Defending walls with missile units

[ezoons]

I'm having the same problem.

Still getting used to M2's mechanics, I tried several custom castle defenses the other day.

Each time, I gave the enemy 2 towers and a ram, but I cannot remember my archers (plain longbows but with maxed out experience) destroying the enemy's siege equipment! All there was (out of maybe 5 battles) was a single siege tower!
Mind you, I've been defending a huge city, and maybe its walls are higher (I mean, an archer would always have to shoot upwards).

Funny thing is, I've had some castle battles in my grand campaign, but with less developed towns, my archers never had a problem firing teir arrows in a flatter trajectory.

[todorp]

It is really ridiculous to watch the gunpowder units shoot up

I didn't see that CA fixed this bug in v1.2.

[Baygon]

It is really ridiculous to watch the gunpowder units shoot up

I didn't see that CA fixed this bug in v1.2.

they should ...

[Rozanov]

I was watching my pavise crossbowmen firing at some Mongols at extreme range. Close up I noticed all the crossbowmen (apart from the captain) were standing at the rear edge of the walkway.

At first I thought it odd, but :

1) an angled shot will (as long as it isn't above 40 degs (approx)) give a slightly longer range than a level trajectory shot.

2) standing at the rear means all the crossbowmen can fire, rather than just those standing at the gaps in the merlons (those standing behind merlons have their swords drawn)

[JCoyote]

What gets me about pavise crossbows is they use the pavise from their back. There's not much historical support for that, not much rational support for it either. Not only would the shield have to be lighter than most pavise were, being directly on the body it would be less effective for its thickness as well. (No air gap.)

I really think pavise should be handled like shield equipment; slows them down but offers protection and accuracy advantages, but they can drop it to fight as "normal" crossbows instead.