Sieges

[Matty]

Is there any way to lengthen the duration of a siege? I find this an annoying feature in that you can build a fortress and unless you man it with 25 peasants it still falls after a couple of years. Surely a small city of this size should resist starvation for a decade even with a sizeable defending force. It would also justify the creation of siege equipment which is currently rendered more or less irrelevant. I always try and role play storming the castle rather than parking an army outside for 3 turns.

Thoughts, anyone?

[macsen rufus]

* Build castle upgrades (not an option once you're fully teched up, though...)
* Use a smaller garrison (1 man garrison usually results in "won't fall without assault", but you're :furious3:ed when they do assault....)
* When besieged, sally and retreat. When you start a battle the enemy can't assault that year.
* There is a virtue along the lines of "skilled siege commander" (not to be confused with "skilled assault defender" which gives extra command during an assault) or somesuch, which I've only ever seen once on one of my generals, and I don't know how to 'farm' it either, but it did double the length of time a given garrison could hold out once I put him in charge. Very useful, though, if you have to leave a province undefended for a while.

I always assault, I just LOVE my artillery too much to wait it out :laugh4:

[Ludens]

As far as I know, no siege ever lasted longer than a decade. There is a limit to how long you can keep food, even if it is non-perishable. Therefor, I think it rather excesive if it takes three years to starve a small hill fort to surrender. Cities are even worse: there are simply too many people to feed, even if the storehoused are stocked to the limit.


There is a virtue along the lines of "skilled siege commander" (not to be confused with "skilled assault defender" which gives extra command during an assault) or somesuch, which I've only ever seen once on one of my generals, and I don't know how to 'farm' it either, but it did double the length of time a given garrison could hold out once I put him in charge.
I am afraid it cannot be farmed. Only historical heroes have these virtues.

[King Kurt]

I have often found that if the battle screen says the fort etc will fall immediately, it is better to fight, - unless it is close, I always autocalc in this situation - loose then retreat into the fort. The seige then seems to go on for a few years, often long enough for you to get support to the beseiged forces.

[Matty]

As far as I know, no siege ever lasted longer than a decade. There is a limit to how long you can keep food, even if it is non-perishable. Therefor, I think it rather excesive if it takes three years to starve a small hill fort to surrender. Cities are even worse: there are simply too many people to feed, even if the storehoused are stocked to the limit.


True.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sieges

But within the context of the game, there is usually no time to bring up siege equipment before the castle falls, hence making it more or less useless (although I endorse the prettiness of watching your cannons take the place apart) and also rendering the whole lengthy upgrading process useful only for the other building upgrades you then implement. So I role play allowing myself 1 year of sitting back and watching before I have to attack or quit the province. And I don't autocalc as for some reason the AI is very generous to the attacker in terms of casualties - its a bloody affair if I manage the attack (or for that matter defence) personally without siege equipment.....

The virtues of defending / attacking castles come from doing just that.

My 99 peasants and 1 jinette in their fortress will apparently be untroubled by their current besiegers for at least the next 8 years. I'll put the kettle on then....

[Mooks]

Yes, it is ridiculous.

In seiges, I usually carry a seige train right behind hte main army. When a seige does happen, I got enough cannons coming to tear any castle apart.

Its not good to starve a garrison out. The fortification will auto demote.

I have gotten a "Expert seige commander" It was win I had a army stuck behind enemy lines and kept on beating them over and over again in seiges, luckily I had enough mercs available to bring my now skilled commander out of there.

[Geezer57]

I like to use agents to break a siege whenever possible. When flush with cash, a pack of Emmissaries to bribe the enemy General is good (never send just one, 3 or 4 is much better). If it proves to be out of the question to bribe (enemy stubborn or cash lacking), I'll use my best spies (especially after receiving the "it is about to fall" message) to try opening the gates. Either way, you usually get the province with minimal damage, and can put it to work for your realm right away!

[Sensei Warrior]

Its not good to starve a garrison out. The fortification will auto demote.


By "auto demote" do you mean the fortification will automatically drop at least 1 level (like from Castle to Keep)? If you did, I wish I knew that earlier. I've never really paid attention to seiges, but if you're right then I'm going to start paying attention.

[Martok]

By "auto demote" do you mean the fortification will automatically drop at least 1 level (like from Castle to Keep)? If you did, I wish I knew that earlier. I've never really paid attention to seiges, but if you're right then I'm going to start paying attention.
Yes, holybandit is correct. If you siege out a castle, it will drop 1 level. Thus, if you were to lay siege to a fort until it fell, the next turn the province would no longer have a castle.

