In Progress "You are not in command of this siege"

Users who are viewing this thread

Version number
1.1.5.21456
Branch
Main
Modded/unmodded
No, I didn't use any mods.

shrapnel360

Recruit
Summary: I started a siege on Argoron, built trebuchets and destroyed their defensive weapons. Another army joins me and now it says "You are not in command of this siege" when I try to initiate an attack. It seems that the siege was stolen from me by the AI, and now I'm just stuck here and nothing happens.
How to Reproduce: Start a siege, wait for AI commander to join, lose command of the siege.
Have you used cheats and if so which: No
Scene Name (if related):
Media (Screenshots & Video):
Computer Specs:
OS: Windows 10
GPU: Nvidia 3080
GPU Driver Version: Geforce game ready driver version 531.41
CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
RAM: 32GB
Motherboard:
Storage Device (HDD/SSD): nvme ssd
 
Hey, our team is aware of this issue and working on it. Thank you for your time and sorry for the inconvenience.
 
This is intended as the joined NPC'S are generally the commanders of the faction or the ranks are high than the player.

 
If this is intended, then why did I only get 1% of the loot once the siege ended in victory? Why wasn't my contribution of many days and resources to the siege factored into the renown/loot calculations at the end? Surely this should amount to something?
 
What he's saying is that its intended that the highest ranking clan (leading an army) commands the siege. In real life, that makes sense as the highest ranking commander would take control of the siege when he arrives. As far as the % of loot, I think (not sure) thats based on the % of kills/disabled your party is responsible for, possibly combined with the level of the troops your party kills/disables. Not that this is based on your party, not your full army.
 
What he's saying is that its intended that the highest ranking clan (leading an army) commands the siege. In real life, that makes sense as the highest ranking commander would take control of the siege when he arrives. As far as the % of loot, I think (not sure) thats based on the % of kills/disabled your party is responsible for, possibly combined with the level of the troops your party kills/disables. Not that this is based on your party, not your full army.
But what I'm saying is that the effort I put into destroying the enemy defenses should factor into the reward calculation, because that would make sense in real life, too. 10 days of siege, destroyed walls, and attrition on their army. Why would I not be rewarded for that?
 
I understand what you are saying and don't disagree with it. I'm just explaining what happens. For me the bigger concern is when you outnumber the enemy 10-1 or more and the new commander decides to sit there for days and days after arriving. The game takes too long to win as it is I don't need it lengthened unnecessarily.
 
Again though, what Marda addressed is that its intended that the higher level commander takes control of the siege. You brought up the % of the loot after Marda's response. Thats 2 different (although somewhat related) topics.
 
This is really annoying I outnumber them by far and want to go in before they have any defensive siege ready, in comes my "ally" and block me from initiating the attack. This is a stupid mechanic (if this is as intended), whoever gets there first should stay in command. I hope this gets fixed as it happend to me twice just today. I just hate seeing "You are commanding the besiegers" and when I hover over "Lead an assault", it just says "You are not in command of this siege". Please make up you mind game. Well, to summarize, I +1 this bug. Should be fixed. Hopefully in 1.2?
 
Yea, this is a silly mechanic. This even happens even when you are the most powerful party.

I am sieging a castle with 320 of my own men, along comes some dinky 100 man 'army' and steals my siege. No, thanks... I will pull out and let them fight the 250 defenders alone.
 
Nicht nur das in einem Angriff Bugen einzelne Angreifer in die Wand rein oder unter die Treppe oder sowas ist mir nemlich auch schon aufgefallen
 
Back
Top Bottom