How to assault city walls

[Franconicus]

There must have been a threat before but I could not find it. How do you assault cities with stone walls, esp. if you have no artillery?

[vale]

I guess you can build seige tower or ladder to scale the wall,

[Es Arkajae]

Aye, you use siege towers, saps and ladders (battering rams are useless against gates defended with burning oil).

Ladders are a last resort and should only be used if you can land the troops on an undefended part of the wall.

Towers are good if you have infantry capable of seizing the enemy's walls without too many casualties, just land the troops on the wall, kill the opposition and seize the gate house which will open the gates for your waiting army turning off the boiling oil. With control of the walls you can also capture the nearby towers and stop them from shooting at your troops and have them shoot at the enemy instead! Its always best to build at least two towers for assaulting a wall in case one gets set on fire before reaching it.

Saps are good if you don't have infantry capable of seizing the enemy's walls without too many casualties, they open a breach in the wall and you rush your army into the city whilst the enemy tries to get his own troops off the walls whilst whichever ones he had in the streets will try to hold you off. Keep in mind though that as long as the walls remain in enemy hands their towers will continue to snipe at you even inside the city. So you should move as quickly into the centre of the city as possible away from the walls, or you should slaughter the enemy units coming down from the walls and then send a unit up to capture the towers. If you like you can use just a few of you rbest units for the initial breach and hold the rest of your army back until the towers are put out of action.

Now if you had an army of levy pikemen and you were facing a wall defended by legionairres then you would use a sap, as one on one in hand to hand combat your levy guys would get slaughtered on the walls by the superior enemy infantry. You would rush your guys through the breach in the wall and engage phalanx mode which would give them a chance against the enemy.

On the other hand if you had an army of legionairres and you were facing a wall defended by levy pikemen you wouldn't hesitate to send in towers as the levy guys would be far less dangerous on the walls out of pahalnx mode and would get their arses handed to them. Whats more if you had legionairres (who have missiles) on the walls you could use them to hurl javelins down on the enemy (another reason for using towers).

I don't play cavalry factions much but I imagine that saps are preferable for them as they allow them to rush cavalry into the city if they lack decent infantry though it would be awkward I imagine.

[Productivity]

I tend to use ladders over siege towers. I find the fact that you have four individual points going up a ladder makes it far more difficult to defend against (the defender has to stretch their line further), plus they can't be burnt down. Also, ladders tend to work, where as siege towers I've found to be quite buggy.

[Es Arkajae]

Have you ever seen the neat little lines of dead people under a ladder before?

Their casualty rate compared to towers is poor, also unlike towers they cannot initially deliver a small platoon of men onto the wall in one heap to clear a path for the following troops.

Ladders are only useful against defended walls if the enemy infantry is decidely inferior (rather than equal or slightly so) to yours anyway, and then the enemy will still inflict higher casualties then they otherwise woud have if you'd used a tower I've personally found.

I have not experienced a game bug with towers at all since installing 1.2, they do not seem to be 'buggy' to me at all certainly I imagine no more than ladders.

[lismore]

I tend to use ladders over siege towers. I find the fact that you have four individual points going up a ladder makes it far more difficult to defend against (the defender has to stretch their line further), plus they can't be burnt down. Also, ladders tend to work, where as siege towers I've found to be quite buggy.

And the men also get up a ladder quicker than a seige tower

[PseRamesses]

...and don´t forget to turn on the siege towers "fire at will" command. I´ve found that moving the siege tower just within range of firing at the defenders on the walls is a great trick. Just don´t move the siege tower too close until you´re ready to attack or the gate and towers will eventually sack your siege tower if you stay in the line of fire too long.
I also never use all my siege weapons at once. Usually I send a ladder or tower forth at the far left or right side of the wall. When in place I send in the direct opposite. This means that when the first guys mounts the walls the defenders rush towards them and the second unit can mount safely and capture towers/ gate and finally pincing the defenders against your first unit.
If I´ve a sap-point I usually do this first then parking cavs in front of the opening, out of range ofcourse. This will divert the enemys forces. If they don´t rush in. Good luck!

[Productivity]

Have you ever seen the neat little lines of dead people under a ladder before?

No more so than siege towers.

Their casualty rate compared to towers is poor, also unlike towers they cannot initially deliver a small platoon of men onto the wall in one heap to clear a path for the following troops.

Actually, I did a bit of testing and ladders get more people onto the walls in the same amount of time than siege towers do. And while the casualty rate may be higher sometimes, every now and then a full siege tower will go up in flames, taking out the whole unit, which then blows your average casualty rate apart. I'd take 15 losses every time on the ladders, compared to 5 losses most times, and about 1/5 times lose an entire unit due to the tower going up in flames.

Ladders are only useful against defended walls if the enemy infantry is decidely inferior (rather than equal or slightly so) to yours anyway, and then the enemy will still inflict higher casualties then they otherwise woud have if you'd used a tower I've personally found.

