Printable View
I try this all the time during sieges, but I have yet to have the enemy accept any of my demands for surrender. Has anybody ever been able to pull it off?
I'm also wondering what exactly happens if the enemy does surrender. I would guess that you gain the city with no loss and no damage to the buildings, which would save you some money rebuilding them.
Had it work once for me, against the Cherokee. Wasn't really worth it, because the tiny garrison was expelled into the country side, where they began raiding buildings. :wall:
I used to try it a lot but I havent bothered with it in a while now. Its broken as far as I'm concerned. Never worked once for me. :thumbsdown:
There was a thread about this a week or two back, where they said a fort surrendered.
But from everything I have seen it is rarer than AI naval invasions.
Right. Apparently the AI will surrender a fort but not a city.
And the enemy unit are placed just outside of your movement area and are free to raid farms, villages and trading land routes.
Beat me to it...Same number of times, same faction, exact same consequence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shinseikhaan
ive never got an enemy to surrender, no matter how doomed they are. in several battles my artillery alone could have killed every enemy soldier(which they ended up doing), but they didn't surrender. it seems they'd rather die ingloriously, mauled by shrapnel or burned alive, than surrender and live to fight anotehr day.
also: i think if they surrender they should retreat to the nearest settlement of their faction. and if they are not near one(such as spain with flanders),they must wait 2 turns before raiding or attacking, but they have a few more units.
Actually, my surrender was a city.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phog_of_War
It works extremely rarely, but it works. I've had city garrisons and forts surrender to my forces from time to time.
For those of you who have seen it, what was the numerical discrepancy? Is the enemy more likely to surrender if you have overwhelming numbers?
I had a city surrender. The A.I. nver builds forts. The stupid surrendering army gets a free pass to pillage. So I am never offering a surrender unless there is no garrason.
At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if it was just a randomized number generator rather than any rational algorithm.
The only time I ever had it work was during the RTI campaign. When the AI surrenders a town or fort, their forces should retreat to their nearest town. When they surrender a town, they should be auto-expelled to their nearest region the same way your forces get teleported when you give one of your regions to another nation.
I've always had superior numbers (at least 5:1) when surrenders happened. Randomization seems to be present though. At times, the defenders would surrender; most times they would not despite the odds stacked against them. Unlike others, I do not find this combination of algorithm (odds stacked against AI) + randomization (there is a CHANCE but not certainty that the AI will surrender if the odds are against the defenders) annoying.Quote:
Originally Posted by napoleon526
If that's the case, randomization should not overcome gameplay factors otherwise there is not point to strategy. It would be nice if it was linked to odds and town happiness, etc.
I know I'm off-topic with that, but I won't start a new thread just to say that I had a Cherokee unit retreat from the battlefield before making contact (the last remaining from other 6 that were destroyed). It's the first retreat from the battlefield I experience.
And, back on-topic, no, never had any besieged town/fort/whatever surrender, no matter the forces ratio. I still offer the option before any assault (I'm a good sport :laugh4: )
I just had it happen a few nights ago. As GB I had Morocco and invaded Grenada. I demanded the Spanish surrender and they did!
Never worked for me, not even when I had six groups of line infantry, four 24lb mortars, three 4" mortars, two Hussars and a number of conscripts lying around for novelty reasons againsts six firelock millitants
Before you ask I blew that place to smithereens
first time it worked in 6 campaigns!!!!!
full stack versus 4 mob units. surrendered after i asked it.
next turn: 2 mob units versus another full stack no surrender?
Here's a thought. Maybe the AI just won't ever surrender victory condition sites like they (usually) won't trade for them. The AI usually expands fairly terribly so I wonder if this has something to do with it.
i've never had it surrender an engagement in the field either however - no matter how badly outnumbered or outclassed...
...............................theres a surrender option in field battles?Quote:
Originally Posted by SMZ
but i dont think that helps us; playing world domination, which means they have only a few victory settlements, but they wont give up anything except for 1 settlement. ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by antisocialmunky
sorry - bad wording - i meant outside the capitol
I just had it happen again. The Cherokee just surrendered the capital of the region just south-southwest of Michigan to me and their garrison retreated towards Michigan.
Tactically, this is a good thing, as it allows me to take a region without incurring any losses. Strategically, it might not be such a good idea. Since my victory was certain, while I would have sustained some casualties, I would have wiped out the enemy force. Now that force can merge with a larger one, which will make the odds of my next fight less good.
however, you can now set up a fort i na tactical position that allows no army to get past you. then if they try to counter-attack, they will either have to attack a well-defended position, or be attacked from a preferrably uphill position.
also, now if you incur losses you can easily retrain them in the surrendered city. remember: unlike previous games, any unit can be re-trained in any city with a working barracks/ town center.
I've had a city surrender to me after a random straggling army outside the city attacked me, which drew out the garrison, which I crushed.
The garrison left in the city was tiny compared to my besieging force and they surrendered. As someone pointed out, it was kind of a waste since they were expelled rather than destroyed and went on to raid towns/etc in the region.
The one place i can see this being useful is if you really don't want to have to manually assasult the fortress (even with a small garrison in it) but don't feel like losing 1/3rd of your stack on autoresolve, which seems to give yo uenormous casualties regardless of how small the garrison inside is AND you don't feel like waiting for the siege to force their surrender.
Well, I know it does, since whenever I play as the Ottomans, I'm usually able to capture Russia's outer territories (Don Voisko, Tatariya, etc.) with an army of less than ten units by demanding the garrison's surrender.
It works quite well for me, actually. Only if it's against mib or depleted units though. I took most of India in one turn by concentrating and pre-emptively attacking, the Mughals never saw it coming... Mass surrenders in the south, only a few pitched battles against inferior numbers, but I caught their main army outside of Calcutta and destroyed it. The battle AI is worse in this game than in M2TW IMO
I always get demand surrender to work when the enemy garrison only consists of town guards, and I attack with a stack with over 8:1 odds. Only time it doesn't work for town guard only cities, is for huge cities where the number of defending units exceeds something like 8. I had one or two successful demand surrender against cities with 1 colonial militia or counterparts defending together with one or two town guards.
it works, BUT buildings damaged after "demand surrender", i have no idea WHY it happens ALL times, not just once, every time someone surrender to me buildings damaged, it's annoying
Empire Total War 1.5:thumbsdown: