City Defense

[Chevalier of Possums]

Im not a fan of how defending seige battles is such a pain. The cities seem to be designed to make it almost impossible to defend. There are like 10 different ways to reach the center, the walls dont seem to hold for very long at all, and the gate can be knocked down by a cavalry unit within a minute or two. I like how the older total war games made defending a city much easier with more choke points and better walls. Now it just seems easier to attack the army laying seige and not bother with tying to defend it during a seige. I get that some cities were not designed with defense in mind but are there any locations that actually resemble a historical fortress that was built for the purpose of holding back an attacking army?

[Holeypaladin]

The Empire's border fortresses seem to be better designed at holding off invaders than most of the cities, which makes sense. Presumably Cathay's big wall, though I've not fought a battle at one, yet.

Siege warfare often boils down to who has the better artillery. If your faction doesn't have artillery, then city walls don't do much for you, since their only real goal is to slow down the enemy long enough for your artillery to route them. And if you play a faction with good artillery, then you can route a defending settlement without sending a single troop in. However, it should still take one turn of siege preparation to give ladders to your infantry... the fact that every infantryman can simply pull one out of his rear is pretty dumb.

[Moot]

Originally posted by Chevalier of Possums:

Im not a fan of how defending seige battles is such a pain. The cities seem to be designed to make it almost impossible to defend. There are like 10 different ways to reach the center, the walls dont seem to hold for very long at all, and the gate can be knocked down by a cavalry unit within a minute or two. I like how the older total war games made defending a city much easier with more choke points and better walls. Now it just seems easier to attack the army laying seige and not bother with tying to defend it during a seige. I get that some cities were not designed with defense in mind but are there any locations that actually resemble a historical fortress that was built for the purpose of holding back an attacking army?

even minas tirith wouldnt last more than a couple of minutes vs most mid game armies in warhammer. At this point, siege battles are just a deterrence to slow down the aggressors in wh3. I dont know how it was in previous games since I am a new comer.

[Epathos]

Siege battles in TW: Rome 2 where the best for me.

[Bashir Al-amole]

You could try to just focus on defending one victory point and dig in, not even bothering with defending the walls. If I'm on defense I just sacrifice most of the victory points instead of trying to defend everything with the meager garrison forces. It works for the most part.

Assuming your enemy doesn't have artillery, friggin Chaos Dwarfs...

[Chevalier of Possums]

Thanks guys, some good suggestions. I agree that a traditional walls wouldnt do much for stopping dragons or magical cannons. I think my biggest grievance is there is just so much wall to defend compared to the garrison size. I also think the defending army should be harder to route since they cant really retreat.