Breaking through seiges is too punishing

Users who are viewing this thread

The casualty figures are just too damn high for them to be worth it, all those casualties seem to be deaths with no wounded, the influence of my tactics skill is seemingly nonexistent, and the enemy doesn't see a consummate loss. Additionally for small parties it should be possible to sneak in undetected. Basically the same system that hostile cities use, only inverted.
 
Well techincally the game says that all you're doing is creating a distraction. In my mind I see my chosen soldiers sorry, heroes, running out of the castles front gate completely naked running away shouting "weeeeeee look at meee look at meeee!" while getting pincushioned and trampled from the enemy long enough for me to leave so I can scoop up that sweet deal going on in Iyaski's markets. 6 denari is an incredible price for fish!
 
Well techincally the game says that all you're doing is creating a distraction. In my mind I see my chosen soldiers sorry, heroes, running out of the castles front gate completely naked running away shouting "weeeeeee look at meee look at meeee!" while getting pincushioned and trampled from the enemy long enough for me to leave so I can scoop up that sweet deal going on in Iyaski's markets. 6 denari is an incredible price for fish!
The entire point of a siege is to stop things from getting in and out.

These are fair points, but I would contend that a small party in the dozens being able to sneak past a besieging army with some luck is entirely plausible. Or at least bypass the bulk of the force and have to make a run for it under the cover of the allied fortifications. For larger forces I agree, although a skilled tactician should know how to create diversions that don't sacrifice a quarter of their army without inflicting any casualties on the enemy. Simply detaching some skirmishers would be enough, and even if wiped entirely out the enemy would still have taken losses in doing so. I do think that baggage train needs to be counted though. Smuggling in a few dozen troops? Plausible. Smuggling in a few dozen troops each riding a horse and leading a large stud loaded down with enough goods to supply a small army for the better part of a year? Not so much... The quality of the besieging forces is an important factor too. A mediocre siege commander with manpower shortages will have difficulty maintaining a total blockade. The reincarnation of Alexander the Great leading a 5000 strong army? That place is airtight. Quality of defenses would be a factor too. Stronger defenses means the blockade has to be more distant and cover a larger area, making it easier to breakthrough via local local superiority, since by the time the entire army has converged the assailants could already be long gone.

In general small breakthrough attemps would make for a more engaging siege system overall. Small engagements where a group of soldiers are trying to sally out and sabotage your blocade, or a caravan trying to sneak past and smuggle supplies into the settlement being caught, and a small sortie being made by the garrison to secure those supplies.
 
Smuggling in a few dozen troops? Plausible. Smuggling in a few dozen troops each riding a horse and leading a large stud loaded down with enough goods to supply a small army for the better part of a year? Not so much... The quality of the besieging forces is an important factor too. A mediocre siege commander with manpower shortages will have difficulty maintaining a total blockade. The reincarnation of Alexander the Great leading a 5000 strong army? That place is airtight. Quality of defenses would be a factor too. Stronger defenses means the blockade has to be more distant and cover a larger area, making it easier to breakthrough via local local superiority, since by the time the entire army has converged the assailants could already be long gone.
I am curious to know how they calculate the casualties in these instances.
 
Back
Top Bottom