Quite a few players will siege a castle until the year before it's about to fall, and then assault it. That way they fight the smallest possible garrison, but sitll keep the castle at the same level.

[Sensei Warrior]

Arrgh, I wish I knew that earlier. I just starved out the garrison at Antioch, while playing the French in GA. Oh well, I'll just have to whip the serfs into action. :oops:

[matteus the inbred]

Arrgh, I wish I knew that earlier. I just starved out the garrison at Antioch, while playing the French in GA. Oh well, I'll just have to whip the serfs into action. :oops:

haha, yes, fallen foul of that one before now...good to have the autodemote confirmed.
Time to build Krak des Chevaliers: 16 years
Current Date: 1193
GA End Date: 1204
GA Goal: failed...damn.

I'm in favour of assaults if it's going to be more than 2-3 years of hanging about...especially with the Turks, I recently toted a 12-demicannon siege train around behind my Janissaries. No job too big, no wall too thick...

I will usually attempt to fight a battle in a province where I'm going to have to stand siege and use this to get the rubbish or a lot of the garrison killed, so that only a small force of elites has to stand a siege. Druzhina and suchlike, and specially hired mercs like pikemen, halberdiers, handguns and organ guns, are good for this.

[Archayon]

Yes, holybandit is correct. If you siege out a castle, it will drop 1 level. Thus, if you were to lay siege to a fort until it fell, the next turn the province would no longer have a castle.

Quite a few players will siege a castle until the year before it's about to fall, and then assault it. That way they fight the smallest possible garrison, but sitll keep the castle at the same level.


Does smashing walls during battle has an effect on the fortification level?

And can you reduce the amount of buildings being destroyed/damaged after a siege?



:idea2: Arch

[Marquis de Said]

Doesn't it seem quite ridiculous that if you assault a castle with ten cannons and pound it to dust, you still get it virtually intact after you capture it, but when you siege it until the garrison starves and surrenders, the castle gets autodemoted by one level?

And by the way, I think the autodemote means the fort will lose one improvement level, so if you have a citadel and a barbican, after it gets autodemoted, it will only have a citadel with no improvements. Did I get that right?

[Deus ret.]

edit: double post sry

[Deus ret.]

Doesn't it seem quite ridiculous that if you assault a castle with ten cannons and pound it to dust, you still get it virtually intact after you capture it, but when you siege it until the garrison starves and surrenders, the castle gets autodemoted by one level?

~:confused: in my experience castle level demotes very much independent of starvation oder an assault (i.e. it demotes in 90% of the cases)....the only reliable exceptions being either a spy or a bribe.


And by the way, I think the autodemote means the fort will lose one improvement level, so if you have a citadel and a barbican, after it gets autodemoted, it will only have a citadel with no improvements. Did I get that right?

Indeed this could be a good explanation for those cases where a castle isn't demoted in level ....it seems rather to suffer in improvements. This would fit well to what happens if you conquer a 'vanilla' fortification and it demotes; the downgraded castle usually has maximum improvements, the castle itself thus being treated itself as an improvement ....no wait :inquisitive: ~:confused:

BTW how does the AI manage to conquer more or less intact provinces always? Or is it just a handicap for the player?

[Martok]

Does smashing walls during battle has an effect on the fortification level?

And can you reduce the amount of buildings being destroyed/damaged after a siege?
1.) No, destroying walls does not lower the level of the fortification. (Ironic, I know; you'd think it would!)

2.) If I understand your second question correctly, then the answer is "no". The number of buildings you pillage/destroy when taking a province appears to be randomly assigned (although I do sometimes suspect it might be partially dependent on the size of your attacking army).



And by the way, I think the autodemote means the fort will lose one improvement level, so if you have a citadel and a barbican, after it gets autodemoted, it will only have a citadel with no improvements. Did I get that right?
Actually, in your example I believe the citadel would go all the way back to a castle once it fell to your troops. I can't say that for certain, however, as the AI doesn't seem to build castle improvements very often (at least in my games).

[Martok]

BTW how does the AI manage to conquer more or less intact provinces always? Or is it just a handicap for the player?
To what are you referring, Deus? Most of the time, I see the AI factions grind each other into hamburger more often than not. When I invade a province, I can usually tell if their (now former) owners took it from someone else in the fairly recent past. Its castle and infrastructure won't be built up very much yet--there *might* be a keep there, if the faction had some money to spare.

[Vladimir]

One thing I can tell you is that if you have a faction leader trapped in a castle, always autoresolve assault. I did this a couple times in VI against the Scots and ransomed the king back twice. If you fight it out yourself or let him starve you don't get the money. It sort of makes sense historically as well.

