Doofus
Sergeant
1) - If you are the attacker, almost always one of the last targets for your troops is the enemy siege engines. Why? This makes no sense. The Siege engines are generally the most deadly defenders. They should be the first target after you have a foothold on the walls. A good example was a battle I had yesterday where the defenders had 300+ troops and 1 catapult. The last 3 defenders standing were the 2 troops manning the catapult and an archer that happened to be at the same tower. This makes absolutely no sense.
2) - When there is a battering ram and the AI controls the attackers (as an example, if my character was already brought down), the attackers can take the walls (with siege towers or ladders) and then they just sit there waiting until the battering ram has destroyed the main door AND the attackers have taken down the 2nd door. Instead of actively attacking the defenders they just sit there on the wall while enemy archers pick them off, occasionally even being hit by catapults. Why? They've succeeded in taking the walls. Its a foothold inside the castle/town and they should be expanding their control from that spot, not sitting there waiting to be killed.
3) Most of the time, I find that if you are using ladders or siege towers, your troops mostly congregate on one side or the other, not evenly split. Many times, if they gain control where the majority of attackers are then the next spawn of troops goes to the other side where they have to battle harder instead of easily gaining the walls where they already have control. Then they lose the control they have because the spot they controlled was not reinforced. By what logic do you not go to where you can get to the walls easily, then expand your control from that point?
4) In any battle, siege or field, when the player leads or is part of an army, the player seems to get a smaller percentage of troops in play in the early stages of the battle and frequently has less actual numbers of troops on the field than his fellow lords. This makes no sense to me as most times (after the early stages of the game) the player has one of the largest parties and has, on average, the strongest troops in play. It seems to me that in a real battle the leader would set an example by leading his troops in the battle with a higher percentage and it also seems that the most experienced troops would be the first in battle as they would be the least likely to panic and run. From a game standpoint, while having more of my troops in play would, admittedly, mean more losses for me, ultimately it would mean less losses for the rest of the army, in general, and the army as a whole would need less replenishment after battle (assuming it wins). The enemy usually has its best troops fighting first and in a somewhat even battle they devastate the rest of my army, who sends a lot of weak troops first. In the early stages of battle I find I have 5-10 troops on the field at once when my fellow lords have 30-40. We lose a lot at those stages of the battle and are frequently down 100-200 in losses early. Then in the later stages when I'm getting 35-75 troops on the field at once we roll, can somewhat easily catch up, and win by a close margin even if the enemy has double the troops. While its kind of a good feeling that my personal party can roll over enemy troops so easily, it causes a lot of consternation early in the battle and it causes a lot of unnecessary losses to the player's army in general.
2) - When there is a battering ram and the AI controls the attackers (as an example, if my character was already brought down), the attackers can take the walls (with siege towers or ladders) and then they just sit there waiting until the battering ram has destroyed the main door AND the attackers have taken down the 2nd door. Instead of actively attacking the defenders they just sit there on the wall while enemy archers pick them off, occasionally even being hit by catapults. Why? They've succeeded in taking the walls. Its a foothold inside the castle/town and they should be expanding their control from that spot, not sitting there waiting to be killed.
3) Most of the time, I find that if you are using ladders or siege towers, your troops mostly congregate on one side or the other, not evenly split. Many times, if they gain control where the majority of attackers are then the next spawn of troops goes to the other side where they have to battle harder instead of easily gaining the walls where they already have control. Then they lose the control they have because the spot they controlled was not reinforced. By what logic do you not go to where you can get to the walls easily, then expand your control from that point?
4) In any battle, siege or field, when the player leads or is part of an army, the player seems to get a smaller percentage of troops in play in the early stages of the battle and frequently has less actual numbers of troops on the field than his fellow lords. This makes no sense to me as most times (after the early stages of the game) the player has one of the largest parties and has, on average, the strongest troops in play. It seems to me that in a real battle the leader would set an example by leading his troops in the battle with a higher percentage and it also seems that the most experienced troops would be the first in battle as they would be the least likely to panic and run. From a game standpoint, while having more of my troops in play would, admittedly, mean more losses for me, ultimately it would mean less losses for the rest of the army, in general, and the army as a whole would need less replenishment after battle (assuming it wins). The enemy usually has its best troops fighting first and in a somewhat even battle they devastate the rest of my army, who sends a lot of weak troops first. In the early stages of battle I find I have 5-10 troops on the field at once when my fellow lords have 30-40. We lose a lot at those stages of the battle and are frequently down 100-200 in losses early. Then in the later stages when I'm getting 35-75 troops on the field at once we roll, can somewhat easily catch up, and win by a close margin even if the enemy has double the troops. While its kind of a good feeling that my personal party can roll over enemy troops so easily, it causes a lot of consternation early in the battle and it causes a lot of unnecessary losses to the player's army in general.
