[Tricon]

About the siege tower:

- Fair to high HP 60-80?
- Protection 6-8 or more (Depending on the time period, siege towers were armored and/or coated with a fire resistant mixture .. I do not have the name of it, though)
- no defence
- fire vulnerability
- high siege bonus
- low magic resistance
- high morale
- very low movement rate 1/3?
- average precision
- high cost (in gold.. I'n not sure if it can be considered resource heavy, but I leave that open to debate)
- probabably an archer attack (historicly siege towers were obviously very seldomly used in open battles. Usually these towers were built near the fortresses you wanted to siege. The most logical use in an open battle IMO would probably be as an archer platform. There are some reports that the romans used siegetowers as quick and easy towers for temporary forts.)

As for the chariots... well, I think the price is OK. They are mighty against independant militias and other light troops, but they have a very hard time against knights/heavy cavalry. Not to mention larger opponents like jotuns.

Inmy current game perhaps the biggest advantage of the OoL is a fast early expansion because of their good armors. However, nothing that a SC cannot do for any other nation as well. Against other nations, like Man or Jotuns (current borders) they're strugling. The Knights/knights of avalon or niffel giants are powerfull morale breakers. But that's to be expected of them. main point is... right now I think the OoL is very ballanced. A new unit like the siege tower would not change that if it's uses are limited or counterbalanced by weaknesses. SP and MP has to differentiated here, IMO. A unit suceptible to fire is a definite weakness in MP games (considering all the items and spells out ther, especially flaming arrows). In SP the AI is not as "fire happy" as most players. Overall something that shióuld be tested in-game a lot.