Garrisoned turrets have not vision range.

[Gurken Khan]

@davidsrsb Do you have a replay? And maybe the log files?

https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/GameDataPaths

@Stan` Split?

[davidsrsb]

I have a save game where infantry behind the wall lost sight of the attackers as soon as they entered a tower. Lower left side of map, at the shore of the sea.

If you make a man leave the tower, all the attackers are revealed

savegame-0189.0adsave

[Gurken Khan]

I don't know why the manned turrets have no sight at all.

@Stan` Do you know, or who might?

[Stan`]

Split the topic.

I suppose @Angen or @Freagarach might.

I suppose it's a template issue.

[Silier]

https://code.wildfiregames.com/rP25135

[Ceres]

From all the discussion and recent changes, I still don't understand how turrets in wall segments or wall segments themselves behave - manned or not. Not manned, they don't shoot anymore, right? What is their behaviour when manned? Does it depend on the type of units they are manned with? Which units should one use to man turrets and wall segments? And by the way, same question for towers and outposts: Can only archers improve something or also pike men? Is an advantage linked to the use of units with the ability to distance attacks only? Are tooltips and the like also adjusted when the behaviour of e.g. walls in this case is changed? Thank you.

Edited September 4, 2021 by Ceres

[alre]

in (very) short: when you place walls, destroy turrets before building them, they take building time, way to much stone, and are useless.

[Ceres]

Erm, but wall segments have turrets between them. Or are we talking about something completely different?

[Gurken Khan]

2 minutes ago, alre said:

in (very) short: when you place walls, destroy turrets before building them, they take building time, way to much stone, and are useless.

And then you have holes in your wall?

I can respect some balancing concerns, but currently turrets seem terribly useless. And why won't they even grant sight to garrisoned units?

[alre]

19 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

And then you have holes in your wall?

not necessarely. when placing the walls it's easy to guess if there will be gaps or if the segments will rather touch. try.

[davidsrsb]

I don't see why removing attack stops vision. It makes it absolutely pointless to garrison them. In 0.25, walls have now become a waste of resources

I don't agree with removing attack. The balance was wrong, maybe they should not have the unmanned sentry bonus. Maybe only ranged weapon users should be able to fire. Ideally to be realistic, they should provide total protection against hack for occupants, but only limited pierce protection.

Walls and turrets should have been more expensive to build, removing a lot of the imbalance.

The suggestion of building wall segments without turrets is an ugly consequence. Real world walls without turrets are unstable.

[Ceres]

Can somebody please explain how turrets in wall segments or wall segments themselves behave attack-wise - manned or not? Not manned, they don't shoot anymore, right? What when they are manned?

Which advantage have distance-fighting units (e.g. archers) when garrisoned on turrents of walls or on wall segments as compared to distance-fighting units standing on the ground? Is there currently a difference between turrets (by "turrets" I mean the higher parts between wall segments - you too?) and plain wall segmentswith regard to attacking possibilities (garrisoned/ungarrisoned)?

[Silier]

10 minutes ago, davidsrsb said:

I don't see why removing attack stops vision. It makes it absolutely pointless to garrison them. In 0.25, walls have now become a waste of resources

Because they removed vision too

 

[Gurken Khan]

10 minutes ago, Angen said:

Because they removed vision too

I think it's just wrong and vision should be added again. (All other points aside.)

[Freagarach]

Or something like https://code.wildfiregames.com/D2769 which I would prefer.

[Ceres]

Is it "only" arts to be adjusted, so units can be garrisoned from all civs, or are there other obstacles? I like the possibility to garrison them there very much, as well as how it looks. Maybe garrisoned women can spill hot water or oil on enemies?

Maybe just 2 minor comments about the looks:

The silhuettes here look as if the men wear stockings. Is it necessary to show silhuettes if there is no roof? I know that silhuettes can be toggled on/off, but that's always for the whole game.

The red rings of selected units are projected to the ground but only visible when that gate is open. The rings are not very helpful here, IMO.

[Freagarach]

On 05/09/2021 at 8:34 AM, Ceres said:

The red rings of selected units are projected to the ground but only visible when that gate is open. The rings are not very helpful here, IMO.

Limitations of a 2D 3D game.

[Hidan]

hi i am use the latest svn version and i can´t put units on the wall towers (only inside). How to set units on the roof of wall towers? Doors and walls work fine.

[Silier]

Units on the towers are not committed to the svn. It is only as proposal right now.

[Ceres]

And I understand that changes to several arts (e.g. higher roof tops of certain civs' wall towers) are needed besides code, right?

[Silier]

Yes,

also some towers need roof to be removed

[davidsrsb]

I like the idea of placing the units on the top. Ranged weapons can have a height advantage. Hacking weapons only can attack a future addition of siege towers.

All including women can use vision with height advantage.

The tower can give strong armour against hack from ground level and some armour against ranged weapons

[davidsrsb]

To keep balance better and add a new feature, how about ladders as an addition to rams. These would not have an attack of their own, but allow hack troops to attack defenders on the wall top and capture wall sections?