Quote Originally Posted by DisruptorX
People will complain about anything. Seiges are the only thing that made RTW worth playing!
Sieges were greatly improved on MTW, but IMO were typically less fun that the field battles.

The worst sieges were those of settlements with wooden walls with the AI defending (they could be rather tense if you were defending as the walls were scant protection). They were ruined by the inexplicable way the AI would run its men ragged under fire before you breached the walls.

Sieges with stone walls were more fun (although large stone walls have a very annoying bug, whereby men cannot climb some siege towers). When the AI had a decent defending force (ie a lot of good armoured infantry - e.g. Romans), assaulting one would be a daunting proposition and in such a case, I'd prefer to starve the AI out.

However, when the AI was attacking stone walls, it often - at least under BI - tended to bring just a tower, a ram and some ladders. The ram usually caught fire and the single tower + set of ladders was silly when the AI often had a full stack or two, so could have brought more siege engines and brought its superior numbers to bear.

The implied criticism that everything else about RTW was not worth playing is quite wrong, IMO. Try one of the realism mods - the field battles can reach MTW quality. Have a look at some here:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=65721