PDA

View Full Version : Patch 1.13 features...what about CASTLES?!?



DoCToR
11-17-2000, 19:53
I am truly amazed nothing was mentioned in that feature list about improving castles one way or another! Whether they plan to include improvements under the improved AI re-balancing tag I have no idea, but surely they can't be under the impression that CASTLES, as they stand, are OK!!!

Let me just reiterate some of the many problems people have discussed regarding castles on the strategic map and tactical battles involving castles:

Strategic:
1. The ongoing debate on whether infrastructures such as Dojos should be degraded/destroyed when the attacking army just takes the province....or whether this should occur when the castle is taken as well. I won't elaborate any more on this as this was a topic that created a huge debate in this forum not so long ago!

2. Whether this degradation/destruction of infrastructures should be decided by default (as it is) or by the attackers or defenders!

Tactical:
1. Why defending a castle is sooo pointless since basically the defenders get no real advantage or even any protection from the castle walls. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/frown.gif

2. Why some of the troops you had in the castle on the strategic map appear as reinforcements BEHIND the advancing enemy army....this is obviously not right!!! http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/frown.gif

3. Related to number 2, and assuming that number 2 isn't a bug....Why can't one select the units that appear in the castle and the ones that appear behind the enemy? Quite often I have had my cavalry in the castle and my musketeers and archers coming in as the reinforcements! Completely irrational! http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/frown.gif

Feel free to add your comments on castles....

A concerned DoCToR http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/frown.gif

------------------
Online name: DoCToR Otomo

Anssi Hakkinen
11-18-2000, 01:59
Quote I am truly amazed nothing was mentioned in that feature list about improving castles one way or another![/QUOTE]The castle rules were already overhauled for v.1.11. Likely CA/DT wants to concentrate on other issues for now rather than admitting defeat right away. Most probably there will not be an additional castle patch anytime soon, and I wouldn't advise complaining to the devs about it - they might decide there will never be.

Quote Strategic:[/QUOTE]As you said, these were already discussed. The general consensus, as I understood it, was that one side would almost always choose to demolish the buildings anyway. IMO a window prompting for this is a lot more unnecessary change than many others.

A strategic advantage to having a castle that is often overlooked is that having a castle greatly discourages AI attack, even if the garrison is ignominiously small.

Quote Tactical:[/QUOTE]Your point #1:
Defending a castle is a *big* advantage. The walls do give notable cover against arrows and especially musket fire, and the enemy attack is channelled into a narrow gate. Furthermore, all castles are situated on steep hills, which is difficult for enemy forces to traverse to get at you. 1) they get tired by the climbing, 2) you can pepper them with arrows 3) they can't do the same without bringing archers uncomfortably close, 4) you can fight them downhill.

Your point #2:
This may be a bug, considering it happens so consistently, but in itself doesn't bother me that much. It gives the defender a needed tactical advantage, should he/she be able to use it correctly. The only problem is that it was somewhat haphazardly implemented in the game in the 1.11 patch, resulting in AI stupidity and other bugs in relation to it.

Your point #3:
This is the exact same issue as the inability to select what forces to use first and what as reinforcements in multi-stack battles. As to why it's not been fixed is anybody's guess, but I agree that it should have been.

Quote Feel free to add your comments on castles....[/QUOTE]In a nutshell, my opinion is that castle assaults are correctly balanced tactically: the defender should win with little trouble with equal forces. However, the AI's stupidity and the fact that the besieging party can just sit there until the besieged forces are almost depleted result in the defender being almost always hopelessly outnumbered in castle sieges.

------------------
"Carai an Mierendaira!" -- "Glory to the Blue Cross!"

