Siege - possible to starve them out?

[Sir David of Derby]

Hey guys, I've got Kelredan Castle under siege and the food stores ran out a few days ago. I'm demanding surrender every day, but Jarl Gundur who owns the castle is inside with his 120-odd men, plus the 80-odd garrison. I can't take it by assault against those odds so I'm trying to siege them. Will they actually surrender due to starvation or will they just sit there forever?

 

[Morphine]

I don't think you can though I never tried in Warband. I tried it in M&B but they didn't surrender nor I had any advantage. In Warband a castle surrendered once. I captured it, lost it and was lying siege again and there was about 10 troops or so of the enemy garrison and I had about 140 and they surrendered. I have a high persuasion skill but it was the first and only time a castle surrendered. I think starving doesn't work at all, only numbers are important. Take into account that defenders get a x4 Bonus. So if there is a garrision with 100 Soldiers you need at least 400 to have an equal number but only if you and the enemy has equal troops.

 

[Sir David of Derby]

I've managed to get them to surrender through outnumbering them many a time. I like to sneak in and grab a castle when it's just fallen - but in Warband it seems to get a massive garrison from nowhere as soon as it changes hands.

Thanks for the quick answer. Anyone else know if you can starve the devils out?

 

[Millenium80]

This can be a tricky one- most times you'll find your food supplies running out long before your opponents. I have, however managed this once, as enemy lords kept attacking me with their armies full of recruits. This allowed me to loot nearby villages for more food. The main idea of starving them out, is that they will lose morale, and enemy troops will start to desert, lowering the defenses. You can either wait for them to surrender after they have about 1/3 of your troops, or just take it by force when the odds are in your favor.

 

[Sir David of Derby]

So they won't actually surrender from lack of food? They will lose morale and desert though? Interesting.

 

[NKatsyev]

My fear is that I'd spend twenty days working down their food supply and then an enemy army will show up and run me off, that's after me spending 2 weeks wages, not to mention food and all else.  It just seems a very costly way to go about taking a fortress.  Though I love the idea and potential of it...

 

[Morphine]

Once the food is empty they should surrender after a few days. In real they all would be dead in a week!

 

[Charlie Brooker]

Just need Taleworlds to add in the ability to catapult prisoners into the castle now.

 

[Sir David of Derby]

Once the food is empty they should surrender after a few days. In real they all would be dead in a week!

Does it actually happen though?

 

[Frisicus]

Once the food is empty they should surrender after a few days. In real they all would be dead in a week!

Without food people get cranky after a few days, after a week they get mean. However even after 2 or 3 weeks without food normal people are not dead yet (not taking into account sick/pregnant and otherwise weaker persons), though they might be thinking about it. 

 

[firey aeon]

only time that happened was when i took a castle, forgot to garrison it then an enemy lord captured it and left like 10 guys -.- then i rushed back and they just surrendered anyways, when ever i try to starve them out my other castle/citys get attacked all the time so i don't have much/any chance and they have like 20-100 days of food

 

[Cznielsen]

I was bored so I tried this.

It was 130 vs my 80 men, i stocked up my inventory all kinds of supplies and started to siege them.

After 30 days nothing really happened, I kept trying to make them surrender but it didn't really work.

Then after some days they actually surrendered on the cost that I didn't hurt them at all and letted them go.

EDIT: They had NO commander (No lord punishing deserters?)

 

[Morphine]

Once the food is empty they should surrender after a few days. In real they all would be dead in a week!

Without food people get cranky after a few days, after a week they get mean. However even after 2 or 3 weeks without food normal people are not dead yet (not taking into account sick/pregnant and otherwise weaker persons), though they might be thinking about it. 

That's right but I'm sure at least 25% will die. Not because they starved to death but they are weak and get sick fast and medieval times was the time of diseases. At the moment it makes no sense to wait until the food storage is empty. It's just waste of lifetime. Food storages should be halfed in my oppion.

 

[ramonb]

I haven't once captured a Castle, let alone a Town by starving them to death or surrender,
Like some guys here said,  surrender is possible when the enemy is brutally outnumbered, and there is no enemy Lord present.

Only way to carry enough food for a 30 day siege is to disband most of your army, say to less than 20 troops, then the Castle garrison will surely sally out and beat whatever crap you have left. (I'm not dumb enough to try that technique)

Seriously, Sieges are unrealistic and unbalanced.
- As Marshal or Leading Lord, there is no way to send another Lord to find meat or whatever food you need.
- You as Leading Lord or Marshal, cant order another Lord to continue the siege, while You "The Master" go shopping.
- Even though our troops can kill 1000+ men in a jiffy, they can't do hunting. (probably a mod could add hunting lessons at the training field)

- Never, since M&B have I seen a single Lord do a "starve to death" siege for 30 days, they usually attack or retreat after some days.
- Siege a town for 100 days is ludicrous, by then the war is will be over, won or lost. And You missed all the fun.

 

[The_Freeman]

I haven't once captured a Castle, let alone a Town by starving them to death or surrender,
Like some guys here said,  surrender is possible when the enemy is brutally outnumbered, and there is no enemy Lord present.

Only way to carry enough food for a 30 day siege is to disband most of your army, say to less than 20 troops, then the Castle garrison will surely sally out and beat whatever crap you have left. (I'm not dumb enough to try that technique)

Seriously, Sieges are unrealistic and unbalanced.
- As Marshal or Leading Lord, there is no way to send another Lord to find meat or whatever food you need.
- You as Leading Lord or Marshal, cant order another Lord to continue the siege, while You "The Master" go shopping.
- Even though our troops can kill 1000+ men in a jiffy, they can't do hunting.

- Never, since M&B have I seen a single Lord do a "starve to death" siege for 30 days, they usually attack or retreat after some days.
- Siege a town for 100 days is ludicrous, by then the war is will be over, won or lost. And You missed all the fun.

I have give this a +1.
The whole point of sieging a castle is that while your army can get supplies the sieged castle cannot, they really should give us something to carry on the siege without needing to fill our inventory with food.
Maybe asking a companion to take around 40 men and loot a nearby village? Or simply take a few men, go to the nearest village/city and buy some supplies.

 

[Aeon221]

Once the food is empty they should surrender after a few days. In real they all would be dead in a week!

Just because there's no food doesn't mean there's nothing to eat. There's still rats, dogs, cats, horses, bugs, shoes, ropes, bark (from trees), grass, leaves and mud!

And if the siege is still going on when the defenders are reduced to mud, there's always the non-essential limbs of other people -- preferably the dead ones!

Sufficiently obstinate or terrified defenders have been known to eat all of the above, as well as plenty of other even more unusual things. Hence their refusing to surrender out of hand after a mere week without food.

 

[Cznielsen]

Once the food is empty they should surrender after a few days. In real they all would be dead in a week!

Just because there's no food doesn't mean there's nothing to eat. There's still rats, dogs, cats, horses, bugs, shoes, ropes, bark (from trees), grass, leaves and mud!

And if the siege is still going on when the defenders are reduced to mud, there's always the non-essential limbs of other people -- preferably the dead ones!

Sufficiently obstinate or terrified defenders have been known to eat all of the above, as well as plenty of other even more unusual things. Hence their refusing to surrender out of hand after a mere week without food.

Sad....

 

[HunterAlpha1]

yep, there's always Long Pig 

 

[Zednix]

it would be great if starvation became an impacting effect in a future update, maybe eventually we will see a bit of catapult action going on too.

 

[wadedidit!]

In some other games I play, the longer you siege, the more enemy soldiers are hit by siege weapons and arrow and die.