Siege Leader

[Melichai]

I am planning to play a lowly Count within the Kingdom of England for the first time so knowing the rules for stealing sieges has taken on a priority.

As far as I understand it the highest ranking noble leading an army in the province controls the province when the siege ends. I am curious if this is the only factor and if there is any complications presented by alliances.

Case One:
Count sieges enemy province with 2000 men, siege succeeds - Count controls the enemy province and can sieze it if he has claims on it. Correct?

Case Two:
Count sieges enemy province with 2000 men. His Duke or King arrives with a band of minstrels. Siege succeeds. Duke or King controls the enemy province and can sieze it. Count gets nothing. Correct?

Case Three:
Count sieges enemy province with 2000 men. A Duke in the same kingdom, but not the Counts Duke arrives with a band of minstrels. Siege succeeds. Duke controls the enemy province and can sieze it. Count gets nothing. Correct?

Case Four:
Count sieges enemy province with 2000 men. An allied Duke or King from a different kingdom arrives with a band of minstrels. Siege succeeds. Allied Duke/King controls the enemy province and can sieze it. Count gets nothing. Correct?

Case Five:
Count A sieges enemy province with 2000 men. Count B from the same Kingdom arrives with 3000 men. Siege succeeds. What happens? Does Count A retain the siege because titles were equivalent and he arrived first? Or does Count B get it because he brought more men?

Case Six:
Count A sieges enemy province with 2000 men. Allied Count B from from a different Kingdom arrives with 3000 men. Siege succeeds. What happens? Does Count A retain the siege because titles were equivalent and he arrived first? Or does Count B get it because he brought more men? Is Count B discounted because he is only an ally?

Also is there any way to discourage your liege from backing you up in wars? Does having poor relations help keep them out? I believe as soon as they are in the way, your liege leads peace negotiations so can peace you out with no gains. Correct?

I'd appreciate some clarity as I want to try anticipate the rules I am playing against.

 

[TempestDK]

I am planning to play a lowly Count within the Kingdom of England for the first time so knowing the rules for stealing sieges has taken on a priority.

As far as I understand it the highest ranking noble leading an army in the province controls the province when the siege ends. I am curious if this is the only factor and if there is any complications presented by alliances.

Case One:
Count sieges enemy province with 2000 men, siege succeeds - Count controls the enemy province and can sieze it if he has claims on it. Correct?

Case Two:
Count sieges enemy province with 2000 men. His Duke or King arrives with a band of minstrels. Siege succeeds. Duke or King controls the enemy province and can sieze it. Count gets nothing. Correct?

Case Three:
Count sieges enemy province with 2000 men. A Duke in the same kingdom, but not the Counts Duke arrives with a band of minstrels. Siege succeeds. Duke controls the enemy province and can sieze it. Count gets nothing. Correct?

Case Four:
Count sieges enemy province with 2000 men. An allied Duke or King from a different kingdom arrives with a band of minstrels. Siege succeeds. Allied Duke/King controls the enemy province and can sieze it. Count gets nothing. Correct?

Case Five:
Count A sieges enemy province with 2000 men. Count B from the same Kingdom arrives with 3000 men. Siege succeeds. What happens? Does Count A retain the siege because titles were equivalent and he arrived first? Or does Count B get it because he brought more men?

Case Six:
Count A sieges enemy province with 2000 men. Allied Count B from from a different Kingdom arrives with 3000 men. Siege succeeds. What happens? Does Count A retain the siege because titles were equivalent and he arrived first? Or does Count B get it because he brought more men? Is Count B discounted because he is only an ally?

Also is there any way to discourage your liege from backing you up in wars? Does having poor relations help keep them out? I believe as soon as they are in the way, your liege leads peace negotiations so can peace you out with no gains. Correct?

I'd appreciate some clarity as I want to try anticipate the rules I am playing against.

1-4) correct

5 + 6) Count A retains the siege and control of the province afterwards.

General rule is that highest rank leads the siege. If two of the same rank sieges same province, then first come first served

No ..you liege will ALWAYS declare was also. The AI liege will always come to the aid of any vassal that is attacked. This would f.x. mean that if you as a count, attack your Duke liege, the King will side with the defender (the duke in this case). If the duke attacks you, the king will defend you. If you declare war on the king, the duke will defend you

Waging war as a vassal sucks ... as the liege will settle peace whenever he gets the most he can get. So often you will see him settle for money, as he cannot get anything else from the war. Then you are stuck with nothing, unless you manage to finish your campaign first.

 

[Snaake]

The general advice is thus to make your wars quick and short when you're a vassal, and try to get your own peace deal before your liege can screw things up for you.

Something that can help you achieve this is luring your liege's attention elsewhere. Wait for him to declare war on some preferably moderately large (but not a major threat) but relatively far away place (or heck, do it yourself, your liege will always back you, as mentioned above). Then when the liege commits to that war, you can more easily get away with a small war closer by (usually), because the AI seems less likely to peace out if it's in another war.

Or maybe this is caused by the fact that your real enemy thinks it is stronger than it actually is, since you and your liege are fighting two enemies at once. Thus it doesn't offer the "please take this cash and go away" peace offers so quickly.

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

An exploit to win sieges as a count is to not close the siege-window, I once stole a siege that way with an army of 2 men (the count and his marshal ).

