Superior invading force should "tag" or lay claim to additional slots in a siege

[JaguarXJ6]

Brittany with an inferior invading force (1750 vs my 6800) got there to lay siege first to the county, but my force there assisted them in each slot after that. However, when I still have the superior invading force in a completely untouched county that I started the siege on from scratch, I would claim ownership UNTIL I move my unit off and back on again. Then the inferior AI siege overwrites my claim to it. That's fine, but it should follow the same rules that bind the player, whomever was there first wins OR whomever had the largest force, period. Why is this unfair to the player?

 

[Lessing]

Not sure I understand you, but.. Don't move your sieging force. Moving them equals breaking off the siege, so of course the AI gets to tag it.

 

[londoner247]

There is also an argument for saying that if there are multiple wars underway then two invading forces would not work together if they are not allies but would instead target different holdings within the county. So, in the OP's example, Brittany is laying siege to the main castle in the county when his forces arrive which should mean his forces will lay siege to the city or cathedral that is in the second slot. Whichever force wins their siege first will move on to lay siege to any third holding.

Otherwise you can get some pretty frustrating results, particularly if you are trying to defeat a rebellious Duke who has declared independence. I had one game where a fairly weak Duke of Galicia declared independence from my King of England but before I could get my troops in position a Muslim army from one of the other Iberian nations had laid siege to both Galician provinces. This prevented me from doing anything other than helping the Infidels but that is clearly not something that I would have done. I could have stood my levies down, declared war on the Muslims, reraised my levies and come back but that would have taken even longer.