Hello everybody!
TLDR: The Siege mechanics should be deepened so that they act as battlefields where both the attacking commander, and also the defending commander will come to shine. This could look like the murder scheme system where "dots" are filled after each successful phase. The defenders will attempt to counter this by using their defense tactics and if successful the "dot" won't be filled. The attackers win when all "dots" have been filled. In essence, a dot is filled when the attackers make progress and the defenders fail to stop them.
How the "dots" from schemes look like: https://forumcontent.paradoxplaza.com/public/515775/ongoing murder scheme USABLE.PNG
Introduction:
In Crusader Kings 2 you spent a lot of time besieging provinces. Occupying territory was one of the primary ways to win wars. However, the system was less than inspiring. Indeed, the "timer" would progress by a set amount every 12 days or so, and it paid no heed to who defended the castle. It was just a matter of waiting the needed time..
I think another system should be created. One which is more interesting where different tactics matter. The besieging commander will obviously play a big role in taking down the castle. However the defending commander - who was completely ignored in CK2, should also play a role. For it hardly makes sense that my stellar commander, who defends my bastion, is as skilled as an inbred farmer at defending the castle.
The proposed siege system:
The system could look like your system for scheming a murder with progression "dots". The more fortified the castle is the more "dots" will need to be filled. Depending on technology, siege weaponry and the siege commander different tactics could be used which potentially could fill more than 1 dot at a time. The castle defenders will naturally try to repel the attackers thus removing any attempt to "fill" the dots at that attempt.
It could look like these examples:
Siege army:
Decides to build proper mobile shields to cover the soldiers while they fill the moat.
Defending army:
The defender, commanded by an unproven rookie, decided to remain on the walls, his archers unable to find many targets.
Result:
Since the defending commander was an incompetent rookie he didn't know what to do. He elected to just stay on the walls, which allowed the enemy to create a path for siege towers. A more prepared commander might have used mangonels (if at disposal) or maybe sallied out to disrupt the attackers, making them easy targets for the archers.
The defending rookie commander has now been replaced with your own character who returned home to defend his family. He is (of course) great at commanding. It could now look like this:
Siege army:
Decides that the gate is the best point of entry and storms the gate with a ram.
Defending army:
The defenders realize what happens. They orderly concentrates their forces around the gate and pour boiling tar onto the attackers.
Result:
The attack made no progress and therefor they didn't fill the next "dot".
And my last example:
The great siege commander decides to:
Feint an attack from both sides of the castle. Though one side is made of mainly strawmen attached to spears. In reality he focus his attack on just one side.
The defending commander:
Splits his army in two equal parts, completely falling for the ruse.
Result:
The walls on one side of the castle has been completely overrun and the attackers manages to cling on to several towers. This fills two dots because of how great the tactic worked. The castle is now even closer to falling.
Naturally, different tactics will be available the better the besieging/defending commander is which will greatly help attack/defend the castle.
You could even argue that the defenders should be able to retake "dots" by for instance pushing the attackers out of the city. In this way siege battles will become battlefields too where the commanders will use different tactics. It also means that a capable castle commander can bog down the enemy for a long time while weak commanders might make stupid blunders or cave-in without much fighting.
Conclusion:
Events will make better sense; it's no longer just an annoying event of the defenders sallying out successfully against the worlds' best commander who apparently was too stupid to create a proper camp. No, now the sally might be repelled exactly because he is the greatest siege commander. Or maybe one of the best generals on the defender side managed to repel the attackers from the walls. As always, the defenders are limited on time, supplies and soldiers. Though, strong fortifications and a good commander will make supplies and man power matter and last a lot longer. Hopefully such a system will make it more interesting than merely looking at a bar ticking down. It will also visualize the struggle over the castle.
Alright, I won't risk repeating myself (too much) and thus make my post boring. I hope such a system will make it into the game so that strong fortification truly will get to shine and make sieges something interesting and also a viable strategy to hunker down.
