, in a meadow, under that tree, in a wheat field, near that cliff, on that elven marble bridge,,, doesn't matter where you fight aslong as your enemies die!!!

[Aametherar]

go orcs! woot \o/ woo...okok nuf of that heheh. I think sieges would be a good aspect in MMO mode after a certain point has been reached with a mortal enemy and you "get to his walls" being that it likely gives that player a huge advantage.

[wills370]

Maybe introduce bonuses for each race and a ever increasing price eg first 10 set price next 10 slightly higher so on and so forth of siege equipment. warring races such as orcs may be better having a lower starting price for siege where by they can purchase more faster eg first 20 set then nest 20 set. And humans have a faster builld time being more techniqually minded but have to pay a slightly higher cost also.

That i belive would bring a good edge to the game and alllow the siege to work in diffrent ways for each race. Letting the players work on there races particular race. Also would let there be a good ammount of siege but once the price becomes to much. Troops would take a higher precidance retaining the balance of the siege engine armyies of other games that are indestructable.

[The Witch King of Angmar]

Races will have edges like this. They certainly should make gameplay interesting enough. As for the bonus on getting to the wall, as stated in another thread, if you had archers on an enemy's wall firing into the castle, that would already give you a bonus of some sort.