Gradual Progressive Sieges

[Evan MF]

I think it would be a neat feature if one did not have to take a whole city in 1 siege assault. It would be great if you could take parts of the city in siege assaults and be able to hold them for more turns.

Say you could take the first two rings of a city in one siege assault. Then wait a few turns for reinforcements and then go on to take the inner citadel, for example.

To add to this one could build their own make-shift defenses such as trenches/walls/camps within their captured area in case of the enemy sallying forth. - If this is too much then at least being able to build trenches/walls/camps outside the city when you are sieging would satisfy.

This would do great for the immersion in my opinion.

Those of you who have a high degree of knowledge in Japanese history - did such things happen? or were the taking of cities usually done in one single assault?

Evan

[Remlap]

Wow this is an awesome idea! It would make for a huge degree of realism maybe not for this period as I don't know either, but for other times it would be great. I wonder if it couldn't be an incorporation of the map editor into the deployment stage, obviously with a few things removed.

[Swagger]

not when a few turns represent ingame several months (read as seasons) or even years..

[Evan MF]

An army could not hold a part of a city for a couple of months or a year even? Sieges mustv'e gone on for years surely?

And yes perhaps to have a limited map editor with trench options and minifort/camp building options would be good.

Evan

[Remlap]

not when a few turns represent ingame several months (read as seasons) or even years..

Yes, this would be the major flaw. And it would either be too long or awkward to do the campaigns any other way. The only thing I could see is that the attacker would decide to build rams etc. the defenders could reinforce the city.

[Evan MF]

But if a siege can last years then how can holding part of a city not possibly last years if the defender does not choose to sally out?

Evan

[a tw player]

But if a siege can last years then how can holding part of a city not possibly last years if the defender does not choose to sally out?

Evan

I highly doubt that sieges here can last consistently for "years". I'm not an expert on this time period, but I would be pretty sure that this would be inaccurate.

A multi-stage siege played out on the same turn could work perhaps...(go into the battlemap, reach the objective, back to campaign map, back to battlemap to reorganise your forces etc.)

[InF3sTeD]

Sieges are going to be divided into sections. I think it will act as multiple sieges in one. Where if you win the first part you go onto the second stage then the 3ed stage and each stage you can reassemble your troops. However, if you were to take the first part of the castle but felt you lost to many men you could always retreat and wait for reinforcements to arrive.

That's my guess on how it will work.

[Remlap]

idk I don't see this being done anytime soon realistically though.

[Swagger]

who smart general would stop an attack to organize lol?

that would also allow the defender to strenghten the defenses and even wait for reinforcements to save the siege..

[scubasteve]

I don't know about Japanese siege battle but I do know that European sieges could last months and even years! It was the same with Roman era sieges.

Considering the construction of Japanese Keeps, I could totally understand multi-staged sieges, even multi-turn sieges. I don't think there is any plan to break the sieges up though so don't expect it this game. I think it'd be a pretty tight feature for later games though.

[Lil Jazzer]

In my personal opinion if you take the first ring around say the citadel you have the option to return to the campaign map and bring in reinforcements (assuming there are units around) this would somewhat erradicate the problem on un-realism if a siege lasts several turns (1 year). Im not sure how many turns will be in a year but it would be probably un realistic to keep a siege going several. I really like the part were one could deploy defenses and trenches (or japanese equivalent), but when you return from the campaign map back to the siege they would be deployed around and/or in the ring itself and proceed to take the next. I hope they would release several tools to implement all this, Darth Vader gave his word he would mod it, *excitement*

[Magefsx]

That kind of stuff would almost definitely be hard coded, so no chance of modding it in IMO
But it would be awesome, as the Romans did it (siege of Jerusalem where there were 3 sets of walls), not to mention more realistic, because like this you could kill most of them, and then seige the rest of them in the keep and starve them out to avoid the last stand. While that happens, the region acts as though it is your own (ie towns, ports, farms etc), but you cannot use the main city. Also, you should get a massive public order penalty that doesn't decrease till the settlement is completely yours.
On a second note, hopefully the surrender button will be reworked, so only the troops with low moral/ loyalty abandoning the castle (with a low loyalty general perhaps joining your cause off the bat, but he'd be renowned for disloyalty from there on in, so highly unreliable).
From writing all that, I've just realised how awesome this game could/should/ maybe will be!

[Maizel]

Maybe it could be an upgrade to your town/city.

If every turn is a season, or even 6 months, a two turn siege would be feasible, reagriding to the amount of time.

[Rotaugen2009]

Well, if you look at some examples (Masada and Jerusalem for ancient times, Leningrad for modern), sieges could indeed go on for years. However, once a breakthrough happened somewhere, the rest of the siege would not last that long. This is already modeled in the games by having a number of turns until surrender or jumping ahead to an actual assault.

[uanime5]

Sieges usually lasted for years because the attackers had no way of breaching the walls so they had to wait for the people inside the city to be starved into submission. The 80 years war between the Spanish Empire and the Netherlands (1568-1648) lasted so long because it was mostly siege warfare.

Also trying to control part of a sieged city can be very dangerous as the defender usually has a better knowledge of the city than you and they can launch assaults from the areas they control. Thus a commander is at a disadvantage by only taking part of the city.

[emporor]

Would like to see this added seems like a good idea. It would be good if you could take areas that would affect the seige like taking out the section with food stocks or the water supply. You could even take out the weapon stocks and could make the defenders soldiers wield worse weapons??

Agreed the turn times would is a bit of a bad thing being long but some sieges were. When the defenders run they move into the other sections. This should have been added in empire or napoleoon especially the latter because of turn times but it would have been good because it would be costly to take a major city like London or Paris and this could be reflected with the addition of buildings to garrison an shoot people from.