Catapult is offensive, Mangonel is defensive.
Mangonel's are placed on top of big towers.
Don't be a Merc Haboe, start to read history books
(click to show/hide)
iam the guy with the bec!
im famous now, thx!!!! anything information was givven in the video btw?
Catapult is offensive, Mangonel is defensive.
Mangonel's are placed on top of big towers.
Don't be a Merc Haboe, start to read history books
Catapult is offensive, Mangonel is defensive.
Mangonel's are placed on top of big towers.
Don't be a Merc Haboe, start to read history books
Im the guy with steel pick WOOOOOT
Heh, he changed poll, becasue there was too many "no"? :lol:
Too much Lord of the Rings
Heh, he changed poll, becasue there was too many "no"? :lol:
If u dislike catapults for defenders - give them ballistas so, it would be even worse for attackers... Realism ftw! Also, give them burning arrows, boiled oil and suiciding hedghocks!
And don't forget the ancient Greck and Roman history, catapults (Onagrs) were well known in this period as for sieging side and for defencive aswell. Dont u thing that thing people used more than 2000 years ago became forgotten in medieval ? :wink:
No, not to many no...............
I not must change the option.
Look, people hates using catapult in defending castle and immortal wooden wall
Minas Tirith walls and towers? Imagine of Tolkien and Jackson's.
Too much Lord of the Rings, Haboe.
Show me a castle with BIG, BIG TOWERS, where you can place the trebuchet?
Dover Castle? NO
Marienburg Castle? NO
Kerak Castle? NO
Read the wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trebuchet
Look at images, trebuchet is to BIG for towers,
catapult have short arm
PS
Kowcio, jesteś kretynem i nie pisz nic w tym temacie........
Butthurt again for losing a siege :rolleyes:
I didn't a developer. I can't give him ballistas.They have a working finished model for it, i'm secretly hoping for it to release at strat 5)
When is bad for Merc's: http://forum.meleegaming.com/strategus-general-discussion/flag-cheat/Simply breaking the rules there.
http://forum.meleegaming.com/strategus-general-discussion/the-kicking-of-attackers-at-maras-castle/Not a clue what this is, seems a teeth whining topic about coalition exploiting, wasn't there at the time, but don't see the relation to it.
http://forum.meleegaming.com/strategus-general-discussion/crpg-ladder-simulator/There were no rules at that time, the topic made there, is one of the topics that inspired me to make the strategus rules we all have to obey to nowadays.
Not really. It was frustrating but we had our share of fun. Guys on TS even started to sing to keep the morale up :D It is a very difficult castle indeed. Steep hills, wooden walls and little space to place the siege tower. Plus bugged con materials... The point is that in this particular case it was clearly visible how the defenders' catapult makes the difference. This should be balanced somehow... Hell, just look at the results of the recent sieges. Rare result for ANY siege, no matter who is the attacker.Maybe adding the ballista as an expansion for castle instead of catapults, though separate ammo's would need to be made for in game, i think using siege projectile as defense is a legit way of keeping any siege engine away from the walls, as it was only attacking the siege tower.
Not really. It was frustrating but we had our share of fun. Guys on TS even started to sing to keep the morale up :D It is a very difficult castle indeed. Steep hills, wooden walls and little space to place the siege tower. Plus bugged con materials... The point is that in this particular case it was clearly visible how the defenders' catapult makes the difference. This should be balanced somehow... Hell, just look at the results of the recent sieges. Rare result for ANY siege, no matter who is the attacker.
Im truly honoured that my catapult skill have been recognised by the other side, i consider my 10 kills with it to be game breaking. PLus you guys are using the completely wrong tactic anyways, it is a small castle and thus rather easy to hit the siege tower, your ladder assaults are lack lustre and very unorganised and looks like you already set your selves up for defeat before the battle starts.shush.... let them use same tactic :twisted:
You guys haven't explored every option, you seem too set on that siege towers are going to work when they obviously don't.
(click to show/hide)
iam the guy with the bec!
im famous now, thx!!!! anything information was givven in the video btw?
Maybe read the title of the video ?(click to show/hide)
Instead of crying to the devs to change all sorts of things, focus on what we need:oh wait..... tell this to Dave...
Haboe, could we agree on this or are you fine with the way things are now?
Wood not being destroyable by cata is bs ofc.
I think the only reason for that: There are no broken wooden wall models.
Was expecting them quickly after cata's got implemented, but it seems they never got to it.
This is nothing but pathetic.
Everybody knows these wooden castles are absolute bitches to take, due to the indestructable walls.
Instead of crying to the devs to change all sorts of things, focus on what we need: Destructable wooden walls.
And in the mean time, commend your enemy for a defense well played. I must say that the Mercs did an excellent job at defending, but the Greys did a worse than usual result at attacking this one. Before you cry back to me; yes, I know how difficult it is to attack hard castles. I've been leading sieges too, also on difficult castles. The Fallen and I have never resorted ourselves to this senseless forum banter for a bad siege, I had expected better of the Greys.
Devs, make wooden walls destructable. The wooden castles are OP.
Watching the greys attack last night was like watching whack a mole they spent the majority of the fight putting up ladders in the same darn place!!
Surely the greys tactics for attacking places is better then this? and they know that there is more then one side to that castle.... :oops:
It's bullshit ofc, but no one is forcing you to attack alburq.
As for mapfixes, they usually get through during resets of strategus.
With some luck we will get one at some point, then i hope to see broken wooden walls, fixed doors/ gates, ballista's and all the other crap they worked on in the past month (including reworked eco etc)
What happened? I don't see the battle results under archives and it looks like the same battle is up again tonight at a later time? How did they get a redo?
We both agree it seems that there is a problem, thats a start. Since we cant count on the devs to solve it by making the walls brakeable anytime soon, we could try and find solutions for it together.
I see, you agree there is a problem with the game mechanic of wooden castles, but you are not willing to do something about it because it wouldnt benefit your clan at this point in the game. But it might in 2 months, or in 3 weeks and then perhaps you will be eager to find solutions, what do I know. Now I know your standing point, it pretty much shows your color - again.
We have the support of Lord Tywin!
Short interview with him
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
I see, you agree there is a problem with the game mechanic of wooden castles, but you are not willing to do something about it because it wouldnt benefit your clan at this point in the game. But it might in 2 months, or in 3 weeks and then perhaps you will be eager to find solutions, what do I know. Now I know your standing point, it pretty much shows your color - again.
Thankyou for your wise input Osiris, you really add intelligence to this discussion - we all give you thanks
I did vote 'yes' at the time, but that was just post-siege rage. Honestly, defenders should be able to use catapults, and that really isn't the part of the siege last night that needs to be fixed. Depriving defense of catapults wouldn't really fix or balance things.
The fact is, if wooden walls were breakable, or siege towers weren't so buggy i doubt we would even be having this discussion.
Realistically the two biggest issues with siege at the moment are the invincible wooden walls, and the 1/3 attack rule. Fix those and we can avoid any legitimate butthurt over sieges, they'd still be tough, costly and nightmarish to organize, but they'd be fair. Leave things as they are and i foresee another few months of stalemate fast approaching.
Ok, remove catapult for defenders but then give them dragons (flying carpet + flamethrower) instead, im totally fine with that.
Don't be such a little pussy. We assaulted wooden castles aswell, and there always was one solution: Throw more armies against it.
Well Ramses the problem is now at hand, not in 6 months. We both agree it seems that there is a problem, thats a start. Since we cant count on the devs to solve it by making the walls brakeable anytime soon, we could try and find solutions for it together. Would be the sencible thing to do here, since wooden castles are being sieged right now. So, if u have any suggestions other than focusing on the devs to solve it (which we ofc also should do) it would be utterly welcome in the discussion.
I am pretty new to this game, I havent sieged a wooden castle before, actually my first sieges in leadership of a clan was the first attacks of this war from our side - Bulugha and Rivacheg. So I will leave the suggestions up to the more experienced commanders like yourself.
The problem is that the Greys expect every Siege to go their way and for it to somewhat be an easy job for them, as soon as it doesn't there are a lot of threads that pop up complaining about unfair it was, do you think if the positions were swapped around the Greys would be making all these threads about how OP wooden castles are? NO.
The threads would be about their massive victories and saying how shit the Apostates are, its just that the greys are raging at the moment because they are unable to come up with a tactic that is plausible and will help them get somewhat a foothold.
I agree that wooden walls are BS atm, but what are you going to do about it? Nothing, These are a few victories that the Apostates have had in the last few weeks and please just let us enjoy it like we let you enjoy yours, after we are all their for the XP otherwise no one would turn up
Jeirbe Castle 12542 men: around 4200 men needed for assault one alone.
Ismirala Castle 19736 men: around 6600 men needed for first assault.
Tehrog Castle 7443 men
Derchios Castle 6970 men
Dhirim 13154 men
Senuzgda Castle 8400 men...
You get the idea, who wants to waste that many on first attack alone? The 1/3 rule is (and has been) priority to change in my opinion above all else. That and make wood breakable as a close 2nd.
Jeirbe Castle 12542 men: around 4200 men needed for assault one alone.
Ismirala Castle 19736 men: around 6600 men needed for first assault.
Tehrog Castle 7443 men
Derchios Castle 6970 men
Dhirim 13154 men
Senuzgda Castle 8400 men...
You get the idea, who wants to waste that many on first attack alone? The 1/3 rule is (and has been) priority to change in my opinion above all else. That and make wood breakable as a close 2nd.
Your argument flaws at the moment you think you HAVE to take Alburg castle. There are plenty of other castles to pick from, why don't you try attacking them? Instead of trying to change the rules at the most convinient time for you, why don't you propose the change, hope the best and then be on your way to a new target? It is senseless to accusse the devs of incompetance several months, even years after a change has been made and then think your proposed change happens at that exact moment. Wooden castles have been bugged for ages and you know it (Maybe not you in person, but people from your faction do), you attacked it well knowing what could happen.
Instead of bullshitting on the forums and demanding ludicrious changes (Not what you're doing, but what the Grey guys are), man up and change your game. I have 0 confidence in the devs from experience. I know they never change what is needed at the right time and in the right place. I lost all faith with chadz when he said Strategus would be on hold for 2 weeks, only to make it disappear for 6 months. You can't influence the devs with anything but simple suggestions, and hope for the best.
As Casimir said it once "Think not what strategus can do for you, but what you can do for strategus".
YOU have to change, not the game. Adjust your strategies, your baseline, everything untill you find the right angle.(click to show/hide)
Strudog, ok, congratulations to your victories, you did a good job defending them and you accuracy with the catapult was amazing, I mean that. We all are having fun, even us guys on the outside of the castle. Thats all good. And you would probably defend it several times even if the walls were breakable - its not my point - point is we know its a flaw in the game - we all know that devs wont do much to solve it in the near time, and we all know merc leadership wont come to some sort of agreement or even try to discuss it.All im stating is that yes they do need a fix, but if the Greys were the one s defending do you really think they would be making all these threads?
Just to show what a bunch of (cencured) your current leadership is, if the Wolves will take this castle we will try and make some agreement on how to make the wooden castles not so OP, even if it will make it harder for us to keep it. If some sorrt of agreement can be found - good, then it will benefit the game.
Strudog, ok, congratulations to your victories, you did a good job defending them and you accuracy with the catapult was amazing, I mean that. We all are having fun, even us guys on the outside of the castle. Thats all good. And you would probably defend it several times even if the walls were breakable - its not my point - point is we know its a flaw in the game - we all know that devs wont do much to solve it in the near time, and we all know merc leadership wont come to some sort of agreement or even try to discuss it.
Just to show what a bunch of (cencured) your current leadership is, if the Wolves will take this castle we will try and make some agreement on how to make the wooden castles not so OP, even if it will make it harder for us to keep it. If some sorrt of agreement can be found - good, then it will benefit the game.
Jeirbe Castle 12542 men: around 4200 men needed for assault one alone.
Ismirala Castle 19736 men: around 6600 men needed for first assault.
Tehrog Castle 7443 men
Derchios Castle 6970 men
Dhirim 13154 men
Senuzgda Castle 8400 men...
You get the idea, who wants to waste that many on first attack alone? The 1/3 rule is (and has been) priority to change in my opinion above all else. That and make wood breakable as a close 2nd.
The 1/3 rule sucks in every case, and in the desert war a few months ago i supported Templar and Ni if i could ever get into a roster.
I'm not complaining that you keep Alburq Castle at 6k men, that's respectable of you, the people who say GO, Wolves etc are dumb and should attack a different castle instead just needed to see the figures that explain why it'd be an even worst waste of men to attack anywhere else. I fully expect we've now reached the point where Apostates have got more active players again and can produce faster than attackers can kill in Alburq Castle (especially with battles being reset). And since noone fancies attacking somewhere else with 5-6k men i expect another fun stalemate. And sure, since it's a game mechanic and everyone else does it who can blame Apostates for stacking their remaining castles they don't want to be attacked? The same way Greys and Wolves can do it to you if you ever want to retake your lost land. So just do away with the rule so nobody can do it, people have posted about it a ton of times, and i haven't heard anyone disagree with the idea that 1800 men should be able to attack any castle, but it always gets ignored or overlooked or postponed or not read- it's hard to tell which.
Bullshit.
You bounced strudog around the map so sargoth would be a big itembombed piece of shit. Instead of making it fun for both sides to fight, you continued the attacks on him.
But yea, then it was not in your advantage to play for fun battles, so ofc you didn't. Our fail was for strudog to be out of his fief, yours is to attack alburq instead of senuzgda/ derchios.
I see, you agree there is a problem with the game mechanic of wooden castles, but you are not willing to do something about it because it wouldnt benefit your clan at this point in the game. But it might in 2 months, or in 3 weeks and then perhaps you will be eager to find solutions, what do I know. Now I know your standing point, it pretty much shows your color - again.Were did you see him stating it won't? he can't implement those change, he isn't a dev and instead of jumping into conclusion why don't you bug the dev on irc for a change.
Firstly, according to most of you that was an idiotic strategy, you laughed at us attacking your runaway lords - nice to see you have realised the value of keeping lords inside their castles.
We never take em out of the castles and fiefs, you can choose to do this also and there is no problem, noone could ever use it against you. To the point, if the lord isnt at home he cannot run the castle properly, is it a flaw of the game? Perhaps it is, perhaps not, perhaps everyone with the right level in the faction should be able to sort the gear, I dont know. But you have options and you choose the wrong one.
But we cant choose not to take a wooden castle because it has flaws, if our side is to wipe you, we need to take it. Its not optional.....and yes, we will try to grind it down, and we will have perhaps 10 sieges more killing 600 troops each time, we will see.
Were did you see him stating it won't? he can't implement those change, he isn't a dev and instead of jumping into conclusion why don't you bug the dev on irc for a change.
Lol, its an option to attack it. You don't have to, you want to, nothing more.
A few words on the subject of Mercenaries:
Merc's give to fuck in the ass to win it, as long as it fits them it is ok, and if something does not fit it cries and lamentations on the forum.
"Grey's are cheating! record keys and accounts! "
"Grey's block spawn's with ladders!"
"Grey's have horses! This is cheating! "
We all know the Mercenaries and we know about them, any extravagance, zdradach, combinations.
