Honestly, I'm tired of crappy pathfinding, silly AI that has no idea how to strategically attack or defend a city, I'm tired of mechanics that are far too easy to exploit and I'm tired of just autoresolving most sieges because I've got the numbers. These battles should be challenging, last resort, massive spectacles. Total War battles in future need to do sieges justice.

@DaaClaptain

Ай бұрын

hasnt this issue already been covered from every angle. Kinda just crying at this point.

@MattsFiefdom

Ай бұрын

Last I heard its tech debt halting progress. Every game since Rome 2 shares the same foundational engine which has problems/limitations that can't be solved. Think the only way they will fix sieges (and the wider game tbh) is with a new game engine (which they 100% need to save the franchise from going stagnant). It's a money/time investment for sure. I just hope SEGA/CA can see the value in it. Great video btw :)

@aerosdacillo1227

Ай бұрын

Sadly the future in CA isnt bright after the sega incident

@cal2127

Ай бұрын

​@@MattsFiefdom it could be solved if they hired competant programmers.

@cal2127

Ай бұрын

​@@MattsFiefdom ive seen modders for rome 2 fix the seige ai and remove the torches

I absolutely hate the mechanic in Attilla that causes towers and gates to collapse when you capture them. It makes no sense and ends up killing your own guys.

@redeyecamo129

Ай бұрын

Yeah that’s the worst part. Like disabled them so they can’t be used anymore or something but don’t destroy it killing your entire unit and sue to some bugs fall of the edge. Just defending them is a big gamble

@jackwei22

Ай бұрын

To be fair attila was designed against the player who would have disadvantages in a chaotic period.

@arthurmorgan5521

28 күн бұрын

i enjoy it at times i feel like it should be optional

@geoffwitt4227

24 күн бұрын

I disagree. First, few if any of your own units die in the collapse. It is usually the enemy under the tower. Second, the attackers don't need to be strengthened by seized towers if they can control. They idea is they are sabotaged.

@Panos_Sa

Күн бұрын

also too many friendly fire from the watch towers! our soldiers dying to a ratio 3 to 1 in every siege battle (total war attila)

Having an Onna bushi unit win in a last stand alongside Samurai Retainer unit were some of the most clutch moments in Shogun 2 Castle Sieges.

@DaFun4U

Ай бұрын

or even lost as the last man watching my poor samurai retainer get pin cushioned by 50+arrows

@VinnieG-

Ай бұрын

shogun 2 sieges were so dumb. The cities didn't even look like cities they were just hilly terrain with a wooden short wall around it

@persepolis4836

Ай бұрын

@@VinnieG- That's because you weren't fighting over cities, you were fighting over forts/castles. And the reason why they could be scaled, is because historically they built the walls at those angles and in those ways to be resistant to earthquakes. A common occurrence in Japan.

@VinnieG-

Ай бұрын

@@persepolis4836 looked like a crap village compared to medieval 2's castles

@persepolis4836

Ай бұрын

@@VinnieG- You're not getting it. They weren't settlements or villages. They were keeps/strongholds that allowed clans to project power into the surrounding area. Look up historical Japanese castles. They were pretty well done in Shogun 2 if you look at historical examples.

2:00: Siege battles in Empire and Napoleon were centered around star forts. Actual urban warfare was extremely rare in that era, and cities were fortified by interlocking systems of fortifications like this ringing them outside the city proper.

@frost_co

Ай бұрын

still, cities are way too small i take over moscow and all i see is a small town with a few farmhouses and 2 townhalls on another note, it is kind of weird that there is no water in siege in empire sweden takes on my recently landed force and boom, we are in farmland why is there no river in sevastopol siege battle

@azoniarnl3362

Ай бұрын

Extremely rare? Most battle lines would anchored to towns and hamlets tho. Plenty of "urban" combat throughout Napoleons campaigns.

@magni5648

Ай бұрын

@@azoniarnl3362 I'm not talking random small villages, I'm talking major cities.

@mcmarkmarkson7115

Ай бұрын

Siege battles in napoleon were total shit, but the city battles were pretty cool

@frost_co

Ай бұрын

@@azoniarnl3362 sure, towns in maps are bigger than empire, but the main city is in the distance (not that fun tbh) I WANNA BLAST GAZA TO THE GROUND (as napoleon not the idf)

It's just a shame CA has a monopoly on the genre. I really wish another developer would enter the space.

@sebaaullador1292

Ай бұрын

Competition means nothing, you really think CA will start to make good decisions just because other studio is making similar games?

