Jump to content

Did they say anything about seiges?


Lighthope
 Share

Recommended Posts

I don't recall if they said anything about revamping the benefits of sieges.

In KoH1, sieges were practically worthless for an attacking army.  All they did was give the defenders time to call in reinforcements.

There was no benefit to maintaining a siege.

Any word of a re-work?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/10/2021 at 8:39 PM, Lighthope said:

All they did was give the defenders time to call in reinforcements.

 

 

But it isn't supposed to receive a benefit by maintaining a siege. 🙂

And isn't this the purpose of a castle? To buy time, call reinforcements, etc?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zaza said:

But it isn't supposed to receive a benefit by maintaining a siege. 🙂

And isn't this the purpose of a castle? To buy time, call reinforcements, etc?

Yes, a castle was built to give time to call in reinforcements.

But with the option of the attacker to just attack, what benefit is there to the attacker to siege?  Why not just attack right now?

Historically, an attacker would besiege a castle in the hopes that they would just give up without a fight.  Many times, a deal was struck between attacker and defender that if relief did not come within a certain amount of time, the defender would surrender.  This way, both attacker and defender would come out (relatively) unharmed.

In KoH, though, there is absolutely no benefit to the attacking side to siege.

M2:TW as this same problem.  I would siege a castle just long enough to build siege equipment and then attack.  Waiting was useless as the defender would always sally forth just before the timer expired.

There needs to be a benefit to the attacker for besieging.  Such as the defender should losing troops as the siege goes on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, frujin said:

Attacker has no benefit. They just need to prepare the attack and breach defenses enough ...

That is kind of the point I was making.  No benefit to the attacker, so why bother besieging beyond what you have to?

But I bow to your decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Arnold said:

The defenders' morale breaks when there is no food, just as with armies, so taking a starved town is way easier.

It's been a while, but if the timer (food) runs out, don't you just get the town?

Hence why the computer always comes out to fight before that happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.