With Best regards
Secuter
TLDR: The Siege mechanics should be deepened so that they act as battlefields where both the attacking commander, and also the defending commander will come to shine. This could look like the murder scheme system where "dots" are filled after each successful phase. The defenders will attempt to counter this by using their defense tactics and if successful the "dot" won't be filled. The attackers win when all "dots" have been filled. In essence, a dot is filled when the attackers make progress and the defenders fail to stop them.
How the "dots" from schemes look like: https://forumcontent.paradoxplaza.com/public/515775/ongoing murder scheme USABLE.PNG
Introduction:
In Crusader Kings 2 you spent a lot of time besieging provinces. Occupying territory was one of the primary ways to win wars. However, the system was less than inspiring. Indeed, the "timer" would progress by a set amount every 12 days or so, and it paid no heed to who defended the castle. It was just a matter of waiting the needed time..
I think another system should be created. One which is more interesting where different tactics matter. The besieging commander will obviously play a big role in taking down the castle. However the defending commander - who was completely ignored in CK2, should also play a role. For it hardly makes sense that my stellar commander, who defends my bastion, is as skilled as an inbred farmer at defending the castle.
The proposed siege system:
The system could look like your system for scheming a murder with progression "dots". The more fortified the castle is the more "dots" will need to be filled. Depending on technology, siege weaponry and the siege commander different tactics could be used which potentially could fill more than 1 dot at a time. The castle defenders will naturally try to repel the attackers thus removing any attempt to "fill" the dots at that attempt.
It could look like these examples:
Siege army:
Decides to build proper mobile shields to cover the soldiers while they fill the moat.
Defending army:
The defender, commanded by an unproven rookie, decided to remain on the walls, his archers unable to find many targets.
Result:
Since the defending commander was an incompetent rookie he didn't know what to do. He elected to just stay on the walls, which allowed the enemy to create a path for siege towers. A more prepared commander might have used mangonels (if at disposal) or maybe sallied out to disrupt the attackers, making them easy targets for the archers.
The defending rookie commander has now been replaced with your own character who returned home to defend his family. He is (of course) great at commanding. It could now look like this:
Siege army:
Decides that the gate is the best point of entry and storms the gate with a ram.
Defending army:
The defenders realize what happens. They orderly concentrates their forces around the gate and pour boiling tar onto the attackers.
Result:
The attack made no progress and therefor they didn't fill the next "dot".
And my last example:
The great siege commander decides to:
Feint an attack from both sides of the castle. Though one side is made of mainly strawmen attached to spears. In reality he focus his attack on just one side.
The defending commander:
Splits his army in two equal parts, completely falling for the ruse.
Result:
The walls on one side of the castle has been completely overrun and the attackers manages to cling on to several towers. This fills two dots because of how great the tactic worked. The castle is now even closer to falling.
Naturally, different tactics will be available the better the besieging/defending commander is which will greatly help attack/defend the castle.
You could even argue that the defenders should be able to retake "dots" by for instance pushing the attackers out of the city. In this way siege battles will become battlefields too where the commanders will use different tactics. It also means that a capable castle commander can bog down the enemy for a long time while weak commanders might make stupid blunders or cave-in without much fighting.
Conclusion:
Events will make better sense; it's no longer just an annoying event of the defenders sallying out successfully against the worlds' best commander who apparently was too stupid to create a proper camp. No, now the sally might be repelled exactly because he is the greatest siege commander. Or maybe one of the best generals on the defender side managed to repel the attackers from the walls. As always, the defenders are limited on time, supplies and soldiers. Though, strong fortifications and a good commander will make supplies and man power matter and last a lot longer. Hopefully such a system will make it more interesting than merely looking at a bar ticking down. It will also visualize the struggle over the castle.
Alright, I won't risk repeating myself (too much) and thus make my post boring. I hope such a system will make it into the game so that strong fortification truly will get to shine and make sieges something interesting and also a viable strategy to hunker down.
With Best regards
Secuter
- 1