Ports

[The Faceless Hoplite]

Thought of this, gimme feedback. Ok, i think that when a city/town is besieged, if you blockade their port that should also decrease the number of turns they hold out for, and if not blockaded, famine shouldnt have as big an effect.

also famine should have more of an effect anyway, i mean, come on, but 3 guys out of each unit for 3/4 turns of seiging, please!!!

Keep cool

[-Abbey.keeper-]

i agree with you that the starvation effect to the garrison is insufficiently represented in the game. IMO the population should suffer a siege, expotenially if it's possible, to represent starvation.

however i had to disagree with the blockade theory as the cities are represented as inland and so it shouldn't be included as part of the siege factor.

it came into play at the siege of athens because the city walls are designed to include the port with the city and so the spartans are unable to cut their food sources.

my 2 cents

[Spoonfrog]

Yeah I think more could/should be done with ports... It would be good if they could:

-Have names (most of the ports on the campaign map are actual cities, not just ports)
-Have garrisons
-Have Buildings (eg: warehouse, shipwright, etc.)
-Undergo sieges (though I am not sure what would happen if one faction owned the port and another faction owned the city - perhaps you could only attack a port to destroy it, or capturing a port would just be like blockading a it, just from the landward side)

[Myrddraal]

That already happens, if you move an army onto an enemy port, it gets blockaded I think. This shouldn't be in the forge, off to the general forum.

[knoddy]

yes Myrddraal u r right if u move a land army onto an enemy port it will blockade the port just like if u blockade it with a naval army

[vale]

Yeah, I believes that port should be able to done more thing. For example they can also allow port to garison army in order to defense against blockaid? Anyway Amphibious Assault is cool too, that will be great in BI if they have that.