Well I disagree. Ladders get more men on, split the defence, and provide just as much impact on the walls as that of siege towers.

I have not experienced a game bug with towers at all since installing 1.2, they do not seem to be 'buggy' to me at all certainly I imagine no more than ladders.

Well you are lucky. I've seen towers not line up properly and have men fall down between the tower and walls, rendering the entire tower useless.

Also the towers are risky, because you can lose them all, rendering you unable to get inside. Ladders never "die" (or at least I've never seen it happen).

I'll give that the (ridiculously stupid) repeating ballista for epic walls makes towers worth it though. But you can't take ladders then anyway, so it's a moot point.

[Beefy]

tbh i just onagers, there alot more fun,

For example, if im fighting Eypgt i will have 2 armies with 3,4 onagers in them for sieging cities, backed up by a supporting heavy army. Then when it comes to it, my onagers blast the wall to hell, out of reach of enemy archers. Also when the walls crumble, they kill the units on them, plus it looks good. And you can cover your approach with them. I use siege towers in conjunction with onagers, for a very effictive assult.

[Franconicus]

Thanks! I'll try and take Carthage tonight!

[mfberg]

Put fast troops on your ladders (velites/javelins) and set them to climb undefended sections. If you capture a couple of towers you have a nice wall area for your slower, heavy troops. If you can run your fast troops around an undefended section of the wall they will capture all the towers and make it impossible for the defenders to walk around the wall.

mfberg

[Franconicus]

Thanks! I'll try and take Carthage tonight!

I did it! Carthage is mine.
The enemy was very weak, because I won against the garrison in an open field battle before. They had one unit phalanx, javelins and longshield cav as well as half unit elephants. I stormed the walls with my phalanx units.
One question: Can I use the ladders for several units, one after the other? If not, can I place new ladders once the first unit is on the walls?
Even though it was easier than expected I lost too many men (800).

[pezhetairoi]

I usually storm cities with 12 units or more in an army, so I have enough build points to do 2 towers and 2 ladders in one turn. I take the two towers and flank the gatehouse, where the enemy usually is, and the ladders wider out, to take control of the towers as far as the next gatehouses either way. The AI usually has no more than 4 units on the wall at once, so it is an easy fight, especially when I've got hoplites who are pretty decent at swordplay.

[Es Arkajae]

No more so than siege towers.

Much more so.

Actually, I did a bit of testing and ladders get more people onto the walls in the same amount of time than siege towers do.

Are you dyslexic? or are you reffering to those 'magical' ladders that somehow initially dump 15 or so guys in one big heap on the wall straight away?

And while the casualty rate may be higher sometimes,

Most of the time

every now and then a full siege tower will go up in flames, taking out the whole unit, which then blows your average casualty rate apart.

I have NEVER seen the AI set a tower on fire when it was loaded up with troops at the wall (the only place where it can be loaded up). either you're full of crap (likely) or you're reffering to an event so rare that bringing it up is pointless.

I'd take 15 losses every time on the ladders, compared to 5 losses most times, and about 1/5 times lose an entire unit due to the tower going up in flames.

1/5th? yep, you're full of crap.

Well I disagree. Ladders get more men on, split the defence, and provide just as much impact on the walls as that of siege towers.

In the important initial moments no they do not get more men on and they do not provide as much of an impact.

You are of course entitled to your wrong opinion.

Well you are lucky. I've seen towers not line up properly and have men fall down between the tower and walls, rendering the entire tower useless.

Never happened to me, I suspect it has less to do with 'luck' than you exagerating how often it happens as it must be rare.

Also the towers are risky, because you can lose them all, rendering you unable to get inside. Ladders never "die" (or at least I've never seen it happen).

Why I suggested always using more than one for the very few times that one of your towers does get burnt.

[Es Arkajae]

I usually storm cities with 12 units or more in an army, so I have enough build points to do 2 towers and 2 ladders in one turn. I take the two towers and flank the gatehouse, where the enemy usually is, and the ladders wider out, to take control of the towers as far as the next gatehouses either way. The AI usually has no more than 4 units on the wall at once, so it is an easy fight, especially when I've got hoplites who are pretty decent at swordplay.

Good, a point I left out, a combined use of ladders and siege towers, still using the ladders to land troops on undefended parts of the wall. Mfberg has the same right idea.

[pezhetairoi]

Es arkajae, you really have to be more tactful sometimes, haha... :) *points at post just above previous one* There are better ways to tell someone he's full of crap than to tell him he's full of crap, and besides, he does make some notable points. I actually prefer ladders over siege towers despite the casualty rate because they cost less siege points, and they don't take a damnedly long time in front of the walls taking fire before the gangway falls onto the wall. There is a lot of time for things to go wrong with the siege tower sitting in front of the wall, even if its own artillery is firing away. Especially in mplayer, when you have experienced players fighting you, with fire archers shooting away while inside the tower your men are still climbing slowly up the stairs. Whereas ladders, despite the risk, at least get -some- men on the walls to buy time, and you can't set ladders on fire. ...at least, I don't think you can. And you at least don't lose the entire unit and the engine with it during a catastrophic rung collapse >.<

But of course, if I have a big army and I'm not short on build points I'd prefer the combined approach and the siege towers.