@aerosdacillo1227

Ай бұрын

​@@sebaaullador1292CA is already bottom low even if theres a competition they will just copy paste the previous engine add a little blur without effort no new mechanics just the same old doomstack

@brutus42690

Ай бұрын

@@sebaaullador1292 No, I want to play a total war like game from another developer. Done with CA

@Astraben

Ай бұрын

@@brutus42690 Manor Lords, though mainly a realistic town-building game, will release soon, and aims to have Total War-esque real time battles, though more limited in scale. From what we´ve seen, it has a more tactical and slow-paced approach to combat, since your units are also your village population. I´d keep an eye on it if I were you.

@switch158

Ай бұрын

​@@Astraben I've been waiting for manor lords for what feels like a number of years now. It's a melding of my favorite types of games and I'm pretty hyped for it. In the meantime, I've been playing bannerlord. It's a very different game, but its kind of similar, and the seige battles are one of my favorite parts.

The only times i ever felt happiness was Medieval 2 and Shogun 2 siege battles I remember my single peasant unit managing to fend off Milanese spearmen while i quickly got soldiers to reinforce the castle Shogun 2 is , Shogun 2 The rest were pretty nightmarish and a chore , Empire and Napoleon felt like i was charging the Isonzo River for the 300th time

@clawzdayz980

Ай бұрын

Sieges in Attila are better than M2 and Shogun 2 combined.. Shogun 2 had very very basic sieges.. but yes they were fun.

@BarryMagikarp

Ай бұрын

Nah Medieval 2's were ruined by pathfinding and other bullshit, units getting stuck in siege towers, units getting partially stuck on walls, cavalry charges stopping before they hit, Shogun 2 and Attila are peak historical TW for me, rome 1 and medieval 2 haven't aged well imo.

@chubbyninja89

Ай бұрын

Honestly, Medieval 2 as a whole is incredibly overrated. And this is coming from someone who played TW games since Rome 1. I mean, there were literally only 6 truly unique siege maps in that game, yet people try to ignore that. Because I played a lot of Rome 2 sieges in multiplayer, and while not perfect, I still had plenty of fun with them, as they actually had a lot of improvements since M2, but I know lots of M2 fanboys will try to childishly ignore them. I mean, being able to actually knock down more than multiple sections of wall was pretty helpful.

@danielomar9712

Ай бұрын

@@chubbyninja89 And the Pathfinding bugs STILL EXISTS UNTIL NOW 😭

@chubbyninja89

Ай бұрын

@@danielomar9712 In Medieval 2 or Rome 2? Because the AI pathfinding has always kind of be troublesome in the TW games, not just the newer ones. Players can manage to work around most of it, but not the AI.

The thing with Warhammer sieges is that with magic and artillery, the attacker doesn't even need to enter a city to destroy it completely... Defensive sieges are fun sometimes, since there are nice chokepoints in most maps now, but offensive sieges are virtually a guaranteed heroic victories for the player past the first few turns

@Denielo5

23 күн бұрын

Well, the siege battles for me is like sending a few tanky lord and hero to breach the gate, than cast the spells on them/heal them.

@Centrioless

6 күн бұрын

As long as the game has a flying unit, siege battle will always be mediocre

Since i am the modder that did Helm's Deep map for The Dawnless Days, i can say that i tried a lot in order to implement multi layer walls siege maps in Attila and i can Say that the AI Is so stupid that don't understand that there Is a second layer of walls, it's even dumber on caputure points, and the huge issue Is that if the enemy pass the First layer, you can't have a second gate because that destroys the AI pathfinding because the AI thinks only about going on the Victory Point to capture, i am trying a lot of my own Custom siege buildings in order to make siege battles more unique

There is also the issue that units can't cover enough space. In theory an attacker attacking a defended position needs approximately 3 times as many troops as the defender to break through. But becuase units are fixed you cannot send half your archers to one wall and the other half to another wall if you only have one unit of archers.

@ElZilchoYo

Ай бұрын

The most annoying thing about this is a former CA dev once told me that they made a system to split units into smaller units, but decided not to implement it.

@wolverine6104305

Ай бұрын

@ElZilchoYo that is madness, there have been so many times when i wished i could peel 60 men off a wall to support a weakening position or take advantage of an exposed flank.

@rorschach1985ify

Ай бұрын

@@ElZilchoYo That's similar to what they did in Med 1, Units were limited by how big the Castle was and even when they could fit many of the units would split into smaller units when the battle map came up. It helped to keep the player and AI from just grouping all their units in one place and meant they only had enough units to defend the castle and navigate through it with little path finding issues and give them enough advantage to hold off larger forces. Even as someone who did not like Med 1 sieges in general that was a nice feature that should have been brought over to the next games.

@zacharyshoemaker835

Ай бұрын

In atilla place the archers on the wall, hold the placement button, and push outward. Thats how you stack archers in single file to cover more of your wall.

To be honest. It isn’t just sieges. Battles have been really underwhelming for a while. Fast, bum rush battles, dumb AI with zero tactics. Really puts me off this series. It was ok until you play multiplayer or games like UG where real tactics impact outcomes

I still remember watching the Rome II Carthage Siege battle video from CA. Oh how we were lied too.

@agonsfitness7308

Ай бұрын

Was never or has never been that hyped for a game as I was that day. My favorite line from that video, "we're still way way pre alpha. The final product will be much better."

@kurrwa

Ай бұрын

@@agonsfitness7308maybe after 15 patches 😂😂😂

@racudo1898

Ай бұрын

We were so easily gullible back then, now we're too cynical

From what I understand about empire and napoleon total wars, is that you fight at the fort for the city, not the city itself

@frost_co

Ай бұрын

the small town that is moscow apparently (russia didnt build fortifications):

@Charapos

Ай бұрын

Yeah that's it. You can see enormous city out of the map far away that represents London when you fight in the fort

@milansvancara

27 күн бұрын

and Shogun 2

@Phantom-xp2co

10 күн бұрын

​@@frost_coRussia built plenty of fortifications actually, but they used wooden forts instead of star forts

@frost_co

10 күн бұрын

@@Phantom-xp2co not in my poland-lithuania game

A siege should be an epic climax to a war. Or a decisive moment in it. Either that or you sit and wait the enemy out. Enemies should be able to force you to abandon a siege by out-manoeuvring your armies or attacking you elsewhere while banking on the fact that the siege can hold out long enough or that you'll cripple yourself if you attack.

Shogun 2 actually has arse-ladder too, as any unit can climb the wall. The game however punishes it severely by having your men fall to their deaths if the wall is too high, and I think climbing units also have huge debuff to their combat. Troy's lack of siege equipment is like, the point - the entire setting is based on the fact the Greeks can't conquer the city after 10 fking years. Troy's siege is the only time the fortification does what it's supposed to do: become a true pain in the arse for the attacker. Gone is the day when you can just arrive and take over a fortified city in 1 turn, then immediately move to the next target; quickly carve out a huge territory in the first few turns. Now you have to wait till the besieged army sally out due to starvation, or crash your army at their wall and have to wait 3-4 turns just to recover for the next campaign. Not a game style for everyone, but still a game design I can respect. (Still, they make the city map way too big for the AI to properly man the wall, giving you ample opportunity to sneak in without much resistance.) On a side note: I actually like minor settlement battle , especially when defense with only the local garrison.

Despite cons of medieval 2 total war sieges it's still the best and I have so many memories still today of epic heroic last stand sieges in defence I did against unwinnable odds. Or this specific huge random siege in late game, where I was attacking with my 2 full armies, having 2 full ally armies arriving, then suddenly 3 full enemy reinforcment armies arriving and then the enemy army defending in the Citadel level of defence with ballista towers. But still won. I also used to watch Pixelted Apollo medieval 2 multiplayer sieges. Which was the only ones I watched. There was just something about medieval 2 sieges despite it's flaws that just hit it beautifully and perfect.

Soldiers climbing the walls without siege equipment in Shogun 2 was not great, should be reserved for speciality units like ninjas

I think the problems over at CA go above and beyond any singular issue like seige battles. Im honestly not at all confident Creative Assembly will be around much longer because it seems like your usual braindead corporate type has a stranglehold over the company and as long as that continues, the series will continue to decline. Need some chad to come who understand the very basic principle of what made total war so good and just do that. Feel so sorry for the devs who are forced to deal with the higher ups. I can only imagine how many meetings they have had/are going to have trying to figure out why they cant squeeze more money out of a failing product. Which in turn means layoffs (Pretty sure this just happened) and the cycle continues. I hope the battles in manor lords are good.

@etienne8110

22 күн бұрын

A chad with a lot of money. Problem is that total wars are 2 games in one. A grand strategy one and a tactical one. So it needs a lot of money. And has a diminishing player base. (Because original fans are getting older and recent shenanigans and drop in quality) Not sure how a newcomer could manage to build all this from the ground up at the level of quality people now expect.

