"Castle" upgrades

**LordK9** · 05-20-2017, 06:38

I think that depends on you. Destruction is whatever you destroy when storming.

**Axalon** · 05-20-2017, 11:22

I have now examined this stuff first hand, today... Due to Macs post... Here are my results...

Case 1 - West Africa
****************************************
Castle level 2

Stormed --- No damage

Case 2 - Mauritania
****************************************
Castle level 1

Stormed --- No damage

Case 3 - Corsica
****************************************
Castle level 1

Stormed --- No damage

Case 4 - Toulouse
****************************************
Castle level 9

Stormed --- No damage

Case 5 - Tripolitania
****************************************
Castle level 1

Stormed --- No damage

It is possible that CA changed the mechanics for V.2.01 - it would explain your conflicting claims. Otherwise, this is how MTW works. Storm a castle and it takes no damage - siege it, and it starts taking damage...
I leave it to active V.2.01-users to examine/explore that possibility. In V.1.1 - upon which V.2.01 is built - this is how things are, feel free to confirm that (in the game) at any time.

- A

**macsen rufus** · 05-20-2017, 17:41

Hi Axalon - yes, I only play in 2.01 so there may be differences included in that version. I've been watching a few of my castle storms today, and it actually looks VARIABLE now! I had a fort+motte drop to fort, but a fort+motte+bailley stay as it was, and then a fort go to nothing...
so there are differences between cases in the same campaign. The question is, is this just random, or are there reasons behind it in the battle???

**Gilrandir** · 05-21-2017, 04:50

Originally Posted by macsen rufus

Hi Axalon - yes, I only play in 2.01 so there may be differences included in that version. I've been watching a few of my castle storms today, and it actually looks VARIABLE now! I had a fort+motte drop to fort, but a fort+motte+bailley stay as it was, and then a fort go to nothing...
so there are differences between cases in the same campaign. The question is, is this just random, or are there reasons behind it in the battle???

I have 2.01 and I have spotted the same regularity Axalon speaks about. I can't wager that it ALWAYS goes this way, but by storming a castle you have more probability it will stay intact than by starving it out. I remember once I stormed a fort and its walls were breached so much that it was a miracle it was still standing. Yet it didn't take any damage, as the campaign map showed.

**edyzmedieval** · 05-21-2017, 11:59

I love how almost 15 years after the game has been released we still find new stuff about it.

**macsen rufus** · 05-22-2017, 01:21

Originally Posted by edyzmedieval

I love how almost 15 years after the game has been released we still find new stuff about it.

Yep - and it also reminds us that what we've seen a few times might not actually happen EVERY time

I don't often let a castle fall by starvation - I usually storm it, or take it by subterfuge (spies or emissaries) to avoid any damage to the region's infrastructure. Often as not a bribe works out cheaper than rebuilding, and of course it's quicker...

In my current campaign it seems about 50/50 whether a stormed castle takes damage, but I can't claim a statistically robust sample size yet.

**edyzmedieval** · 07-09-2017, 23:48

Speaking of castle upgrades... I never got to do this. How effective are those culverin / bombard towers?

**DEB8** · 07-10-2017, 17:04

Originally Posted by macsen rufus

In my current campaign it seems about 50/50 whether a stormed castle takes damage, but I can't claim a statistically robust sample size yet.

I have MTW+VI Gold Edition and the results here seem to vary dependent on the level of the "Castle" !

[ Keeps and above : Storms = No damage , Siege = damage ; Below Keeps ( particularly in VI ) : Storms = damage , Siege = Unknown ( I usually storm these... ). ]

**Gilrandir** · 07-18-2017, 11:36

Originally Posted by macsen rufus

Yep - and it also reminds us that what we've seen a few times might not actually happen EVERY time

I don't often let a castle fall by starvation - I usually storm it, or take it by subterfuge (spies or emissaries) to avoid any damage to the region's infrastructure. Often as not a bribe works out cheaper than rebuilding, and of course it's quicker...

In my current campaign it seems about 50/50 whether a stormed castle takes damage, but I can't claim a statistically robust sample size yet.

More inexplicable still is the destruction of the province port after you starve out the castle.