[Es Arkajae]

Es arkajae, you really have to be more tactful sometimes, haha... :) *points at post just above previous one* There are better ways to tell someone he's full of crap than to tell him he's full of crap,

I'm a strong proponent of honesty.

and besides, he does make some notable points. I actually prefer ladders over siege towers despite the casualty rate because they cost less siege points, and they don't take a damnedly long time in front of the walls taking fire before the gangway falls onto the wall.

He wasn't arguing that, if he was I would have had less of a problem with what he was saying, he argued that they took less casualties in the storming of the wall which is simply wrong.

As for time , its not that much extra time over ladders but I can see your point as regards overlapping towers picking off men whilst the tower is recieving the final nudges, but this applies partly to ladders as well and on the approach though the nearby towers will be trying to set your tower on fire, not shooting at the men (unlike with ladders), same goes for enemy archers. The main concern is usually javelin men or distant archers who can still get one in their sights, who present the same problem to ladders and towers, at least with towers though the tower is in the way of the javelin sometimes.

There is a lot of time for things to go wrong with the siege tower sitting in front of the wall, even if its own artillery is firing away.

If one is destroying ones own towers with ones own artillery then 'one' is an idiot and no amount of advice is going to help 'one'.

Especially in mplayer, when you have experienced players fighting you, with fire archers shooting away while inside the tower your men are still climbing slowly up the stairs. Whereas ladders, despite the risk, at least get -some- men on the walls to buy time, and you can't set ladders on fire. ...at least, I don't think you can. And you at least don't lose the entire unit and the engine with it during a catastrophic rung collapse

Against a human player especially a tower remains your best bet to take walls, if the enemy has oodles of archers your ladder men are toast anyway, they find it difficult if not impossible to use their shields and they'll be meat pin cushions before long. Against a human player the best bet is either saps or if one is storming the walls than simply overwhelming them with attacks from multiple directions.

But of course, if I have a big army and I'm not short on build points I'd prefer the combined approach and the siege towers.

If you have only a small army then the enemies is likely even smaller and so will be unable to mount a proper all out wall defence and merely spreading out your attack will usually work, all other things being equal.

[pezhetairoi]

ah nonono, i mean there is a lot of time for archer defenders and whatnot to shoot your tower into flames while it's sitting in front of the wall accumulating the assault party in the penthouse suite. Of -course- anyone destroying his own tower with his own artillery is an idiot :-P (cannot imagine anyone being in that class of commander) It's own artillery refers to the peashooters in the tower itself.

It seems that your posts are indeed being cut short. Hmm.

[Es Arkajae]

Against the AI their archers will never (or at least extremely rarely) fire on a tower when it is actually at the wall. Human players may be a bit different, but then a human player commanding archers is going to rip your ladder crews to shreds and you'll lose entire units in any case. Better to take the chance that the tower won't catch fire as they often don't and have the enemy concentrate on them and leave your units alone for the approach.

Oh and apparently my posts only get cut short when I use the little sideways 'v' symbol thingies especially when they point to the left.

In the recent case it was because I was quoting you using them, I edited them out and my last reply came through fine.

These '>'

[nameless]

I hate ladders, first off, the troops are open to everything and in the sights of a good archer can be wasted quickly. Second, once the ladders are there you've already lost a good amount of troops. Third, you can only get four guys on the wall at once, meaning that your relying on four guys, with their flanks open to buy enough time against like 80 guys for the rest to come up. When the computer was seiging me with a superior force when I captured Carthage, I had to rely on Velites mainly and weaker infantry. They attacked me with ladders and because of that my velites were able to hold them off easily because they only had to deal with four guys against like 80 guys and even so. Add that with the fact the towers already sniped out a dozen of them already.

Seige towers. First off, the troops are well protected and the tower can take much more damage. SEcond, if the tower is set to FIRE AT WILL it'll waste anyone on the wall to pieces, when I assaulted a selecuid city there were a team of javelins waiting for me and the tower simply wasted like half of them before it came to the wall. THird, once the tower's in place it takes a few seconds for the troops to run in and get ready. Fourth, once the tower opens, you have enough troops, maybe half of your unit holding off another unit for the rest to come up and help you out.

Now what you say is true though, the tower can be shot down of course by a good archer unit and kill everyone down there but if they can do that to a tower which is clearly designed for taking alot of punishment how can a ladder which can't fight back and clearly exposes the entire unit do better against the same thing?

In either case, I always have three units of archers and some cannon fodder to keep the towers and enemy units concentrated on them rather than the towers anyways which IMO should always be used when fighting a powerful garrison anyways.

[pezhetairoi]

arkajae: so that's why my '>.