At least a part of the current problems with sieges in the more recent games starts at the campaign: namely they're too close to each others. more often than not you reach the next settlement within a single turn meaning that you fight one-sided siege battle after one-sided siege battle until reach a major city with an army and a garrison and you suffer losses which makes you temporarily halt your campaign to replenish your numbers. There are ways to solve this (which have been used in older games): Above all other suggestions (!!!!) make the distance between settlements larger (preferable with a fog of war which hides the settlements in places you have no information about) I can recall at least one campaign where I lost several turns because I lost my spy after an unexpected declaration of war and thus I was forced to choose between sending my army in blind (and leaving a gap in my defence) or hunkering down. with regards of the battlemap: I did like fighting in unfortified towns in troy (the best low tier settlements in my opinion, not gone disagree about the AI though) although I usually skipped fighting the walled settlements myself. I think they should expand on this: for example at the lowest tier the only advantage of fighting in a town is choke points and a garrison, the second tier adds barricades, pits and the like; third tier you get bulwarks (reinforced position at higher ground and at at least one of the entrances, ideal for desperate last stands, but with plenty of ways to pass around if you're willing to risk the archers on the top behind the protection of a breastwork) at the fourth tier you get proper walls and after that further upgrades to the walls and towers. In this context whereas promoting a town from tier 1 to 2 and 3 should be fairly easy and cheap (to the point that it feels properly expendable), tier 3 to 4 especially should be a huge leap and whereas the jump to five and six should be (comparatively) smaller, it still ought to feel like a jump and by extension even a single such settlement should be of huge importance to your empire. You ought to fear besieging a town like Syracuse, Carthage, Rome, Alexandria or Athens. We know that such sieges could literally take years. Besieging such a city should be a huge event, the entire culmination point of a campaign and most likely the end of such a war except for some mopping up. This should not be a lightly taken decision, there were good reasons that quite a few cities and polis remained (at least nominally) independent for a long time even after Rome became the dominant power. Allow an army in such a city to regenerate unless the harbor is also blocked and the option to recruit even when it is under siege. make it multiple tier so that you not only have a fight for the wall and gate, but also for the inner city and citadel. add numerous low tier units to the defenders at every stage so that these can turn the battle in bloody meatgrind whilst their better units get to retreat for the next round. Make the death of such a city a long drawn out affair that will lock at least one full army in place for multiple turns and preferably requires you to support it with a stream of reinforcements and/ or mercenaries. Rome wasn't build on a single day, it shouldn't fall on a single day either! In short, more distance between settlements, greater differences between the different sorts of settlements and the advantages provided to the defenders (because they aught to be in the more advantageous position, it should not be a fair struggle to start!!!) Make the traditional siege a proper, epic, drawn out affair that feels like the high point of your campaign and provide the defenders with plenty of advantages which allow it to punish the assailants with huge losses and the ability to lock large numbers in place.

Im so agree with this. The IA is really old, not only in the sieges... The IA doesnt know to attack or encircle or defend propertly

I love my Med 2 sieges, but I loved the scale of Rome 2 sieges.

@mcmarkmarkson7115

Ай бұрын

That's just nostalgia. CA never had good sieges. Rome 2 was probably best, but there were so many I auto resolved almost all of them.

There’s a reason why I don’t have large unit size because I don’t want to wait 10 minutes for John Citizen who’s the last man in the unit to finally get over the walls or to reach the ground, it makes pathfinding 100 times worse and makes my troops vulnerable

@worganfreeman2694

26 күн бұрын

Yea it'll really make you pull your hair out!

Ya know, one thing im hearing, and I agree with ya, but AI is the recurring theme. I, like many, found Thrones to have the strongest siege elements in spite of what became a slog of game play. Especially the unique major cites. Those were amazing. Still, and ever again with CA and Total War... they need to at least try to make AI that functions beyond an assumed rock paper scissors schematic. Id love it in a deployment I placed my cavalry center, and put my archers on the flanks, when i enter the battle, the AI demonstrates that it responds to that set up.

@luketheduke100

Ай бұрын

Amazing that modders gave fixed the bugs and improved the AI but a multi million triple AAA organization can't???

Even though the castles in shogun were really small. I do think they were among the best. Since the AI actually decided to attack settlements, now they just wait until you are starve.

Atilla was good with the multiple platforms in the city but it needs to evolve now to 2 or 3 sets of walls where you can upgrade the defences. It's not in depth enough

A siege battle rework was one of the biggest marketed features of W3, promising actual sieges reminiscient of older titles. Instead we got two superficial reworks that pretty much adressed none of the issues, and sieges are the worst they have ever been.

Shogun 2's sieges are the best for me personally. The layered walls, the upgraded tower defences, the decision making to burn your towers, and the key rationing of your ranged unit ammo. One of the few total war games I keep coming back to.

@geoffwitt4227

Күн бұрын

Shogun layouts are what wins it a gold star over prior TW's. I disagree on later. The pathfinding is very bad in Shogun. Even better is Troy and Pharaoh TW.