[macsen rufus]

It sort of makes sense historically as well.

Hmmm, I'm sure Bohemond of Taranto would have liked the "autoresolve" option at Antioch, but historically I don't think he did.... :book:

But I do get your point, as siege assaults usually see the defenders fight to the death. I very, very, very rarely ever have any captives if I fight the assault in person.

I find it very irritating that my forces trash the province I've just taken because it's nicely teched up, only to find "6 facilities destroyed, 6 facilities damaged" and the inhabitants back living in caves and using flint weapons. When you need the tech, spies and emissaries are the best way to go.

[Archayon]

But I do get your point, as siege assaults usually see the defenders fight to the death. I very, very, very rarely ever have any captives if I fight the assault in person.




It does work when you do it like this:

1) Smash some walls
2) Put a horse archer/fast archer unit in the gap, some decent infantry/pinning unit on both sides of the wall next to the gap, and some other high attack units a bit furder.
3) Shoot some with the HA, let them charge you...
4) Carefully retreat, making sure the defenders leave their castle. The little trick it not to place the pin units too close to the gap, because they might frighten the defenders.
5) When the defendes are far enough out of their castle, close the gap with the pinning units.
6) With a closed castle (your pin units are the gate), it looks like a normal battle (but you are under fire a bit). Make prisoners then... They will root faster because they are cut off from their castle.


It worked several times for me, especially when the castle is not too big, like a castle or fortification (it takes a while, and your troops remain under fire).


edit: i think somehow, defending in a castle has such a HUGE morale boost units just doesn't rout at all. The solution is getting those defenders OUT of their castle.

:idea2: Arch

[Vladimir]

Hmmm, I'm sure Bohemond of Taranto would have liked the "autoresolve" option at Antioch, but historically I don't think he did.... :book:

But I do get your point, as siege assaults usually see the defenders fight to the death. I very, very, very rarely ever have any captives if I fight the assault in person.

I find it very irritating that my forces trash the province I've just taken because it's nicely teched up, only to find "6 facilities destroyed, 6 facilities damaged" and the inhabitants back living in caves and using flint weapons. When you need the tech, spies and emissaries are the best way to go.

Any king with his wits about him, surrounded and cut off from all reinforcements would surely surrender with the hope of being ransomed. I just hope the spies in M2 give you a decent chance to take the castle/town without all the infrastructure damage. We all know how much troops like to pillage.

[macsen rufus]

@ Archyon - I like your six-point plan. It shows I've let my siege assaults get a bit stale and repetitive, and have devolved to a two point plan.

1. Empty all my artillery into any walls/towers still standing
2. Send in the killers and massacre the enemy

I ought to use the sort of finesse I use in field battles, I suppose, but always feel the pressure of time limits is more with an assault. Normally I don't let any cavalry get anywhere near a castle due to all the arrows flying around, so hadn't tried the HA technique... :2thumbsup:

In fact I think it's even affected my strategy - I normally only have the enemy king under siege when it's his last province and there's no chance of ransom anyway. Maybe I should try harder to catch him sooner in the campaign!

[Deus ret.]

To what are you referring, Deus? Most of the time, I see the AI factions grind each other into hamburger more often than not. When I invade a province, I can usually tell if their (now former) owners took it from someone else in the fairly recent past. Its castle and infrastructure won't be built up very much yet--there *might* be a keep there, if the faction had some money to spare.

I can't help, I seem to make strange observations all the time :embarassed: ....but one of the most constant observations in my games is that in most cases when a province changes ownership between AI factions it suffers no or rather neglectable damage - if it's taken either by assault or starvation doesn't matter here.
Since I tend to keep a lot of spies/emissaries in enemy provinces to be aware of the general development on the map, it shouldn't be too hard to prove. ....except that I'm playing HRE now and everyone else seems to attack only me.:dizzy2: damn it but I'll try and post some screenies in due time.

Of course, if AI factions battle each other over a longer time span and provinces change ownership often, their infrastructure suffers, albeit in a rather snail-like manner --- say, ~3 AI conquests match 1 of mine in terms of destruction.

Again I can't help, it's the way my games are :shame:

[Martok]

Sorry man, I wasn't trying to imply you were lying or anything, but now I realize that's how I sounded. My apologies, Deus ret. :shame: I need to remember that everyone's games are different. Goodness knows I myself have run across some pretty weird stuff in MTW that no else has encountered! :laugh4: :inquisitive:

[Deus ret.]

@Martok ~:) np