Haboe is the largest płaczką an confusion.
With normal discussion topic did mess.
I have a rather strange tug, everything comes from us is bad.
So you envy torments that differently than banned our people you can't beat us?
The normal thing is that when something is not working or there is no balanced it writes about it and for that matter in this topic
Nothing more here do not write, delete the discussion, because it is senseless
A few words on the subject of Mercenaries:
Merc's give to fuck in the ass to win it, as long as it fits them it is ok, and if something does not fit it cries and lamentations on the forum.
"Grey's are cheating! record keys and accounts! " You actually got caught doing that, if you cheat on a scale like that, don't be pissed if it hurts your reputation later on.
"Grey's block spawn's with ladders!" Has been a while since this happens, today it was the normans, and whoever was in their roster doing that. Its a bannable offence so off course i report it.
"Grey's have horses! This is cheating! " Where do you get your quotes mate? check the spoiler below on what i have to say about uif movement on the mapWe all know the Mercenaries and we know about them, any extravagance, zdradach, combinations.(click to show/hide)
Haboe is the largest płaczką an confusion. Not sure what płaczką an confusion means, but i assume it means im a dick on the forum, and there you are right :lol:
With normal discussion topic did mess. Might be going off topic now and then, both sides do, but in the meanwhile both sides have been giving proper input on possible solutions on this problem.
I have a rather strange tug, everything comes from us is bad. I get the same feeling with the massive army of grey minussers that follow me around the forum, thanks for making me feel important there ;)
So you envy torments that differently than banned our people you can't beat us? I didn't ban those guys, they got themselves banned by cheating on a large scale, you got caught, stop whining about it if someone reminds you of it :rolleyes:
The normal thing is that when something is not working or there is no balanced it writes about it and for that matter in this topic
Nothing more here do not write, delete the discussion, because it is senseless You start by replying on everything in the discussion to end with "close it now", wanna have the last word? :P It's good that discussion play out like this, shows the problem at hand from multiple perspectives.
A few words on the subject of Mercenaries:
Merc's give to fuck in the ass to win it, as long as it fits them it is ok, and if something does not fit it cries and lamentations on the forum.
"Grey's are cheating! record keys and accounts! "
"Grey's block spawn's with ladders!"
"Grey's have horses! This is cheating! "
We all know the Mercenaries and we know about them, any extravagance, zdradach, combinations.
Haboe is the largest cryer
With normal discussion topic did mess.
I have a rather strange tug, everything comes from us is bad.
So you envy torments that differently than banned our people you can't beat us?
The normal thing is that when something is not working or there is no balanced it writes about it and for that matter in this topic
Nothing more here do not write, delete the discussion, because it is senseless
One more merc not understanding the purpose of this, try reading some posts before and call your mom and perhaps she can help you out...Oh man this is hilarious, half of your post are a contempt of hatred and a bunch of reply's that could be counted as a 12 year old writing, if not worse then that, and your basic logic is to stop defending Alburq the way its men't be be defended simply because the walls can't be broken? what a great logic.
This is like speaking to a teenager, am I? I have an option to stop trying to make u understand, I will use it
"stop crying" or "You can chose to siege something else" or " what are you proposing?"
It only seems to be a problem for you because its concerning a castle you want to have, and you can't have it at this point.
And yes, they are working on a fix for the walls, though i heard its not perfect/ complete yet.
Morales have been boosted the past weeks, activity in the eastern front is back.on forum? :P
As i said, fixes are being worked on by the devs, just not functioning properly yet.
Good to see you agree not to take any wooden castles, since yesterday it was "not an option or a choice, we have to take it even it we take it 600 tickets at a time"
Changed your mind after last nights battles?
Wolves 1,830 Apostates 351
Grey Order 2,162 Apostates : Alburq Castle 483
Morales have been boosted the past weeks, activity in the eastern front is back.