Talking about visual cringe how about units not retreating into the city say when holding a gate. They will literally break and then try to run out the gate the enemies are coming in from and just run into the enemy's swords and die, so fucking stupid and they used to have this right in M2TW and they also had a feature when surrounded they'd go into a desperation last stand mode where they fought to the death and it was cool! idk how this isn't mentioned more. its horrible and completely immersion-breaking.

@MartinTraXAA

25 күн бұрын

It was also a rather important mechanic, because surrounding a dangerous enemy unit so they would fight to the death could easily end up maiming you far worse than the enemy.

@coloradoing9172

19 күн бұрын

​@@MartinTraXAAIt's an awesome feature because the Art of War actually has a section on not fully encircling the enemy and leaving a gap so they try to escape instead of fighting to death.

I just wanna know what the thought process behind the idea of turning the game into basically a bare bones arcade game as technology has gotten better. “I know most of our fans got into the game because of its technical and tactical appeal but let’s strip all of that away for the few people that complain about how long battles are.”

I totally agree, but would go further and say that battles in Warhammer in general are terrible. There is zero tactical depth to them it's purely about min maxing your troops and the battles are so unnecessarily fast you barley have any time to employ tactics in the first place.

Why isn't any CA siege battles were you have a moat or a ditch around your castle?

I liked the Empire TW feature wherein having an overwhelming army gives you the option to demand the surrender of a garrison. This should be a randomized feature in games. The chances are higher when you besiege a city the first few turns after defeating a full stack.

One thing that I think would help somewhat is having less settlements on the campaign map and smaller settlements on the battle maps (with unique locations being the exception on settlement size). That way most battles would be land battles, giving siege battles more significance since you have less settlements and can't afford to lose many, and making most maps smaller or more focused would help the AI by giving it less options to think about.

My biggest gripe with M2TW's siege battle was how hard it was to place units in the streets. You'd get blocked by non existing walls constantly when trying to set your infantry and god forbid your cavalry especially.

At least war hammer 3 has not all flat one sided cities. The one walled ones are alot more rare now

Great video! What soundtracks did you use in the video? They're great, and perfect to be soundtracks meanwhile gaming!

I enjoy Pharaoh and I do feel like the AI responds quite well to defend areas of towns and cities. For me the most annoying thing in that game is that your units will forget attack orders on routing enemy units if they are inside a fort or settlement.

@danhobart4009

28 күн бұрын

I lost interest once I saw the devs didn't care about historical accuracy.

Empire, Napoleon, and I think MAYBE also Shogun II use forts, but ETW + NTW for sure. They're not supposed to represent the actual city but one of the several forts outside them. If you look and zoom in, there's always a low poly city way off in the distance on every siege map that represents the city you're wanting to capture by taking this fort.

Attila is my favorite TW game

My two cents: the main design change that has negatively impacted the series was the switch from regions (MTW1) to an open map (RTW onwards). Not only did this (in my opinion) bog down the strategy part in unnecessary micro that slows the pace of the game down, it also significantly increased the number of siege battles. In MTW1, you would attach a region. Only if you won this battle, or the enemy chose to retreat to the keep, did you start a siege; you then had to decide whether to keep besieging passively or initiate a siege battle. Sieges only focused on the castle, not the town, but despite the castle designs being very simple, it was a tremendously fun experience to watch your siege engines batter the walls down. The switch to an open map also causes the frustrating mechanic of winning a field battle, only for the remnants of the enemy army to flee, requiring you to fight again next turn, and so on until they are completely decimated.

Hopefully we see better siege mechanics when you wait. How good would it be to able to choose where the breach happens/repairing breaches, digging mines/counter mines, quick sorties to disrupt siege works. These actions using up supplies, soldiers, and advanced ones requiring advanced engineers. Turn actions like 'plague trebuchet ammo' from a technology to be researched to a general trait-related (Cruel Genghis Khan isn't going to lose any sleep).

Sooo true and so sad. Sieges were the battles that i wanted the most and now i'm avoiding it. Such a fail fromage CA. I agree with all your list at the end Hope they will be best

I’ve had a total war Attila campaign going with a friend for going on half a year now. With us always playing on opposing sides the sieges are great.

Shogun 2 be like Me: So what is my option on sieging the enemy? CA: Bows and arrows! Me: Bows and what? CA: Bows and arrows! And tons and tons of body to pile up.

Total War Three Kingdoms was the nail in the coffin for my love of creative assembly. Also limiting units to only be a part of a generals army took away a ton of tactics used throughout history. I don't think it's just the sieges but that Total War literally lost it's soul.