 

[sjones25]

An exploit to win sieges as a count is to not close the siege-window, I once stole a siege that way with an army of 2 men (the count and his marshal ).

So, as long as that siege window is open, the siege leader won't change? You could be sieging a province with an unnamed commander and the king shows up and you unnamed commander is still leading the siege until you close that window?

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

So, as long as that siege window is open, the siege leader won't change? You could be sieging a province with an unnamed commander and the king shows up and you unnamed commander is still leading the siege until you close that window?

Yes (at least it has worked for me)

 

[Melichai]

Great, thanks for the confirmation. First war has gone like clockwork, swamped the siege with manpower and won before the Duke arrived so was able to make my own peace taking the County. One more County to go and I will be a Duke myself. Which is nice, because never playing a Count before I never noticed the rather hefty crown duties which are being imposed on me.

Out of curiousity, I had to move my army across water and I will need it in the same particular area for the next war. Which means another insanely expensive shipping fee.

Is there any downside to leaving the armies mobilised but at zero upkeep in your own province where theyre not taking attrition? I.E. any morale, province or character impact for being mobilised?

 

[TempestDK]

Great, thanks for the confirmation. First war has gone like clockwork, swamped the siege with manpower and won before the Duke arrived so was able to make my own peace taking the County. One more County to go and I will be a Duke myself. Which is nice, because never playing a Count before I never noticed the rather hefty crown duties which are being imposed on me.

Out of curiousity, I had to move my army across water and I will need it in the same particular area for the next war. Which means another insanely expensive shipping fee.

Is there any downside to leaving the armies mobilised but at zero upkeep in your own province where theyre not taking attrition? I.E. any morale, province or character impact for being mobilised?

If your province in question has roads and the army size is below the supply limit, there should be no ill effects to having them mobilized there.

Only events I know of, that fire when regiments have been long in the field, is for vassal regiments under your command. Those can't be kept in the field forever.

 

[unmerged(133776)]

One more County to go and I will be a Duke myself. Which is nice, because never playing a Count before I never noticed the rather hefty crown duties which are being imposed on me.

As long as you have a Liege, you'll run into those times when he'll jack up those Crown Duties on you, so all you'll do is substitute a Duke Liege for a new King Liege.

Is there any downside to leaving the armies mobilised but at zero upkeep in your own province where theyre not taking attrition? I.E. any morale, province or character impact for being mobilised?

As long as they are your personal troops, there is really no bad side effect to leaving them mobilized (as stated) and setting the upkeep to 0 (all depending on the supply limit of the province they are now in). The only downsides are you won't be getting any reinforcements that have built up from the province(s) those troops are from, so you'll end up using only the troops that are left after fighting the war. I would go ahead and leave the troops from the province they are now in demobilized (so they get a chance to rebuild), it'll be a simple matter to mobilize them when you are ready. One other possibility (depending how many different provinces you have troops from) is the loyalty of your Commanders. If your Marshall (or other leaders) are dis-loyal, I don't know if they'll get events to disband because they are dis-loyal.

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

It is also more likelier to get revolts in provinces when its regiment is mobilized.

 

[FelixMajor]

I picked up a copy of CK Complete Mac from GamersGate earlier this week. So far I've found the game interesting ... I really enjoy the dynastic control elements of the game. I'm really frustrated with war at this point though. I've been loading repeatedly as Leincester and to this point my military efforts have only managed to aid one of the counties of Ulster.

Ulster has been an easy and desirable interest for expanding my Duchy, but so far I've managed to siege a province to redline, only to have a neighboring county jump into the fray and make peace immediately upon the "liberation" of the province. I pause immediately ... but I've already lost the province to the neighboring county. My Duke and his personal host were leading the siege for me ... from what I have read here he should be given first shot at the peace deal. Is there something that I am missing? At this pace I'm only making a third rival ... one of greater power since Ulster seems to have higher value provinces.

 

[TempestDK]

I picked up a copy of CK Complete Mac from GamersGate earlier this week. So far I've found the game interesting ... I really enjoy the dynastic control elements of the game. I'm really frustrated with war at this point though. I've been loading repeatedly as Leincester and to this point my military efforts have only managed to aid one of the counties of Ulster.

Ulster has been an easy and desirable interest for expanding my Duchy, but so far I've managed to siege a province to redline, only to have a neighboring county jump into the fray and make peace immediately upon the "liberation" of the province. I pause immediately ... but I've already lost the province to the neighboring county. My Duke and his personal host were leading the siege for me ... from what I have read here he should be given first shot at the peace deal. Is there something that I am missing? At this pace I'm only making a third rival ... one of greater power since Ulster seems to have higher value provinces.

Anyone with a claim on the title can settle for peace at anytime, no matter if they actually control the province. Usually that is not a problem as they will not have warscore to actually claim the titles if they don't at least control some territory. But when a ruler has lost control of all his territory, he will accept ANY peace deal presented to him.

So the moment you seized control of his last personal province, the count settled peace with him demanding his claim, and he had to accept it. The count probably lost some prestige on demanding more than his warscore, but I guess he doesn't care now.

Now you have an extra reason to take him down

 

[FelixMajor]

Thank you for the clarification! It is much appreciated. =) Back to my march to become King of Ireland.