Age of Strategy Forums

What about if the walls are conquerable. You build it, then it yours, and you can put 1 unit on the wall.
You can freely move units trough walls, but enemy need suege tower to get on the wall.
trebuchet, catapult destroy the wall, battering ram opens the wall (Your units can enter without siege tower)

Hi
Sounds Good!!

patroid

I don't like it so much. Maybe if you explained it more I would - I'm not sure if I understand. The way I see it is that it is not only worthless but dangerous to build walls.

no, because enemy need siege tower to enter it

The walls will be conquerable.

the enemy troops can only attack it. they need siegetower, or ladder to be able to fight the unit in the wall and conqier it. siege weapons could break up the ,,gate'' of the wall, and make it able for the enemy to enter it without a siege tower.
meele units can only attack the siege tower from the wall, and ranged units gain a 26% attack bonus on walls.

Ok, I understand better. Thanks!

Ladders should be weak structures and easy to destroy. And while I love the siege tower, there will need to be a siege tower killer to offset them if we give them this property - maybe the fire archer?

What if there were multiple kinds of walls you could build. Like Great Wall that is unconquerable, Normal Wall like you are saying here, and Barricade, a wimpy structure mostly designed to slightly impede enemy movement but dirt cheap. (Balint: tell me what you think of this suggestion.) (Please.)

I think catapults and trebuchet should also get an bonus against Siege towers,

Siege towers are actually "normal" towers, but than on wheels

That sounds good

The idea is good.

bonus against siege tower: swordsman (kills the guy who moves the tower), catapult, trebuchet, (fire archer)

What I was thinking. What about Axe men?