@milansvancara

27 күн бұрын

wym, Total war three kingdoms has actually some of the best systems ever introduced, it prevented a lot of boring gameplay habbits as well as actually innovating after a looooooong time. People wonder why CA doesn't innovate anymore yet they trash on any titles that try to do that:D Thrones - superior juicy battles and population tied to unit count 3kingdoms - general system was actualy awesome, prevented every battle with every army being the same and it was actually very historical approach to have specialized commanders of regiments, diplomacy was superior to all other titles and it was the most beautiful looking total war game without a doubt troy - actually the best grand campagin mechanics in terms of resources and how much tactical you need to be during campagin instead of classic boring ''conquer everything'' strat. yeah, all of them had their mistakes, but these titles had actually something extra. More innovation means better games in the future, but not if fans trash on it

I’d love to see some more in depth mechanics for the actual process of laying siege to settlements. I’m reluctant to use the word ‘mini games’, but some kind of limited time events to reflect the lengthy back and forth nature of historical sieges would be a really nice touch for immersion, and perhaps add a little more risk as well.

I have a really memorable last alliance siege where I had a glorious last stand against like 5000 orcs. It was so much fun even though I lost

Something that no one talks about,shogun 2 sieges would be perfect if everyone DIDN'T climb walls. There are features of siege that most people don't even know existed because every unit has siege ladders hard coded. Making it false doesn't even disable it. Instead of ninja being special, everyone is ninja. Did any of you even know gated can be torched in shogun? Did you know you could guard gate ramps with archers firing down after the gate is breached? Creative assembly is always crippling siege mechanics by insisting that the ai ONLY climb walls.

Ever since we started climbing walls with our bare hands and ropes this type of battle has been horrible.

Oh yea in empire Siege battle were terrible, the AI is clearly not made for this and many things are missing, Vauban had a strategy to dig trenches to get closer to the walls for example, siege Battle in this game were boring and I always ask if there's a mod to take them out

Map design absolutely needs to be looked-at (I personally would just want realistic maps with defenses I can place PRIOR to a battle) but it’s really the AI that ruins everything. We need a new engine, period. I’d argue that we need a new dev… they’ve messed so many things up that all it will take is one pioneering developer to give people what they’re asking for and CA will lose half its customer base overnight.

biggest issue with seige battles for me is the lack of realism, it should be heavily defence sided with the walls being costly to take but then once taken it becomes more even with the street by street building by building fighting, whereas in most tw games it can often be better as the defender to let them into the city, abandon the walls and gates and just block the roads

Couple of points on things that have contributed to sieges and battles lacking importance. The replenishment system and the predictive auto resolve system. When I replay some Medieval 2, I find myself manually fighting almost every battle because of how devastating army loses can be in that game. Even housing guerilla warfare with archers and cav archers to dwindle some forces as they approach and then retreat off the map to gain a tactical edge in a future battle. Currently there is no tactical edge. Armies replenish in a couple of turns and army losses mean nothing so long as the unit doesn't get fully killed. Because of that and how predictive the auto resolve is, I find myself auto resolving most battles in Warhammer. Sieges lack importance because you know as long as your army isn't wiped out you can be as cavalier defensively or offensively and your army will be replenished in a couple of turns to full strength as long as you win. There is no real need to be tactical when unit losses are meaningless and your units are always expendable

Well, let's just wait, and we have the same as with naval battles, that they aren't around anymore, that seems to be Sega, Ca best plan for a problem.

Sad, but true. Thanks for another great one.

I haven't played a TW siege battle in forever. Is there any game series out there that recreates historical sieges (other than Shogun 2 or ToB) that does sieges well?

I beat the mongol invasion at the front gate of Baghdad with 3 full stacks over the course of like 7 battles. It was a great time to be alive lol.

Siege battles in TW were never something to brag about, not even back in the days of Medieval Total War 1, which arguably was the last time time when they were any good. In fact, if memory serves, back in the days of RTW1 we used to call that game jokingly Siege total war, due to the fact that every war devolved into fighting full stacks in siege battles by the end-game, and quite often even sooner. Armies have no business defending city walls or castles. Then again, the entire TW formula is 20 years stale by now. If simulation of historical warfare was ever their goal, they have abandoned it ages ago.

Do you know if the Attila modding tools work for Thrones of Britannia? Would love a Europe campaign map in Thrones by using the Attila modding tools.

@TheTerminatorGaming

Ай бұрын

Not sure tbh, good question!

Imagine if we still had the CA from 2000 - 2011. The amount of innovations that we could've gotten must've been through the roof. The fact that they're still using the same warscape engine since empire, more than a decade old engine is insane.

@milansvancara

27 күн бұрын

if you innovate and make games more complicated it isn't AAA title anymore... You can innovate only on indie scale, that's how the market works

Defenders should get some kind of bonus for defending walls and staying on them, like receiving some extra missile resistance and melee defense while on the walls or something. If they lose walls they were defending, they should receive a leadership penalty.

I couldn't agree with you about the Warhammer Sieges more, Terminator. The Siege Rework fell flat on its face the day it made its debut! And even though the rework fell flat on it's face, I try to deal with it, and I'm hoping that Creative Assembly will be able to fix that siege rework.

What Med 2,rome 2 and attila mods did you use in this vid?

My biggest issue with siege battles has always been the lack of variety in settlements. I get it would be a ton of work but we have archeological evidence of what many ancient cities look liked. Why not use this to create settlements that would have been similar to their historic reality? This would make sieges of towns/cities unique and enjoyable rather than a drag.

in rome 2, i feel frustrated when enemy ship cannot land during siege battle, because it stuck. i cannot win especially if i turn off battle timer. especially empire and napoleon, enemy just stand still when my army is inside the castle

At least for Warhammer 3, I think just getting rid of ass ladders and making it so only specialized infantry like naturally stalking units can climb walls would go a long way for major sieges. Minor sieges without defensive buildings should just be one capture point and a couple decent defensive positions that might be better for the attacker if they have ranged superiority. Every tier of defensive building gives the settlement better defensive positions to the point that without artillery or specialized units the attacker just can't get in. You sacrifice a building slot or maybe two so that the region becomes a fort instead of a town.

Thank u this a thing I been trying to point out it takes all the fun away

Could you imagine Thrones with an expanded map that expands all the way to cover the same area as Rome II? It would be far too big but it would be amazing. You would still get Attila’s combat, Thrones sieges, and Rome IIs culture/unit diversity, in Medieval IIs historical setting.

Finally, someone who likes Thrones of Britannia! One of my favourite ToW games!

also too many friendly fire from the watch towers! our soldiers dying to a ratio 3 to 1 in every siege battle (total war attila)

Say what you will about Rome 2, but some of the sieges in that game were Amazing. I remember on one of my campaigns I took Carthage with a land and sea invasion while they had a full stack in the city. It was one of the best sieges I'd ever played in Total War. Attacking the walls at 3 locations and landing men in the harbor at the same time...

CA should release 1 game in 6-7 years but that is worth our investment. Then iterrate and update (DLCs) for atleast 4-6 years. By that time another 1 title being developed and released. DLCs - not just faction packs but an update that improves gameplay substantialy with new mechanics and new capabilities.

A more dynamically destructive building/wall environment has always been my dream.

There was this guy, belaruse?, who talked about technical debt which to me sounds like a main issue. So the concept is that every total war game since wascape engine 2 (Napoleon) is simply built on top of the older game leading to a "debt" of old issues that was never resolved and has become an issue so a fix that should take a few weeks to finish x takes ages to fix cause it is webbed in with so much old garbage. Reason I believe this is partly that people have found traces of older games in the code. But also from experience. I work in industry programming and we have had a challenge where everyone just inherited some one else foundation. That brought with these issues that lay deep in a code that looked like they worked but was not tested properly and what specific situations occurs was brought to life. I got so tired of this so I just made my own foundation from scratch. I can believe that if it is true that they just continuously keep building on an old broken engine with the gate bug and the pathfinding bug they just inherit tons of problems. Then need to make something new. Take the best bits from the games and code that has worked and redo the bits that haven't worked. Or something completely new. Otherwise they will loose customers. I have vowed to never pre order a total war and never buy one of I hear that that these issues still exists.

I just replayed Shogun 2 and finished as Shogun Togukawa Ieaysu after watching FX Shogun. Oh boy did the siege battles slap! You said it in another video: if only TW would have kept using all those good features and mechanics from old games, instead of keeping the amount of features "limited to 50"(arbitrary number). Thats what it feels like to me, the campaign or battles could never become too complex and they wanted to stay "innovative" so they keep churning through concepts and features and replaced them again and again. Shogun 2 did so much right , so much more land battles with great weather and landscape graphics and less meaningless small villages to besiege

I checked out after Thrones of Brittania. No title since has really interested me. And I’m likely not going to return to the franchise until we see either Empire 2, Victoria total war, or WW1 total war. I also wouldn’t be opposed to a LOTR total war either.

When you watch a historical battle, you see how the side starts the siege, tries to dig tunnels to try to undermine the walls, builds parapets so that their soldiers/engineers can draw trenches to bring firing positions closer and builds positions from which to use siege weapons/cannons with the aim of trying to break a point or more of the wall and try to overwhelm the defenders. All this with limited resources for both, which can mean that defenders must launch an attack or that attackers have an urgency to launch theirs. Total wars don't have that sense that a siege is serious for both sides. And the only thing that is reflected or attempted is something as vague as leaving the army besieging hoping that the enemy will have his units greatly reduced. A simplification, which kills the relevance of sieges.

