How come when I join an army siege, my troops are always on the front lines and take most of the casualties?

[Lord Irontoe]

Every time I join an allied siege attack, its my own troops that wind up on the front lines pushing the battering rams and siege towers. They're always the first up the ladders and end up taking the heaviest casualties. I can have the smallest army of the group and I still take twice as many casualties as the next guy. If I can't actually control anyone in the siege, then I'd appreciate not having my guys be treated as meat shields by my so-called friends. Here I am trying to help and instead I'm getting taken advantage of.

 

[MostBlunted]

It would also make sense that when you join an ongoing assault, that your troops are not the first ones to charge.

 

[Lord Irontoe]

It would also make sense that when you join an ongoing assault, that your troops are not the first ones to charge.

I wonder if that's what I'm doing wrong because its when I join a siege that's already started that my guys are always the first in. Is it different if I'm part of the attacking army?

 

[Delinard]

i think its because the game treats your party and the army as 2 seperate allies, so it distributes them equally, but if you were to join the army, it would divide all troops of all lords in that army, otherwise 50% of your men will be in that battle.

 

[NLCRich]

See my opinion is counter to this. I'd rather have my own troops out there because my allies troops are typically weaker. Especially on the field, if I had most of my troops I'd be able to make a much larger impact on the result of that battle.

It bothers me that if I just go in to help a large army, I just get a few of my troops and those are the only ones that I control in the battle (joining battle, not in army). When I take them to battle, the rest of my army comes in very gradually, and in the end I am left with a few cavalry versus the rest of their army on my own because the allies just suck.

However, I agree that as vassal in the army, the player doesn't really have any way to create effective tactics in battle and especially siege. This makes those battles even more annoying because you don't have any way to really help your own troops.

 

[Lord Irontoe]

What I really wish for is when you are joining an ongoing battle, your army spawns in as reinforcements with the battle already underway. Then you could assess the situation and send your guys in where they're needed. Plus it would make you feel like Gandalf charging down the hill to save the day.

 

[NLCRich]

What I really wish for is when you are joining an ongoing battle, your army spawns in as reinforcements with the battle already underway. Then you could assess the situation and send your guys in where they're needed. Plus it would make you feel like Gandalf charging down the hill to save the day.

YES!

 

[AfLIcTeD]

The player always seems to spawn with a lot more troops than their allies. Which is why you are losing so many. When in a battle look at the scoreboard and you will see.
Most of the time I will spawn with something like 100+ troops and each ally will have like 20-30.

 

[black_bulldog]

See my opinion is counter to this. I'd rather have my own troops out there because my allies troops are typically weaker. Especially on the field, if I had most of my troops I'd be able to make a much larger impact on the result of that battle.

It bothers me that if I just go in to help a large army, I just get a few of my troops and those are the only ones that I control in the battle (joining battle, not in army). When I take them to battle, the rest of my army comes in very gradually, and in the end I am left with a few cavalry versus the rest of their army on my own because the allies just suck.

However, I agree that as vassal in the army, the player doesn't really have any way to create effective tactics in battle and especially siege. This makes those battles even more annoying because you don't have any way to really help your own troops.

If the mortality rate weren't so high during sieges I'd agree but as things stand it puts you at a disadvantage when it comes to losing troops. If you have a bunch of crappy low tier troops fine or if you really need to up your medicine ok, but for me this is far from what I would call ideal.

 

[Stromming]

YES!

DOUBLE YES!

 

[Krow]

What I really wish for is when you are joining an ongoing battle, your army spawns in as reinforcements with the battle already underway. Then you could assess the situation and send your guys in where they're needed. Plus it would make you feel like Gandalf charging down the hill to save the day.

I believe that'd need the game to calculate everything going on with that siege in the background, which would take resources. Now imagine multiple sieges happening at the same time. However, I am sure they (the devs) can come up with a way that creates a scenario upon joining the siege and calculate everything on the loading screen. There can be about 10 fixed scenarios* and depending on the place, number of troops left on both sides... etc., it decides what you see and the progress you see when you finally join it. Your side might be already in the castle/town or might be taking heavy damage and dying before even breaching.

*scenarios meaning what you see when you join the siege assault and its progress

 

[NLCRich]

I believe that'd need the game to calculate everything going on with that siege in the background, which would take resources. Now imagine multiple sieges happening at the same time. However, I am sure they (the devs) can come up with a way that creates a scenario upon joining the siege and calculate everything on the loading screen. There can be about 10 fixed scenarios* and depending on the place, number of troops left on both sides... etc., it decides what you see and the progress you see when you finally join it. Your side might be already in the castle/town or might be taking heavy damage and dying before even breaching.

*scenarios meaning what you see when you join the siege assault and its progress

Right, I'd think they would just need to setup a number of different scenes based on the scenario. It would feel less random, but it could work.