The Daimyo
11-19-2000, 16:35
I have to agree with DOCTOR here, on this matter. I've already posted half a dozen posts in the past 4 months on this topic, but I will reiterate it again at my site tomorrow in a rather large post. Ansii is correct though, on all of his points, but it's not what DOCTOR was trying to say, I think http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/wink.gif, so both posts look to discuss valid points.
I'm going to make a huge list of all the features we all want to see, and argue their points and possible drawbacks. Seeing as to how I am a programmer and a game mod designer (among other things), I think I'll be able to keep this in the realm of "things that can logically be done".
I'll make sure to go over the castle bit as thoroughly as possible. I will back up all of the ideas for additions or changes to things with actual historical data pointing to the way it should/could be done without being hokey or breaking the gameplay balancing issues.
This will cover all the issues we'd like to see addressed, features to be added, and ideas for an add-on and sequels.
I hope you all will stop by my site on Honor Day and check it out.

The Daimyo
Miaowara Tomokato
@ http://www.planettotalwar.com

DoCToR
11-20-2000, 02:33
Quote Originally posted by Anssi Hakkinen:

Your point #1:
Defending a castle is a *big* advantage. The walls do give notable cover against arrows and especially musket fire, and the enemy attack is channelled into a narrow gate. Furthermore, all castles are situated on steep hills, which is difficult for enemy forces to traverse to get at you. 1) they get tired by the climbing, 2) you can pepper them with arrows 3) they can't do the same without bringing archers uncomfortably close, 4) you can fight them downhill.

Your point #2:
This may be a bug, considering it happens so consistently, but in itself doesn't bother me that much. It gives the defender a needed tactical advantage, should he/she be able to use it correctly. The only problem is that it was somewhat haphazardly implemented in the game in the 1.11 patch, resulting in AI stupidity and other bugs in relation to it.

Your point #3:
This is the exact same issue as the inability to select what forces to use first and what as reinforcements in multi-stack battles. As to why it's not been fixed is anybody's guess, but I agree that it should have been.

[/QUOTE]

#1:
Well this is obviously debatable...the many castle assaults I have had as defender and attacker have almost always ended up with the losses taken by both sides being fairly equal (no many on what sizes the 2 forces are). I have never witnessed a besieged castle force triumphing over the attackers. Some people have reported very little advantage regarding kill ratio from firing out of a castle to firing into a castle.

#2 It certainly does appear to be a bug as they are supposed to be besieged in the castle not appearing as reinforcements!!! It gives an attacker the advantage, not the defender, since it splits up an already beleaguered force into 2 separate armies which can be picked off at leisure by the attacker. What happened to me once was my cavalry were placed inside the castle and my musketeers, archers and YS came on as reinforcements behind a massive Oda army...the outcome needs no explanation!! It just doesn't make any sense and is completely DAFT....

#3 We agree on http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/wink.gif

Daimyo, I most certainly will come and visit your site, especially as you are putting up something about the castle issue (IMHO the only really tragic part of this otherwise super game).

DOc http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

Anssi Hakkinen
11-20-2000, 23:47
Quote #1:Well this is obviously debatable...the many castle assaults I have had as defender and attacker have almost always ended up with the losses taken by both sides being fairly equal (no many on what sizes the 2 forces are).[/QUOTE]That is actually pretty well, considering the defender always recieves 100% casualties. In a normal battle, the defender would quickly be overwhelmed, considering the numerical superiority the attacker usually has. It might be that the advantage of defending a castle is not as great as it should be, but it DOES exist. With high-honor YS or nagi holding the gate, an able defender may turn the assault into a real bloodbath for the attacker (I have first-hand experience... http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/frown.gif ).

Quote #2 It certainly does appear to be a bug as they are supposed to be besieged in the castle not appearing as reinforcements!!![/QUOTE]Maybe the designers' intent was to have the extra reinforcements arrive as "guerilla forces" hiding in the province while the castle is being besieged. Admittedly, this questionable "feature" doesn't really work in the game, because the reinforcements arrive too early and, as you pointed out, their composition cannot be selected.

------------------
"A bushi who has mastered the jutsu but knows nothing of the do is like a priest who preaches one thing and does another."
- Shimmen Miyamoto Musashi