Still see u have a problem with understanding texts Hobbit, try reading my post again - perhaps I should do a shorter version for you? Isnt english your native tongue?
My hangover has gone but for some reason i'm pissed (not the drunken pissed!)
Let's start this off with your targets in mind.
Alburq Castle at this present time is of an extreme strategic importance for both sides, that is without a doubt fact. For us Mercs it is standing there as a beacon, an impregnable log that for us has raised our morale and has brought guys back to playing for us and raised activity substantially. Now to us Alburq has now turned into the Bane of the Wolves, for there have been several failed attempts to storm the walls. So for us it is a morale booster for us and our allies, it also temporarily puts your invasion on hold so we can build up other fortifications.
Now Alburq Castle to you is a pain in the arse to put it bluntly. You cannot risk having 6000+ troops threatening your rear if you decide to move onto other conquests because those troops could be used to attack you, your fiefs, or harass your men. So to you, you need it gone and under your control. Furthermore for us it allows us to attack north, east and south so we can cover 3 points of the compass with one castle hence why you need it gone.
As for the OP, catapults should be banned in castle defence. No, catapults/mangonels were used to defend and attack, for us it has worked very well, the only reason you are moaning about it, is because it makes it exceptionally difficult for you to attack the castle, but then any attack would always be costly no matter what you do. We have adapted our tactics to deal with your attacks, and surprisingly it has worked out for us. The thing you should be worried about is that as soon as you decided to attack my castle shit has gotten into gear, the Mercs have suddenly become an organized fighting force, no arguing on TS, no petty discussions, mixed with full concentration with the task in hand. (Minus my karaoke singing which Phase managed to record....) This has then worked in our favour seeing as we can now fight back with efficiency, for example the VVar battle where we were outnumbered 4 to 1 (450 v 1800) and we won because we had a damn good roster, yes the roster wasn't as full as it could have been for you or us but we managed to work together.
The thing that annoys me (aimed at OP) is that as soon as something doesn't go your way you suddenly complain about it and demand that to make it easier for you that we must be banned from using legitimate tactics to make sure our castle is defended. The same was made after the second battle where Kalp said Alburq Castle should be removed.
Now back to you Grandmom, i agree that wooden castle walls should be able to be destroyed, i agree with that wholeheartedly, for i am a player whom likes to play fair and give everyone a chance, being able to destroy the walls would be an advantage to you but it would still lead to a lot of attacks seeing as the terrain is very difficult to utilise. The surrounding hills provide cover for a catapult but the range you would have to shoot would be huge, furthermore we are atop a hill so our archers range and angle would make it difficult for any breaches you make. As soon as you breach the castle you have to run up steep hills peppered by arrows.
Now my solution to you of how to take Alburq would be to adapt your tactics, these last few days i have been planning attacks on Alburq ffrom all directions involving varying scenarios, a few would work if you had come up with them, but i have covered most avenues of attack now so i am ready for most possibilities, you asked for a discussion so let this post be the beginning.
I await your responses.
A castle and a village, don't be greedy! But i am not without conscience, the people of Jayek deserve to be reunited with their brothers in Alburq... SO i think everyone benefits if you erm... lend me Alburq just until the peasants can adjust...
Nah, mainly on the field :wink:
A strategy like this takes heavy losses in the start, but it's paying off now.
Free Peasants of Fisdnar 1,757 Apostates : Fisdnar 1,061
Wolves 1,830 Apostates 351
Grey Order 2,162 Apostates : Alburq Castle 483
Apostates 985 Die Normannen 1,447
Wolves 2,059 Apostates : Alburq Castle 747
Wolves 2,212 Apostates : Alburq Castle 505
Bah calling any victory meaningless is absolute trash. Every victory means something, no matter how small or large it is. This just shows we are actually starting to fight back.
Zaalback the pride in this war is non-existant, it's a game if you take pride over winning on that or having pride you are in a war it's just sad and petty.