Castle defense additions - are they worth building?
I realized, that the defense additions (like ballista tower) can only be built with the corresponding size of castle. I can't recall exactly which one belongs to which, but they are unavailable if I built the next level castle and new ones can be built.
I realized, that these additions are very good when defending and they are relatively cheap. However should I build all additions at all level or is this just a waste of money as building the next level of castle (like citadel) will 'erase' these additions?
How is that?
Re: Castle defense additions - are they worth building?
I've wondered about this, too. I've come to the conclusion that it's not worth the money if I'm thinking of upgrading the castle any time soon, or if it is unlikely to be attacked (ie it's not on my borders.) The only time I bother any more is for the "outposts" on the frontiers of my empires. I build big on the corners (use those provinces for big garrisons and troop production), then salt the edges with smaller upgraded forts/keeps with garrisons (use them mostly for agriculture and/or trade and to produce ships and/or low level troops.) If I own enough land, I'll keep most of my troops one province back so that I won't provoke and arms race and so I can counterattack any sneaky border crossings.
Personally, I hate assaulting castles that have catapult towers - those things winnow down my attackers every time.
Re: Castle defense additions - are they worth building?
I find any castle defense additions to be a total waste of money. I've never seen the AI attack my castle, they only sit there and try to starve me out. So those additions will never get any use in battle!
Unless you get the AI attacking your castles a lot?
Re: Castle defense additions - are they worth building?
Building the next level of castle won't erase the additional defences, it includes them. In other words: if you build a fortress, it includes both the citadel upgrades (barbican and demi-culverin towers), whether or not you have built them before. This way you can get gunpowder castle defences even before gunpowder is invented! So, if you are going to upgrade you castle soon, don't bother building the upgrades. A possible exception is the motte (fort-level) because it gives you Vikings Landsmen in the regular MTW campaign (in Norway, Sweden and Denmark, if you have VI), gaining you a very good unit for a small upgrade.
Re: Castle defense additions - are they worth building?
I am not sure if I understand correctly: "it includes them" means, if you build the next level castle, you get the improvements for free with the castle upgrade?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludens
Building the next level of castle won't erase the additional defences, it includes them. In other words: if you build a fortress, it includes both the citadel upgrades (barbican and demi-culverin towers), whether or not you have built them before. This way you can get gunpowder castle defences even before gunpowder is invented! So, if you are going to upgrade you castle soon, don't bother building the upgrades. A possible exception is the motte (fort-level) because it gives you Vikings Landsmen in the regular MTW campaign (in Norway, Sweden and Denmark, if you have VI), gaining you a very good unit for a small upgrade.
Re: Castle defense additions - are they worth building?
Quote:
Originally Posted by HicRic
Unless you get the AI attacking your castles a lot?
In my experience, reappearing Popes always attack your strongholds since his Haughtiness is in such a hurry to spread the Gospel. It really pays off (both strategically and fun-wise) to prepare garrisons and castle defenses as you await their reappearance. I like to carefully garrison these castles. Usually one unit of pavise Arbalesters, one serious Cavalry unit and some elite foot soldiers allow you to "hold out" for at least three years as well as enabling you to put up a proper defense in case of attack.
The real fun is in sallying forth during the siege battle. Popes come in various hard-scripted guises. You know the Pope who resurrects with a s***load of handgunners and arquebusiers? His first attack wave will consist of spears and militia. If you manage to hold these off with your Pavise Arbalesters plus the usual treats of boiling oil, catapults and the like, the next wave will consist of hordes of handgunners and arquebusiers who start circling your castle with no apparent aim. Just open the gate and counter-attack with your Cavalry. You can kill hundreds of them before you withdraw the horsies to prevent them from running into spear reinforcements. Repeat if necessary. You'll lose half of your horses, but as a reward they get a valour bonus which comes in useful in case they manage to break through the gates. I've managed to rout Papal armies of 3000+ with such garrisons in combination with good defenses. I always play Expert, in case you wonder.
Re : Re: Castle defense additions - are they worth building?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bretwalda
I am not sure if I understand correctly: "it includes them" means, if you build the next level castle, you get the improvements for free with the castle upgrade?
Indeed.
Lone imporvements that COULD be meaningful are once you've your fortress..... In several campaigns, I've been attacked in a castle just once, so I simply don't build them.
Re: Castle defense additions - are they worth building?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianII
In my experience, reappearing Popes always attack your strongholds since his Haughtiness is in such a hurry to spread the Gospel. It really pays off (both strategically and fun-wise) to prepare garrisons and castle defenses as you await their reappearance. I like to carefully garrison these castles. Usually one unit of pavise Arbalesters, one serious Cavalry unit and some elite foot soldiers allow you to "hold out" for at least three years as well as enabling you to put up a proper defense in case of attack.
