Fire

[Emjay]

What exactly is hte point of fire?

Does it have a morale penalty? Can it be dangerous to units?

Ive noticed in seige battles that fire spreads nicely but it didn't seem to do anything other than make things burn for a little bit. The same goes for forests. They go up in flame but what for exactly?

Is this feature just fluff or does it have a point.

Ta :)

[AlyG69]

well in towns when the towns starts burining it lowers morale etc for the army defending the town causeing them to rout faster... also against towers and ships the more fire % both have the more the more damage. specially against ships.. I once had to fight a sea battly with like general 1 melee unit and 3 artilary ships versus 8 melees 3 ranged and 1 artillery... I won cause I used my 1 melee ship as bait sailing around and everyone went after that ship whily my artillery ships 1 by one set all the other ships on fire... which eventually killed all 12 ships I was fighting... I would always manually fight sea battles

( actually attacked a town and won using that tactic with only a fleet )

[Emjay]

Thanks for the feedback.

Judging on the trees in forests it doesnt actually spread so I think its just for looks.

Bit of a shame as that would be a nice mechanic.

[AlyG69]

it spreads in towns not trees now.. I actually had situation where my archers using flame ammo put the trees they were standing in on fire... but they didn't burn themselves.. that would have been a good feature... ( I would have lost all my archers lol but still would have been more realistic)

[Totally Innocent]

You can set 'flammable' ground on fire with fire arrows, it'll do damage to enemy units for the duration of the fire, can help wither down enemy units in heavily forested areas.

[Darkrage_nl]

If you put a settlement to the torch they lose melee attack, melee defense and morale.

The debuffs can go so far that some enemy units (like the nordic warlords) have 0 attack.

The downside is the increased repair costs you get as a result (it is not very profitable unless you got a faction bonus),

[DaddyJokee]

Yah, Defense, Attack and Morale debuff for the defender. It's a bit annoying really. Flaming arrows are good against cav so I use them when defending, except the archers are such poor shots that they end up setting half the town on fire.

[[Wahr] Eogard]

When the ennemy got a -5 or -10 (or maybe more ) morale malus before you actually face them directly is pretty nice. Then you can just use your general abilities to lower morale even more or using archers or whatever you have.

Defenser are no more godlike

[Emjay]

Originally posted by Totally Innocent:

You can set 'flammable' ground on fire with fire arrows, it'll do damage to enemy units for the duration of the fire, can help wither down enemy units in heavily forested areas.

Can you force fire the ground then?

[Emjay]

Originally posted by HRH Prince Nicholas (Herrman):

I only played as the Western Roman Empire but from what I seen when the barbarians torch the buildings on fire it lowers morale plus melee/defense bonuses. I feel like its a cheesy perk like CODMW game.

It does kinda make sense due to the fact that the very town/city you are trying to protect has just gone up in flames and you havn't even started to defend it yet. I quite like the mechanic for that reason. It may be too harsh a penalty mind.

But one thing for sure is they have turned siege combat into something useful.

[Darkrage_nl]

Originally posted by Emjay:

Originally posted by HRH Prince Nicholas (Herrman):

I only played as the Western Roman Empire but from what I seen when the barbarians torch the buildings on fire it lowers morale plus melee/defense bonuses. I feel like its a cheesy perk like CODMW game.

It does kinda make sense due to the fact that the very town/city you are trying to protect has just gone up in flames and you havn't even started to defend it yet. I quite like the mechanic for that reason. It may be too harsh a penalty mind.

But one thing for sure is they have turned siege combat into something useful.

I find it quite balanced with the new towers.

The only downside is a if you rebuild a desolate settlement it starts and stays at 100% damaged until the town is done.

If you get attacked during the rebuilding it is a instant loss (or victory if you are the attacker). What imho do not make sense as there was no settlement to lose to begin with (you are still building it).

[Emjay]

Originally posted by Darkrage_nl:

Originally posted by Emjay:

It does kinda make sense due to the fact that the very town/city you are trying to protect has just gone up in flames and you havn't even started to defend it yet. I quite like the mechanic for that reason. It may be too harsh a penalty mind.

But one thing for sure is they have turned siege combat into something useful.

I find it quite balanced with the new towers.

The only downside is a if you rebuild a desolate settlement it starts and stays at 100% damaged until the town is done.

If you get attacked during the rebuilding it is a instant loss (or victory if you are the attacker). What imho do not make sense as there was no settlement to lose to begin with (you are still building it).

Considoring it can cost a LOT of money too. I know the price goes down with the more troops you have but I 'purchased' a town for 20,000 yesterday. Luckily it didn't get attacked but I was surprised to see I had to still build on top of the ruins.

I think at the very least you should have a small defensible area. Like if your a Nordic, Celtic or other 'barbarian' faction then a small wooden fort or something. Couple of wooden walls and towers maybe. With a good few barricades.