Does "Demand Surrender" ever work?

[napoleon526]

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.

[seireikhaan]

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.

[Skott]

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.

[Fisherking]

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.

[Phog_of_War]

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.

[seireikhaan]

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.

Actually, my surrender was a city.

[Prodigal]

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.

Beat me to it...Same number of times, same faction, exact same consequence.

[Prussian to the Iron]

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.

[napoleon526]

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?

[Belgolas]

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.

[antisocialmunky]

At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if it was just a randomized number generator rather than any rational algorithm.

[Servius]

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.

[Slaists]

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'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.

[antisocialmunky]

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.

[Vlad Tzepes]

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 )

[Servius]

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!

[TessHM]

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.

[Memnon]

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

[truth1337]

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.

[Erisono]

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