@geoffwitt4227

Күн бұрын

OK, let's ask .....to improve their siege mechanics. If not them, maybe Paradox will lend a hand in 10 years.

Honestly Shogun 2 is by far my favorite when it comes to siege battles. The fact that all units can climb all walls just made it so chaotic and fun while still retaining some form of tactical thinking due to the multi layered design of the higher level forts. Only downside is that the campaign is filled with tons of level 1 boring castles that totally ruin the immersion.

I mean the multi layered castles from shogun 2 are because that’s how japanese castles were built

I had a siege in Attila with AI als Ally. I docked half a dozen of ladders and Siege tower at the wall and burned down 2 of the gates. And the AI decided it would be the smartest move to line up all of their units at 2 of my siege tower. not even the ladders. no the towers, the slowest possible access to the enemy city.

Really enjoyed them in Med2, and still play them via modded campaigns (Divide & Conquer, Tsardoms).

Shogun 2 had great simple sieges. Gun units (on defense) have never been more satisfying before or since.

there should be way more options, sally out radious should be entire province, also, with ur ideas it would help, that way armies cant just march all over the place, crusader kings style of options for sieges and campaign, look at how popular just a mod that combines attila and crusader kings is! they need to double down on that because thats why we love it, because of the options. trojan horse ideas, tunneling, commander duels they added from three kingdoms was awesome, and historically accurate to an extent, . in the towns, you should be able to hide troops within buildings, and ambushing options, maybe intentionally flooding surrounded areas of towns, or other geographic based options. Hate how they tease you with it by letting you place ONE weak barricade ona aroad in attila, like that could have been expanded so much.

The issue with CA is the same issue that plagues all companies. They start out small and innovative, and then they become successful and the lackies and grifters pour out of the wood work and destroy companies with red tap / beauracracy / and saddle it with ineficiency and lack of creativity. I have been in project management for 20 years, and without fail the larger companies I work with are always the most ineficient and worst managed.

What about the sieges in Shogun and the original-original Medieval? :P

I disagree about Rome 1 not aging well, last week I had a blast taking Sparta from the AI, with no pathing issues. You can make the AI seize up if you know how to make it get choice paralysis, but if you avoid exploiting its weakness, you can have fun ala Shogun 2 style fight to the end.

Decent ai alone would make all sieges in the games feel 100x better

Depending on the period sieges should be anything but risky with most of the warfare based around that. Of course besieging a city far away in enemy territory was always a risk, but the next door fortress or castle should not

Napoleon had pretty good siege battles, because they were far and few & the small town battles were good because there was still alot of open ground around them. Good for MP Versus Campaign anyway. If a star fort was encountered in Napoleon, given the price tag of it, it felt unique/special. Especially in Versus.

Defending sieges was really fun in attila but my problem was you'd plug 1 or 2 areas and the ai wouldn't flank you at all.

The biggest issue is CA literally removing chat... permanently.

I’ve only played Atilla and ToB and I enjoy both of them but the siege battles do seem to be as simple as fall all the way back and hold the final point in Atilla. ToB was my first TW and I thought those battles were great

Roads and on top of walls are so narrow why they dont try to make it a bit wider and stairs also wide it may improve pathfinding or we feel less worse.

Your right. I honestly wish they would have made special maps for Constantinople and other major cities Rome as well. CA feels like they just want to release and not fix bugs taking their customers for granted.

I really do hope Manor Lords will eventually implement sieges and castle building.

Well said, Termy

I simply dont think they invested enough in the AI and pathfinding and the engine will never give us what we want.

Napoleon still has that 'sometimes units die descending fort ramps' bug, field battles still kick ass though. Cmon CA get a grip, I've been rotating the same 5 total war games for years now, let's make it 6, tried pharaoh a few weeks back, but, dunno maybe it ll grow on me

All I want is for my units to stop climbing towers when I don’t tell them to

a quick match mode for multiplayer-siege battles would be a step foward

@lukiepookie5140

Ай бұрын

would get causals like me into multiplayer, cant lie discord servers are scary 😂

I know it will never happen, but i want survey logistics. I want to feel long drawn out sieges, where the lines are anchored while attackers poke and prod trying to get in, and rely on actual logistics trains to stay afloat. I want long drawn out battles where we have to think before we commit units. I want food, ammunition, and shelter to matter. Imagine one of your cities is being sieged, but you didn't have an army that can respond, but you do have some light units and you use them to sabotage supply lines to the event forcing them to either make a premature attack or retreat. Basically i want a sprinkle of paradox in my total war. I am so sick of things getting dumber and more arcadey. Embrace the setting and the realities of the times.