Should towers be controllable by the player?

[Mirez]

if some smart modder could read this...

[Sir_Toejam]

If you’re in the castle of a siege you SHOULD get a defensive advantage, otherwise there isn’t much point in fighting in the castle rather than coming out instead.

of course there is, don't be ridiculous:

-walls prevent walkers from attacking your troops
-walls provide extra defense against ranged attack (even if your attacker has the unicorn bow, they still do half damage behind the walls, for example)
-even broken walls provide bottlenecks for attackers
-castles provide "moat" damage, which can be devastating depending (sylvan entangle moat, for example)
-if your town is dwarven, the denfenses grow even more:

-heavier walls
-automatic rune casting from the moat
-the extra shieldguards if you build the level 1 building


just sayin' being in a castle is a fantastic defense if you utilize it correctly.

[Kareeah Indaga]

And??? That’s still no reason not to make towers controllable.

[ThunderTitan]

I belive his point was that you do get an advantage regardless, and not really directed at the tower problem.

[Sir_Toejam]

indeed, if you noticed i specifically left out ANY mention of the towers at all.

I was very directly addressing your contention that i quoted from your post.

[DaemianLucifer]

indeed, if you noticed i specifically left out ANY mention of the towers at all.

I was very directly addressing your contention that i quoted from your post.

So,you basically said nothing on topic,you spammer

Now lets here some tower ideas!Having them manned by units still seems like the best solution to me.Imagine mounting your uber balista there and granting it even more bonus

[Kareeah Indaga]

indeed, if you noticed i specifically left out ANY mention of the towers at all.

I was very directly addressing your contention that i quoted from your post.

What contention? Re-read my post: I was referring SOLELY to the towers, and mentioned nothing else. Thus; what is your point?

Now lets here some tower ideas!Having them manned by units still seems like the best solution to me.Imagine mounting your uber balista there and granting it even more bonus

Units in the towers IMO would be a good idea. Maybe once you built the Citadel/Castle it could add a slot for each tower, so there is some sort of visual clue as to where they go (unlike H4; that was always an annoyance to me) and if nothing else you could stash extra stacks (like the random neutral joins that always seem to accumulate, or at least they do for me) in them where they’d be out of the way. However I think you’d need a cap on the number of units each could hold, say no more than 15 (20 in the center tower)? Perhaps fewer for higher level units, or ban the units of level 5+ (for example) from the towers all together; otherwise people could stash 10,000 Titans in one tower where they couldn’t be blocked.

[Sir_Toejam]

then don't say things like:

If you’re in the castle of a siege you SHOULD get a defensive advantage, otherwise there isn’t much point in fighting in the castle rather than coming out instead.

'cause that sure sounds like you are talking about the defensive advantage to fighting in a castle in general, not just about towers.

...and it's still a ridiculous thing to say, regardless of whether there are towers or not, hence my post detailing the other advantages to castle defense.

[Kareeah Indaga]

Fine, then how about this:

If you’re in the castle of a siege you SHOULD get a defensive advantage FROM THE TOWERS, otherwise SO FAR AS THE TOWERS ARE CONCERNED there isn’t much point in fighting in the castle rather than coming out instead.

Does that make more sense? It’s not like I referred to ‘towers’ earlier and later in the post in a thread about the towers. Oh wait, I did.

But let’s pretend, just for a moment, that I didn’t. Let’s do what you did: we’ll take the sentence completely out of context and make it the sole component of the post.

You will notice that the sentence under those circumstances, but otherwise as it was originally, still works:

If you’re in the castle of a siege you SHOULD get a defensive advantage, otherwise there isn’t much point in fighting in the castle rather than coming out instead.

—SHOULD get a defensive advantage. Not ‘you don’t get a defensive advantage in a castle and thus there’s no point in staying in it for a battle’. SHOULD, as in, ‘yes, it is good and proper that the besieged have a defensive advantage; it should be so, we would not wish it to be otherwise.’

But naturally if you’re going to take a single sentence out of context, then twist its meaning in your own mind into a pretzel and spew out a condescending, self-righteous and “ridiculous” rant about the result you’re going to have missed that.

Now back on topic.



I don’t know whether it would be a better idea to make tower control part of a skill or not. If it were part of a skill it would become a choice to be made; sacrifice say, Pathfinding for it, or not? But it’s only useful if you’re likely to be under siege. On a map with no towns, or a map with AI armies that are underdeveloped or otherwise unable to reach and threaten your towns (behind a border gate, for example), you’d never use it.

On the other hand, however, making it a skill would make it boost-able; it could be made to do extra damage, or partially bypass defense, or maybe gain the possibility to dump acid/boiling oil/tar/some other appropriate liquid on enemies inside or near the walls.

[Sir_Toejam]

...originally, still works

No, it doesn't. If we take your clarification, then we have to assume that in essence you are making a ridiculous point. Hence, why i called you on it.

you're still wrong, in context or out.

face it and move on.

[ramparter]

I think you should always control ballista and towers regardless of your skills. Skill should just boost the effectiveness.

[arturchix]

Of course, they should and it should be primarily linked with the War Machines skill - with each upgrade player controls more towers. But no damage increase per level.

[IronRush]

Of course YES!

[Jandos]

yes, they should be