Results 1 to 30 of 72

Thread: Aggressive factions are unrealistic

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #6
    EBII Hod Carrier Member QuintusSertorius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    23,396

    Default Re: Aggressive factions are unrealistic

    I'm kind of more concerned about how unrealistic siege warfare is (thanks to the R:TW engine). In antiquity, most sieges went one of four ways: surrender before the first parallel was even dug or engine sited; treachery leading to the garrison being betrayed (and a large sum of silver changing hands); surrender because of starvation after a long blockade; or an accomdation reached between besiegers and defenders, with the former moving on and leaving the place unmolested. The number of sieges won by assault were extremely rare, because a properly sited fortification was just too costly to attack.
    Last edited by QuintusSertorius; 02-27-2011 at 16:48.
    It began on seven hills - an EB 1.1 Romani AAR with historical house-rules (now ceased)
    Heirs to Lysimachos - an EB 1.1 Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR with semi-historical houserules (now ceased)
    Philetairos' Gift - a second EB 1.1 Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO