Good Siege Army

[MasterCaruyn]

So which faction(s) is(are) optimal for sieges? In other words, whom should I bring to massive sieges with over 500 people?

 

[Fry]

For besieging someone else, your best bet is the Nord Huscarls. They're the strongest melee fighters with the best armor, and they'll tear through anything.
For siege defense, your best bet is the Rhodok Sharpshooters. Their deadly siege crossbows inflict a one-hit-kill on many units, and their pinpoint precision will allow them to pick off even the farthest of targets with ease.

(Note that if you bring Sharpshooters to an assault, they'll run out of bolts eventually and then sit there like sitting ducks. Sharpshooters on defense, however, will respawn bolts and can keep firing forever!)

 

[SpittingLlama]

For besieging someone else, your best bet is the Nord Huscarls. They're the strongest melee fighters with the best armor, and they'll tear through anything.
For siege defense, your best bet is the Rhodok Sharpshooters. Their deadly siege crossbows inflict a one-hit-kill on many units, and their pinpoint precision will allow them to pick off even the farthest of targets with ease.

(Note that if you bring Sharpshooters to an assault, they'll run out of bolts eventually and then sit there like sitting ducks. Sharpshooters on defense, however, will respawn bolts and can keep firing forever!)

I have to disagree with a few points here. Nord Huscarls are the second worst armoured top-tier infantry in the game, with Sarranid guards being the worst. They are still the best melee for siege offence though.

However even 100s of nord huscarls may not get you though a cities walls (if you are fighting other nords on hardest difficulty for example). The next option is to get as many rhodok sharpshooters as possible and shoot the defenders from the walls. When your troops run out of bolts, simply retreat and start the battle again.

For siege defence, nord huscarls are again probably the best, although I find it useful to mix in some vaegir guards or swadian sergants as they have longer ranged weapons.

vaegir archers are probably the best ranged unit for siege defence, as they have the highest overall dps, you don't need the range advantage of xbows, and don't worry about running out of arrows. Their one major drawback is that they are piss-poor in melee, and so sharpshooters can be picked for their versatility.

 

[SpittingLlama]

Oops double post. Stupid slow internets.

 

[MasterCaruyn]

Well thx for the replies. The problem is that I can't get Nords because I'm at war with them. So what I'm using now is Swadian sergeants and Rhodok sharpshooters.

 

[HolgerHardrada]

I think it really depends on the situation and castle.  I find for defense the best bet is to mix in both melee and archers.  I find rhodok sharpshooters best for siege defense since they dont run out of ammo so quickly, and rhodok sergeants/huscarls along with them.  If your castle has long windy approaches, its probably best to go with more archers, while if there is only a single ladder going up and its easy to block enemy troops (I think Uxkhal or suno is like this) then its probably best to go mostly infantry.

For offense, if you think you can take a castle with one go I would go mostly infantry, but if you're going to do multiple hit and run assaults go mostly archers (i prefer marksmen for this with fast rate of fire, then you can retreat after the volleys are over.)

 

[Nikolai Alexandre]

what I do is get tons of ranged units, (except swad xbowmen they suck) and just tell them to stand in a line before the castle and shoot.  Once their mostly out of ammo I retreat, and do the same the next day until they have 10 guys left and then charge.

 

[Landwalker]

So which faction(s) is(are) optimal for sieges? In other words, whom should I bring to massive sieges with over 500 people?

I'm going to echo the "Huscarls and Sharpshooters" mantra based on my recent experience with hit-and-run siege assaults.  My army consists of about half elite Nordic infantry and half elite Rhodok crossbowmen and I can fare quite well in protracted sieges.

Here's the thing about huscarls—They may not be the best-armored infantry in the game, but they do have the best shield for top-tier infantry (Huscarl Round Shields are big, have a lot of hit points, and have high damage reduction, so they can take a beating, especially if the enemy is an archer-heavy faction rather than crossbow-heavy), and if you're going to be standing around taking volley after volley, the shield is crucial.

My personal preference is to start the assault with everyone holding position and holding fire.  This way, your precious sharpshooters will break out their board shields instead of getting shot to pieces.  I then advance my Nord line towards the walls so that they draw all the fire into their shields, and advance my Rhodok line up behind them. Once everybody is in position, the archers get the go-ahead to fire at will and the defenders start dropping like flies (naturally, I help out in the archer line with my own siege crossbow).

Eventually, everyone will run out of ammunition (everyone on both sides). Once this happens, you can usually climb up the ladder on your own (shield in hand, just to be safe) and find dozens of crossbow bolts stuck into the top of the wall where the sharpshooters missed.  Just pick them all up and go back to doing your business, frequently from much closer range if the enemy is also out of ammo.  You can knock out an extra twenty defenders at least with this approach.  Only retreat once everybody on your side is out of ammunition and you're out of scavenging opportunities.  I don't know if it actually has any effect, but I seem to have better luck if I manually pull my army back to the edge of the map before ordering the retreat.

If Nord infantry isn't an option for you, there are other possibilities depending on how patient you want to be and how much of a role you want infantry to play in your assaults.  They don't have to play any role other than arrow-magnet, so if you want to let your crossbowmen do all the work you can probably just get away with Rhodok board-shield-wielding spearmen (don't upgrade them to sergeants or they'll lose the shields), since they'll have the largest and, perhaps, strongest shields available.  If you want your infantry to actually be useful, though, just in case the situation should arise, Swadian elite infantry is probably where I would turn—their heater shields are smaller, but they're strong enough; their armor is quite good; and if you need them to go up on the wall and cut a fool (or fight off an attempt to lift the siege), then they're quite capable of it.

 

[SpittingLlama]

^Even though rhodok sergeants get warhammers and glaives, in my 200 days with a rhodok-only army I have NEVER seen one use anything apart from cleaver+board or hammer+board. I do believe they change if the shield breaks, but they usually die long before it does.

And yeah, the auto-calc on retreat does factor distance to enemy. Don't like the random plains you got? Simply retreat at the start and reload until you get a good one.

 

[CriticallyAshamed]

They don't use glaives I noticed that too   makes me sad panda. Nothing quite like guys with deathbringingkillrapeslaughtermobile weapons and sweet stats.

 

[Felonious]

, but they do have the best shield for top-tier infantry (Huscarl Round Shields are big, have a lot of hit points, and have high damage reduction, so they can take a beating, especially if the enemy is an archer-heavy faction rather than crossbow-heavy)

Rhodok Sergeant here, mind if we have a word?

 

[pickled_heretic]

, but they do have the best shield for top-tier infantry (Huscarl Round Shields are big, have a lot of hit points, and have high damage reduction, so they can take a beating, especially if the enemy is an archer-heavy faction rather than crossbow-heavy)

Rhodok Sergeant here, mind if we have a word?

honestly it's not even a contest between huscarls and rhodok seargents, or any other infantry.  the huscarls will dominate every time.  look at the stats, look at the equipment, and test it for yourself in some mock battles.  huscarls are OP, even considering the nords only really have them and some weak archers for their top tier soldiers.

in fact, if you check the stats the rhodok sergeants are not really better than swadian sergeants.  they have inferior skills in every category except spears, and their other stats are vaguely comparable.

 

[Felonious]

You seemed to have missed my point there. I know all too well the inequity between Huscarls and Rhodok Sergeants (although I disagree with your point about Swadian Sergeants being stronger than Rhodoks, as Rhodoks are nearly impervious to ranged attacks, which actually was my initial point).
I've lost many-a-Sergeant to a Huscarl's axe.

My point was however, that you can say a Huscarl is better than a Rhodok at fighting, and that is probably true.
But one thing that the proud Rhodok's can do like no other soldier in the whole of Calradia, is stand on their own two feet, in front of whatever projectiles they are confronted with, and take a hit for the team.
Of course once they've taken that hit and all subsequent hits until their enemies stockpiles run dry, they slowly and surely march in to face their enemies in melee (and if this particular melee involves a Huscarl... then they're probably dead).
The Rhodok's shields, are truely second to none.

I have not deluded myself into thinking that Rhodok Sergeants are god's gift to infantry, but they are god's gift to my shield walls.

 

[pickled_heretic]

The Rhodok's shields, are truely second to none.

I have not deluded myself into thinking that Rhodok Sergeants are god's gift to infantry, but they are god's gift to my shield walls.

they really aren't. the huscarl shield has better mitigation while the rhodok heavy board shield has more hitpoints.  not only that, but the huscarl's shield skill itself is higher than the rhodok sergeant (admittedly only by a point, but every point makes a difference).

you can make arguments that one is better than the other, but there is no objective standard other than saying something like stat x is higher for the huscarl shield, stat y is better on the heavy board shield.

a more likely circumstance that is backed by my own observations is that they are both basically impervious to missile fire as long as they are facing the enemy, since after a certain level of shield skill and shield stats it won't matter too much, but then in all other cases the huscarl is better.

 

[Bears]

I bet a good choice is going with hussies and LOTS of rhodok sharpshooters. Place the hussies up front as tanks and sharpshooters at back for the ULTIMATE carnage. Watch how the defenders get their heads bolted in. When your army of destruction runs out of bolts just come back with another ladder and your bags mysteriously refilled. If it's a siege with a ramp then you should go for the straight attack with the hussies.

 

[Landwalker]

, but they do have the best shield for top-tier infantry (Huscarl Round Shields are big, have a lot of hit points, and have high damage reduction, so they can take a beating, especially if the enemy is an archer-heavy faction rather than crossbow-heavy)

Rhodok Sergeant here, mind if we have a word?

honestly it's not even a contest between huscarls and rhodok seargents, or any other infantry.  the huscarls will dominate every time.  look at the stats, look at the equipment, and test it for yourself in some mock battles.  huscarls are OP, even considering the nords only really have them and some weak archers for their top tier soldiers.

in fact, if you check the stats the rhodok sergeants are not really better than swadian sergeants.  they have inferior skills in every category except spears, and their other stats are vaguely comparable.

I believe (this is assumption on my part) that Felonious is disputing the assertion that Huscarls have the best shield, not that they are the best infantry soldier. Unfortunately, I do not think that this assertion is correct, either:

A standard Huscarl's Round Shield has 410 hit points, Resistance 19, Size 100, Speed 81, and 4.5 pounds.
A standard Board Shield has 430 hit points, Resistance 10, Size 85x143, Speed 81, and 4.5 pounds.

Thus, the net difference between them is:
20 HP in favor of the Board Shield
2,155 square units (centimeters?) of coverage in favor of the Board Shield, or 21.55% improvement over the Huscarl's Shield
Resistance 9 in favor of the Huscarl's Shield.
The Board Shield also, of course, cannot be used on horseback, but I suspect neither the Nords nor the Rhodoks much care.

I suppose an argument could be made either way, but if I'm heading into battle on foot, I want the shield that's going to last the longest.  That +9 Resistance for the Huscarl's Shield is a huge difference, and allows it to take much, much more punishment (from both weapons and sustained projectile fire) than the Board Shield.

Even when you move up to a Heavy Board Shield, the Huscarl's Round Shield still has a decisive advantage in damage resistance.

I still don't enjoy seeing a wall of board shields marching across the battle field at me, but of the top-tier shield-carrying infantry equipment, I'd rather be up against a board shield than a huscarl's shield.

 

[Felonious]

Hmmm, Seems I have my stats completely backwards.
I was going off the assumption that a top tier shield that can't be used on horseback, must have a considerable edge over one that can, that and my own personal experience.
I would however like to point out that your calculations on the size of the Huscarl's Round Shield seem incorrect.
Assuming that 100 refers to the diameter of the shield (if it refers to the radius then it would be almost 3 times the size of the Board Shield..... Which seems slightly unlikely) then the Board shield is in fact 4301 square units larger (12,155 as compared to 7854).
This is a nice amount, but definitely doesn't make up for the lower resistance and the Round Shield's horse compatability.

It seems logic has failed me again, or perhaps the game has failed logic.

 

[Landwalker]

I would however like to point out that your calculations on the size of the Huscarl's Round Shield seem incorrect.
Assuming that 100 refers to the diameter of the shield (if it refers to the radius then it would be almost 3 times the size of the Board Shield..... Which seems slightly unlikely) then the Board shield is in fact 4301 square units larger (12,155 as compared to 7854).

Ah, my mistake. For some reason (i.e. brain fart) I calculated the Huscarl's Shield surface area as if it were square. 

I wasn't able to quickly find top-of-the-line versions of the Board Shield (presumably a Reinforced Heavy Board Shield) and the Huscarl's Shield (Reinforced Huscarl's Shield), so the best-of-the-best comparison may move towards favoring the board shield. When I have some spare time in a while I'll give it a shot and see if anything changes, but since bog-standard infantry don't (to my knowledge) use such variants, it would likely only matter for the infantry leader rather than for the infantry themselves.

 

[pickled_heretic]

the area of coverage is practically a moot point.  at 6 and 7 shield skill respectively for the sergeant and huscarl, the shields for both soldiers are going to cover significantly more than their actual coverage states - a total coverage that probably extends well above the head, below the ankles, and wider across than the width of the entire model, regardless of what shield they use.  shield skill is also going to affect shield damage and mitigation which is going to render these discussions as worthless within the context we are speaking of.

 

[Thundertrod]

I like Hired blades There 2nd best at every thing, 130 wepon proficency. 5 power attack, athletics, shield, and iron flesh.
There heater shield armming sword combo is efecive. there base armer is not so good but there helament and boots are good. and thay don't care about your faction relations.