A little thing I'd like to see in sieges...

**Sfwartir** · 06-17-2005, 14:18

I see Sarcasm is the last person so far to have an opinion on the thread issue, so thanks for that Sarcasm. Joe mentioned the hard-coded issue. I believe that even though we can't do anything with what is hard-coded right now, doesn't mean we'll never be able to. Who knows, maybe CA will make some things not-quite-so-hard-coded some day. Or even better (and a lot more likely), maybe someone will figure out a way to un-hard-code

things in the near future.
A small spot or two on each wall length, where the player can choose to put his/her artillery i f he/she wants to, is all we need really. Maybe the deployment spot(s) don't necessarily have to be a part of the wall itself? It must be within the deployment area of the fortress garrison though, for obvious reasons.

Some other issues I'd like to raise when it comes to siege/sallies:

1#I think it should be possible for a defender to deploy forces outside of the walls, no matter the size of the walls, when choosing to sally forth (not when the besieger assaults, though). It takes forever to move one's army out of the city as it is now (vanilla). Guess this is hard-coded too.

2#Would it be possible to add a sort of earthwork line around the besieged walls, perhaps midway between the walls and the "thin red line"? It could act as circumvallation(sp?) lines built by the besiegers (anyone understand what I mean?). It would have to be quite high, perhaps the height of a infantryman x2, but of course easily possible to pass across.

3#It has been mentioned in antoher thread that the fact that you can sally forth as many times as you like per turn in vanilla is a bug. If it is a bug, it's a bug that makes the game more historically correct, and should be left in. Raids on a besieging army was indeed common, and has been so since people started sieging each other. Raids such as these were commited on a nearly daily (or should I say nightly) basis during a siege, with varying results of course, but it did happen. It could be from 10 to 500 (or more) men, depending on the size of the besieged city/settlement, that went outside to attack siegeworks, harass the enemy, kill off horses or soldiers/dignitaries. Sometimes, such raids were used as diversions, making it possible for the besieged to muster its army and attempt a breakout. So I say it's in.
With each turn being 6 months, you actually could sally forth roughly 180 times each turn and it would still be historically correct.

Anyway, I feel we've established that counter siege artillery is not entirely out of time frame, and that's at least a start.

On the other discussion raging on this thread, I don't mind it being here. I wish it would focus more on the horrible ( H o r r i b l e I tell you!) Orlando Bloom tho'

**eadingas** · 06-17-2005, 14:24

The problem with #1 and #2 is this:
in the engine, the "city border" (the deployment line for defenders) = city walls. You can change the border through some fiddling, but only if there are no walls defined. If there are walls defined in the settlement plan, they override any border settings you might have. If there are no walls, you can probably make entire battlefield a defender's deployment zone, but then.. you have no walls. Unless we make some artificial wall-like buildings, but they will never work like "real" walls, they will simply act as unmovable obstacles.

**bodidley** · 06-17-2005, 22:10

Another thing I'd like to see in sieges is the ability to break out and retreat. I bet that one's going to be a long time coming though...

**Sfwartir** · 06-25-2005, 05:55

Originally Posted by bodidley

Another thing I'd like to see in sieges is the ability to break out and retreat.

Yes, that would be interesting too. If you manage to get your garrison across the thin red line, you loose the city but maintain your (full strength) army. Good suggestion!

**GoreBag** · 06-25-2005, 06:10

Originally Posted by eadingas

The problem with #1 and #2 is this:
in the engine, the "city border" (the deployment line for defenders) = city walls. You can change the border through some fiddling, but only if there are no walls defined. If there are walls defined in the settlement plan, they override any border settings you might have. If there are no walls, you can probably make entire battlefield a defender's deployment zone, but then.. you have no walls. Unless we make some artificial wall-like buildings, but they will never work like "real" walls, they will simply act as unmovable obstacles.

That's not quite true. You can deploy troops outside of your walls as long as the walls are the thin, wooden kind. Granted, they need to be really close to the walls, but they're outside.

**eadingas** · 06-25-2005, 10:33

I do believe this is only because for the engine, they are still "within" the walls, because wooden walls are thinner and do not fill the entire area designed for walls.

**Simetrical** · 06-26-2005, 05:27

Originally Posted by eadingas

I do believe this is only because for the engine, they are still "within" the walls, because wooden walls are thinner and do not fill the entire area designed for walls.

Hmm . . . I wonder if it would be possible to model walls with an offset? Like, with "null space" of some kind on the outside? Maybe that could persuade the engine to let you deploy outside the walls?

-Simetrical