Age of Strategy Forums

I imagined this as nothing more than a portable thatch of limbs 5 ft tall( tops) roped together quickly at the front for protection of foot troops how could this possibly be a siege transport this is ridiculous I'm sorry to say fellas ) i think build time should take less time than wall also?

right, please list the units that should not be able to be transported by that

As it is, it takes more time than a wall. The uint in general is simply to provide a screen for units, so noone would know what is behind it till they exposed themselves. A mantlet could easily be put up to block the view from enemy forces.even for siege weaponry, as the operatives would be exposed

This is the problem its a simple portable shield it is not originally intended to transport anything its a shield to stand behind to stop arrows! Self supported a simple cover. Just enough to shield one unit man size i believe it should be two but, When wheels was added it became something else! Then implemented

But its more durable than camouflaged screen the weaving will stop arrows but destroyed easily by swords man or horseman right isn't that how its supposed to be for protection not hiding or transporting ? )

RiverRaider 1097 wrote:But its more durable than camouflaged screen the weaving will stop arrows but destroyed easily by swords man or horseman right isn't that how its supposed to be for protection not hiding or transporting ? )

Well, its for both. If you don't know where the enemy is behind the mantlet, you dont know if its a swordsman or archer, until it reveals itself by attacking. And part of the protection is limiting enemy intelligence (such as having a few of these set up to hide a tunnel to sap a cities walls). Unless you think that there is a way to 'reveal' the unit behind the mantlet, without protecting vunerable units it wouldn't be worth the 3 turns. The mantlets purpose is used to adavance you vunerable units while mitigating risk. Plus they cannot go on forests or enter any buildings. It is very slow as well, so there is no movement bonus for artillery.
Moral of the story: dont change it

Hardeep, you have said it.

But they do move in forest that's the only thing that's originally right lol, hey its all good if you guys want to carry your siege units in bushes with wheels go ahead lol )

no, mantlet is not a "'carrier", it can only "carry" units that can "tow" that mantlet - so only ground-on-foot units should be in i think.

Yes, my thoughts as well )

Well then, if that is the case, how does the mantlet propell itself when noone is using it? Hmmm?
Answer: A poor guys pushing it for insubordination.

Hardeep wrote:Well then, if that is the case, how does the mantlet propell itself when noone is using it? Hmmm?
Answer: A poor guys pushing it for insubordination.

and back talk (huh).

That's the whole point, picked up and moved by units or unit that's STANDING behind it very light weight its just to stop arrows as a shield would does not need wheels...unless used by a very old archer lol ) or COOLguy

Sounds like the manlet should be an equitable item, not necessarily a whole new unit. New units can move on their own, this seems like it should only move if someone is using it.

The effect would be +x Pierce armour but -x speed.

RiverRaider 1097 wrote:That's the whole point, picked up and moved by units or unit that's STANDING behind it very light weight its just to stop arrows as a shield would does not need wheels...unless used by a very old archer lol ) or COOLguy

Okay, let's try a little experiment.
Step 1: become proficient in the use of a longbow.
Step 2: get a large shield approximately 2x your height and 8x your girth, check to see if it is capable of stopping cloth yard arrows shot from a longbow.
Step 3: find a battle
Step 4: haul ass and mantlet over into bowshot range
Step 5: Arrive to the battle with the strength to fight
Step 6: Fire off the longbow after setting up your mantlet. (Enemy retreats out of bowshot as a result)
Step 7: Mobilize the mantlet, pick it up, and advance.
Step 8: Once in bowshot, set up and fire again.
Step 9: repeat step 5-8 until enemy is defeated

step one : a longbowman should surly then! have the strength to carry a bundle of limbs five ft. in length probably half the weight we carry now! If not then they should be cooks not bowman )

RiverRaider 1097 wrote:step one : a longbowman should surly then! have the strength to carry a bundle of limbs five ft. in length probably half the weight we carry now! If not then they should be cooks not bowman )

Castle sieges consisted of heavier mantlets due to the fact that longbows were firing down upon them from hundreds of feet up.... lightweight just dont cut it...
C'mon CoolGuy i need some support!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mantlet

Internet don't lie.

There are many types of mantlets - "mantlets" are even used with modern weapons. The mantlet in the game is made of wooden planks (as the image shows) and mounted on small wheels.

The link above outlines three basic types of mantlet.

RiverRaider 1097 wrote:This is the problem its a simple portable shield it is not originally intended to transport anything its a shield to stand behind to stop arrows! Self supported a simple cover. Just enough to shield one unit man size i believe it should be two but, When wheels was added it became something else! Then implemented

What you describe here is more of a Pavese, which I believe has its own thread (at least on the pre-forum list).

I'm pretty sure it was just supposed to be for a front line defense position, not an assault turtle.. question..why can't we turn this into the siege tower just lengthen it increase build time and capacity. Seems this is the mantles current role )

The siege tower was supposed to have a bunch of special abilities. Otherwise, yes, the units are very similar.

This mantlet, you can build just out of range of enemy fortifications and bring in fire archers and other weaker units into range with a little protection.

I have to say I think the mantlets are a wee bit overy powered. In their current for they now allow us to move siege through the forest, and make it almost impossible to if some one only builds those and fills them with siege. I agree with raider only foot units should be able to take cover in this. Maybe another unit (aka a siege tower should be able to hold siege wepons) and that unit should have about the same building time as a fortress.

The mantlet costs the same/more than a wall and tower.

Can you put siege units in it still? I haven't been able to.

Yep, I say make build time same as battering ram add height to the image and make it siege tower. Then start over on this unit and design it like originally attended? before wheel was introduced...oh it moves must need a wheel theory? Foot units movement is normally 3 but should be two if carrying a mantlet? )

Mantlet moves one in game.

Historical mantlets did move.

Siege towers are completely different in structure and development.

The unit that has no movement was already suggested as a "Pavese".

I think turn time to build is O.P. as I have a majority of units as workers making it efficiently easy to Create multiple upon multiple units of such. Suggest 4-5 turns. I believe it's a Bit O.P. when able to travel through forest I suggest making it non passible in forest terrain as They do soak up a decent amount of arrow damage. In turn of Not passing through forest terrain You could increase movement by 1-2 and I agree it should be restricted to Foot units and such as the trebuchet and Catapult would be O.P. do what you will I'm just Submitting Feedback.

mantlet changed to carry only infanty units.
up on server in 10 minuts.

Thanks!

This unit is useless now...
After all, there was an older name for it, Siege shield....

Hardeep wrote:This unit is useless now...

Should we reduce its cost then?

Maybe 3 without Ambidextria and 2 with?

Good call Dan, maybe the siege tower will get a second look now? )