Steam telepítése
belépés
|
nyelv
简体中文 (egyszerűsített kínai)
繁體中文 (hagyományos kínai)
日本語 (japán)
한국어 (koreai)
ไทย (thai)
Български (bolgár)
Čeština (cseh)
Dansk (dán)
Deutsch (német)
English (angol)
Español - España (spanyolországi spanyol)
Español - Latinoamérica (latin-amerikai spanyol)
Ελληνικά (görög)
Français (francia)
Italiano (olasz)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonéz)
Nederlands (holland)
Norsk (norvég)
Polski (lengyel)
Português (portugáliai portugál)
Português - Brasil (brazíliai portugál)
Română (román)
Русский (orosz)
Suomi (finn)
Svenska (svéd)
Türkçe (török)
Tiếng Việt (vietnámi)
Українська (ukrán)
Fordítási probléma jelentése
Also the devs sayed that they will overhaul the entire system towards the end of EA.
Is it annoying to see your troops clumped at a single ladder? Yes.
Is it game breaking? No.
I've lost two Sieges. One on purpose, just because I "YOLO'd" it, and another due to buggy junk we see in Sieges.
I've witness too many bugs in Sieges to count. So many that I restricted what tactics I use.
1) Only build a Ram and go. That's it. That prevents a relief force of any consequence reaching the siege and presents the least number of failure points for bugs.
2) Build one Tower, never two, if I'm faced with certain Tier defenders in a certain combination of Culture and Wall Tier. (It's a judgement call.)
That's it.
I don't do Breeches because of my past experience with them bugging out and the very long bombard times it takes to create them. It's not worth it, IMO. If I couldn't take the fief with ladders and a Ram, something is wrong with my other choices. I do not lose Sieges because I only fight battles I know I can win.
Note: Unit Count/Battlesize matters in a number of respects across all scenes. Difficulty Settings also matter. The gameplay experience can be substantively changed as well as the choice of tactics when these settings are in different combinations from those of other players. No "one way" always works in all of these situations, battle scenes, and unit counts/tiers/cultures. IMO, ladders & ram is a dependable combination provided the player is making appropriate choices in units, tiers, and their chosen target.
What I do is take down the walls yes it takes a bit longer and you have to make sure you have plenty of food and you usually get attacked twice by armies around your size ( it saves chasing them all over the map so I'm happy with it ). After taking out two large armies and then taking the settlement you have reduced the enemy somewhat.
Start your siege with just your army and your own parties with a freshly made army then invite some allies It'll take a day or two for them to arrive but that's fine for it'll take a day or two for a relief army to attack you. I build all 12 siege weapons and put them in reserve before starting then start on the walls replacing siege weapons as they get destroyed, By the time the walls are down I've been attacked twice and have a good enough army to take the settlement.
Here is a few examples; When defending in a siege, the AI groups starts inside the buildings/towers (not all the time) wich leads to a cluster**** where one group is trying to go one way and another group is trying to go the other way, wich then leads to these 2 groups of troops getting stuck in that tower.
The AI getting stuck inside inaccessible buildings (they either fall or get pushed into those places).
The AI breakdancing when trying reload siege weapons (the one that carries the stone) and getting stuck in that motion.
The defending AI on wall just letting the attacking force get past them without fighting them.
The defending AI trying to get to a position and runs past enemy forces that are already either on the wall or in the courtyard.
Although this doesn't happen as much anymore, sometimes the attacking AI refuses to use the ladders.
With that said, the sieges are still better than what they used to be. It still needs alot of work though.
the mods hardly fix anything. to say they're outpacing the devs is hilarious, because it's wrong.