The real fun is in sallying forth during the siege battle. Popes come in various hard-scripted guises. You know the Pope who resurrects with a s***load of handgunners and arquebusiers? His first attack wave will consist of spears and militia. If you manage to hold these off with your Pavise Arbalesters plus the usual treats of boiling oil, catapults and the like, the next wave will consist of hordes of handgunners and arquebusiers who start circling your castle with no apparent aim. Just open the gate and counter-attack with your Cavalry. You can kill hundreds of them before you withdraw the horsies to prevent them from running into spear reinforcements. Repeat if necessary. You'll lose half of your horses, but as a reward they get a valour bonus which comes in useful in case they manage to break through the gates. I've managed to rout Papal armies of 3000+ with such garrisons in combination with good defenses. I always play Expert, in case you wonder.
Ahh. The only re-appearing pope I've had was in my first game, and I had a large army on hand to deal with them before any castles could be attacked. Still, it's worht pointing out that 99% of your castles probably won't ever make use of the improvements.
Unless-I don't remember-they add to the time your castle can survive under seige? I think some of them do, actually! In which case, if you get seiges happening a lot then they'd be useful!
Re: Castle defense additions - are they worth building?
Quote:
Originally Posted by HicRic
I find any castle defense additions to be a total waste of money. I've never seen the AI attack my castle, they only sit there and try to starve me out. So those additions will never get any use in battle!
Unless you get the AI attacking your castles a lot?
I find the Mongols especially prone to assaulting castles. Whenever I play an eastern faction, I upgrade as quickly as possible to the castle level with its upgrades. Even though they managed to force the gates, they would lose at least half of their army.
Re: Castle defense additions - are they worth building?
Ahh-in my games, the Mongols get wiped out before my faction reaches them (if I start far away) or I'm there to greet them and I wipe them out in short order before they get a chance to seige.
I suppose I've underestimated castle improvements-the trouble is, I've played MTW so much that even on expert I don't have much trouble winning the battles, so the AI don't get a shot at my castles. A shame, as I enjoy the seige battles (I sometimes play them in custom battles).
Re: Castle defense additions - are they worth building?
@Ldvs The problem in letting the Mongols (or anybody else) siege my castles is that then you lose the province and some facilities are destroyed in the process... and I dont like that. I have difficulty building them up maybe because I still try to build too many things in too many provinces.
Anyway, Mongols are not that easy for me, especially when I dont get them to fight me across a river.
@HicRic: Do you win because you can get the upper hand with even inferior troops because of your tactical skills or your troops are just good enough to prevail - attributed to your strategic skills?
Re: Castle defense additions - are they worth building?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bretwalda
@Ldvs The problem in letting the Mongols (or anybody else) siege my castles is that then you lose the province and some facilities are destroyed in the process... and I dont like that. I have difficulty building them up maybe because I still try to build too many things in too many provinces.
Anyway, Mongols are not that easy for me, especially when I dont get them to fight me across a river.
Indeed you should use a "one province-one unit" system. By the way, I didn't say I liked to see Mongols besieging my castle ~;) When it happens, it's because I was defeated earlier.
As for the Mongols, I tend to use a spears-arbalesters-light cavalry strategy. Although you must have the best spears otherwise they will not withstand the tremendous heavy cavalry charge and once the line is broken, all your units rout at once... If you're able to use polearms (halberdiers) then do it.
Re: Castle defense additions - are they worth building?
What is this "one province-one unit" system? Is it on defense? And the other tactics you mentioned? For some reasons halbediers did not fare too well for me so far - probably I did something wrong...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ldvs
Indeed you should use a "one province-one unit" system. By the way, I didn't say I liked to see Mongols besieging my castle ~;) When it happens, it's because I was defeated earlier.
As for the Mongols, I tend to use a spears-arbalesters-light cavalry strategy. Although you must have the best spears otherwise they will not withstand the tremendous heavy cavalry charge and once the line is broken, all your units rout at once... If you're able to use polearms (hallebardiers) then do it.
Re: Castle defense additions - are they worth building?
"one province-one unit" means you specialize a province in a certain unit : 1 for cavalry (long and costly upgrades), 1 men-at-arms, 1 spearmen/halberdiers, 1 for strategic units (i.e spies assassins bishops...).
Halberdiers are best used as flanking units. Pin the cavalry unit with your spearmen and charge it in the rear (or flank) with your halberdiers. Use arbalesters to shoot down the horse archers. Light cavalry is useful to catch both the horse archers and routed mongol (foot) warriors (prefer steppe cavalry or alan mercenary whenever it is possible).
