Well do they? What I mean is, if I have a keep, and I add a curtain wall and ballista towers, if I were to upgrade to a castle, would it have extra walls and towers where the curtain wall and ballista towers were? The reason I ask is because I almost never put investment into improving my forts while I can just upgrade to a new type of castle, but if they carried over, I might consider it.
Yes.
Every level of castle has A higher Improvment though. I only aplies to the towers though. Things like Moat don't carry over.
Castle already comes with ballista towers and curtain wall, even if you didn't build any upgrades for the keep, i.e. you went from a plain keep to castle straight away. The same thing applies to other improvements and castle levels.
Some people get by with a little understanding
Some people get by with a whole lot more - A. Eldritch
Castle comes with arrow towers IIRC - not ballista ones.
Castle has both arrow and ballista towers to start with, and you add catapult towers with the upgrade (after you have added the ring wall). In a similar manner, citadel already has catapult towers to start with. Unupgraded keep has only arrow towers.
Some people get by with a little understanding
Some people get by with a whole lot more - A. Eldritch
Castle upgrades also are useful to have when castle is under enemy siege (surprise..) Castles level drop by one when its assaulted, and that means that if you have Castle+Ballista Towers you lost ballistas, but castle remains. Well, if have just castle, it will drop to keep..
So the reason to build those extra Walls and ballistas is not only to shoot enemys during assault.
-Pakkanen kesyttää nudistin-
Yes, I thought so too, but Gil once stated that the castle downgrade is randomised, ie. it may or may not happen. But it's always better to take the 2 or 4 years to build upgrades, you never know when you're going to need them. Upgrading my keep in Poland with walls and ballistas made me withstood a castle assault by the Horde in my last campaign where I surprisingly lost to their invading forces. They decided to attack the castle on the next turn and had massive casualties caused by the arrow towers of the outer wall plus the boiling oil/pitch. If they broke through, I had just 2 units in there vs their full stack...
A slight idea for a future patch though, perhaps it could be doable to detract the time you took for upgrading the lower level castle from the buildtime of the next level castle. For example, if I built an outer wall plus ballista towers for a keep, then the upgrade to castle level would just take 8 years instead of 12 and so forth...
Ignoranti, quem portum petat, nullus suus ventus est. -Seneca, Epistulae Morales, VIII, 71, 3
Okay, thanks..Originally Posted by [b
Can you tell are the number of facilities being destroyed also random? Does assaulting affect to that how many building is lost?
-Pakkanen kesyttää nudistin-
I'm sorry, not sure about that My guess is that if the castle is downgraded one level due to the capture, you will also lose all buildings that can only be built on that higher castle level. Well, either they get destroyed or also downgraded by one level, that is.
Perhaps another diehard SP player can enlighten us here...
Ignoranti, quem portum petat, nullus suus ventus est. -Seneca, Epistulae Morales, VIII, 71, 3
Answering the call...
No, even if the castle is downgraded for a full level (for citadel to castle, e.g.) that doesn't mean that the buildings will be downgraded accordingly, it will still be random. For example, in my current campaign I have armourer's guild (which requires citadel), in a province with a castle.
Some people get by with a little understanding
Some people get by with a whole lot more - A. Eldritch
Your answer is needed again..Quote[/b] (hrvojej @ July 11 2003,12:40)]Answering the call...
No, even if the castle is downgraded for a full level (for citadel to castle, e.g.) that doesn't mean that the buildings will be downgraded accordingly, it will still be random. For example, in my current campaign I have armourer's guild (which requires citadel), in a province with a castle.
I´d like to know if there is any way to try save more buildings? There can be more than 10 destroyed building when capturing province, and that´s way too much..
-Pakkanen kesyttää nudistin-
The higher the level of the castle is, the less buildings will be destroyed. With fort, you'll destroy pretty much everything, but with citadel it might be only one or two. The other thing would be to use spies to open the gates, but it's *very* hard to do, and I'm not even sure whether that prevents destruction or just ends the siege before time, since I can't recall if I ever succeeded in that. You can also use a little exploit - bribe the besieged garrison, and voila, you get the province completely intact. Especially great with rebels, who have no loyalty and low cost. Just remeber that they actually have to be in the castle for this to work, not outside in the province, as the second scenario will still result in pillaging.Quote[/b] (Knight Keimo @ July 12 2003,02:04)]I´d like to know if there is any way to try save more buildings? There can be more than 10 destroyed building when capturing province, and that´s way too much..
Some people get by with a little understanding
Some people get by with a whole lot more - A. Eldritch
Thanks again
Yeah, should try those agents sometimes.. I´m just so brutal guy that I hardly bother to use them..
-Pakkanen kesyttää nudistin-
Thats alright Keimo, we forgive you
there is got to be some blood craving peeps around to spice things up
Legacy for the airwaves.
building destruction is ususaly completely random.
there are some factors whichaffect it though, and yes, i believe that the size of the castle is one, can't say i've discovered any others though.
Head Moderator of TotalRome
Refugee of the Total War Centre
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks