Why waiting one turn for siege equipment if we can just lay ladders?

[Darcaem]

I was playing another campaign with VC and I just realized this. I was attacking a small town with walls and a very small garrison with my main full stack army. I need to wait one turn to attack just to buid a ram.

But actually, during the battle I do not use the ram at all, I just send my flying monster to create chaos among the garrison while my infantry slowly advances and lay ladders in the walls. That's it, simple and easy, the garrison is just overrun.

If any infantry unit can carry a ladder, shouldn't we be able to just overrun the garrison in the first turn without waiting for siege equipment?

[Daliena]

Hell, you can always have infantry break down the gates too. But, if you don't have artillery or specific monsters like a varghulf, you gotta wait and build a ram/siege tower because reasons.

[Nickzilla]

yeah, it's silly. they should just make you build ladders like you had to in Rome. If you make it so you build 2-3 a turn, I don't see anything wrong with that. I think it is the way it is because they want to give you an incentive to build walls in minor settlements.

[Tenshin51]

Seems fine w/ me. There going on siege anyway. Siege ladder in real history they serve as distraction, true horrors of siege will be the siege tower and other siege machine before the gunpowder.

It will be cool in siege, the attacker can also build some catapult and other siege machine, those siege machine are being assemble during siege. It will be nice attacker also build fort like Caesar.

[Mojo Amok]

Ladders are rather awful in my opinion - your troops come up at a trickle and are either very tired or exhausted when they arrive (I forget which because I haven't used ladders in so long).

If you don't mind lots of casualties, ladders are acceptable, but assault troops arriving from a siege tower are vastly more effective.

[Darcaem]

Originally posted by Tenshin51:

Seems fine w/ me. There going on siege anyway. Siege ladder in real history they serve as distraction, true horrors of siege will be the siege tower and other siege machine before the gunpowder.

It will be cool in siege, the attacker can also build some catapult and other siege machine, those siege machine are being assemble during siege. It will be nice attacker also build fort like Caesar.

I do agree, defenders should also build siege equipment, would be nice!

But I do not agree with your first statement. While in most sieges it is true that ladder attacks were usually a bad idea, with huge casualties and only usefull as a distraction, when the attackers had a great numeric advantage, a fast and simple direct from attack did work. Napoleon did that in his very beginnings, and also the british against the Marathas in India.

[Mors Avis]

Ladders are rather awful in my opinion - your troops come up at a trickle and are either very tired or exhausted when they arrive (I forget which because I haven't used ladders in so long).

If you don't mind lots of casualties, ladders are acceptable, but assault troops arriving from a siege tower are vastly more effective.

What Tohibii said ^^ ... ladders are a 'brute force' method of taking a city/castle, and, as such, should be viewed as a last resort. You lose too many men using ladders.

[Darcaem]

Originally posted by Tohibii:

Ladders are rather awful in my opinion - your troops come up at a trickle and are either very tired or exhausted when they arrive (I forget which because I haven't used ladders in so long).

If you don't mind lots of casualties, ladders are acceptable, but assault troops arriving from a siege tower are vastly more effective.

Totally agree. But, in my example, I'm attacking with a huge undead horde against a couple of defenders. I don't give a **** about a couple hundreds of casualties, the necromancers are going to call them again anyway :)

I'm not defending that a direct ladder attack is a good tactic in general, but I think it would be nice if it were an option.

[Trash Rat Lady]

Yeah I was wondering this too. It's especially frustrating when being forced to wait two turns before attacking can literally decide whether or not your army can get wiped out if you know enemy reinforcements are on the horizon.

[Daliena]

Originally posted by Dadger Ben:

Yeah I was wondering this too. It's especially frustrating when being forced to wait two turns before attacking can literally decide whether or not your army can get wiped out if you know enemy reinforcements are on the horizon.

You can always just set up a ram in one turn, right?

[TVMAN]

Originally posted by Darcaem:

I was playing another campaign with VC and I just realized this. I was attacking a small town with walls and a very small garrison with my main full stack army. I need to wait one turn to attack just to buid a ram.

But actually, during the battle I do not use the ram at all, I just send my flying monster to create chaos among the garrison while my infantry slowly advances and lay ladders in the walls. That's it, simple and easy, the garrison is just overrun.

Ladders are fine for trash units like skeletons and zombies, because you can literally throw them at walls and not care about the casualties. Only using ladders becomes a problem when you start fielding more expensive armies. It takes a long time for infantry to scale ladders, and they'll reach the top in a tired trickle.

Mid to late game, you'll want to start building siege towers so you can quickly get your Grave Guards up onto the walls, all while your Crypt Horrors break down the gates. Monstrous infantry like Horrors can break down gates a lot faster than rams do, so I don't bother with rams at any point regardless.

[SleepyNarwhalz]

Originally posted by TVMAN:

Originally posted by Darcaem:

I was playing another campaign with VC and I just realized this. I was attacking a small town with walls and a very small garrison with my main full stack army. I need to wait one turn to attack just to buid a ram.

But actually, during the battle I do not use the ram at all, I just send my flying monster to create chaos among the garrison while my infantry slowly advances and lay ladders in the walls. That's it, simple and easy, the garrison is just overrun.

Ladders are fine for trash units like skeletons and zombies, because you can literally throw them at walls and not care about the casualties. Only using ladders becomes a problem when you start fielding more expensive armies. It takes a long time for infantry to scale ladders, and they'll reach the top in a tired trickle.

Mid to late game, you'll want to start building siege towers so you can quickly get your Grave Guards up onto the walls, all while your Crypt Horrors break down the gates. Monstrous infantry like Horrors can break down gates a lot faster than rams do, so I don't bother with rams at any point regardless.

Mid to late you can take down an entire city with manfred. If we're being honest VC are easy no matter which way you slice it

[Big Moustache]

Using siege equipment = high casualties on your side. I never use them. All my sieges are the same: kill tower, kill units on walls with crossbows, destroy walls, put handgunners in front of each breach, win. Handgunners wreck heavy armored elites and lords and heroes in no time.