Re: Castle defense additions - are they worth building?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bretwalda
For some reasons halbediers did not fare too well for me so far - probably I did something wrong...
Halbediers have kinda low moral - like militia sergeants. Any valor/moral upgrades you can get them are well worth it - otherwise they are apt to route. They aren't really good at holding a line - they are much better if you can charge them into a flank of an armored unit.
Re: Castle defense additions - are they worth building?
Yupp, now I am more careful with halbs and they work better... I don't expect to stop the charge but find them useful to kill after the charge is halted. Also, this way they gain valour...
Re: Castle defense additions - are they worth building?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bretwalda
@HicRic: Do you win because you can get the upper hand with even inferior troops because of your tactical skills or your troops are just good enough to prevail - attributed to your strategic skills?
Without meaning to sound immodest-both! I've played for too much Shogun and Medieval for my own good, so I know how to out-play the AI on both the strat map (so my armies are strong) and on the tactical map (so I can win even when attacked in a weaker position).
Of course, nobody is going to win using all peasants for their armies-so strat map skill is vital. I don't claim to be a genius at either-I'm useless at the online battles against other humans-but I can manage against the AI fine.
There are people much better than I-some "rush" at the start of their game and take large amounts of territory with very small armies, requireing near-pefect moves on the strategy map and great generalship on the tactical map. I cannot do this, I admit.
Another example of out-fighting the AI is with the mongols. They can't field their whole army at the same time, and they don't use their reinforcements effectively. This allows me to field one full-strength army with a few reserves and take on much larger numbers (as they throw their men piecemeal at me, they can't put, say, 5000 men on the field at once).
I have no idea why I just wrote so much completely off-topic. Uhh, I'll shut up now. :dizzy2:
Oh-one more thing. I still lose a battle now and then to the Mongols, thanks to their Mongol Heavy Cavalry. They're very powerful-I've had them charge a line of spearmen head-on and win almost straight away as they broke and ran. They were low-morale spearmen, and MHC are just..solid. Hard as nails. ~;)
Re: Castle defense additions - are they worth building?
It's still early days for me with MTW and I have built a few of these castle upgrades so far. Although, as has been said, it may be unlikely that they ever get to see any use.
The only benefit I can see for them, so far, is that they're cheap and quick to build. Certainly worth it if I'm not ready to commit to the full costs of the next level of castle.
At the borders, where there's always a risk of a successful invasion prior to the 8, 16, 20 year build times for the full items, completion of an additional defense layer in just 2 or 3 years has some appeal and the low costs mean it's not such a great loss if the province is taken later.
It's difficult to judge the level of 'deterrent' that it represents to the AI across the border. It could be that they do serve to make them think twice about attacking that province for just long enough that you get a good chance to shift up to the next level of castle. Once you've done so, you don't need so many troops stationed on that part of the line, freeing up former defenders to become a more mobile force.
I suppose the irony is that your most advanced castles are being built in order to get more advanced troop types and are far enough behind the front lines that they will never get to see any defensive action. So, if troop production is the sole reason that you're shifting up to higher castle levels, the upgrades cost you time as well as money and should be skipped.
Re: Castle defense additions - are they worth building?
Thanks for the reply! Could you give some ideas what to build (and maybe in what order) in each of the specializing provinces (horsie, sword, spear, agents, ships, later gunpowder)?
Also, do you have an idea if you don't have enough money to do all building tasks in a year what gets built?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ldvs
"one province-one unit" means you specialize a province in a certain unit : 1 for cavalry (long and costly upgrades), 1 men-at-arms, 1 spearmen/halberdiers, 1 for strategic units (i.e spies assassins bishops...).
(...)
(I am not sure: should I start a new topic with these questions as they seem to be a little off from the original subj?)
Re: Castle defense additions - are they worth building?
I generally start building borders forts, then specialize : for a cavalry province, build the first two levels of stables, generic spearmen can often be produced in the same province at least in the very beginning when no light cavalry are available to you (execpt steppe cav, hobilars). Afterward, build armor buildings plus estates. It's long and costly.
For the men-at-arms, build either archery or spearmaker, then upgrade to the dungeon level.
If you have some very rich provinces (i.e Flanders), don't bother with military upgrades at the beginning and concentrate on farms (60%), that will be your cash cow. One the contrary, if you have provinces generating very low incomes (Swiss) only make military buildings.
You can scarcely build whatever you want in a same turn at the beginning unless you play the French. My advise is to mix expensive buildings with cheap ones. When specializing you can allow yourself not to upgrade at each turn.
Feel free to start a new thread, but I think you should be close to getting the point by now ~;)
