How do you win an offensive siege against anything other than militia?

[Saibot42]

Just basic strategy. Lost 1800 men to an 1100 garrison because I'm a moron. Does the AI get cheat bonuses, their knights seemed to perform alot better than knights should in an urban environment. Didn't get bogged down in infantry at all like mine always seem to do. And do crossbows shoot their allies at all or do they just shoot them in the back?

[LusitanPlayer]

sieges are quite hard. I usually waste the enemy, siege them for long turns until they are exhausted and withered. usually archers, (slingers if rome total war) xbowmen, javelins, etc. can kill your own soldiers. Magyar cavalry is being a pain in the ass to mass for me because they can do that.

[ikyu828]

for siege battle i only use archers or mangonel, other range weapon simply doesn't work that well, naffatun n siphonatores also works great, but need to be really close
if you don't have archers, then use more melee units.

[Saibot42]

I think this is what I learned from the loss and the victory against the depleted garrison; let crossbows fire, casualties be damned. A unit of mercenary crossbowmen killed the French king by standing there firing at point blank range. No running, and turn off time limit to facilitate that. Never let heavy infantry absorb a charge, always spearmen. Never use light infantry at all, they seem to underperform for their stats. Don't neglect cavalry, but never let them be the first to fight. Use siege engines, I always neglect those in favor of more troops.

[napoleonic]

1. attack multiple walls at once
2. use high attacking infantry to assault, don't try to throw spearmen and other weaklings to enemy walls
3. after capturing walls, bring your ranged units (easiest would be long ranged bowmen or xbowmen) and use them to attack enemies inside the city, soften them before committing the rest of your assault infantries to attack, often you actually can kill 2/3 of enemies there that have no where to run with your ranged units from their own walls.

ps I DON'T BOTHER with offensive siege engine, waste of money, time and resources; ladders and siege towers FTW!!!

[Deteriorate]

If at all possible I use javelin units. Crossbows on walls are awesome but much of the fighting is deeper in the city. Javelins are much much less likely to incur friendly fire from a ground level firing position in close combat. Mounted acritae are hitmen on horses, it is rare when a unit or two cant kill a general. Plus you can speed them around the city get them behind enemy infantry that is caught in melee, it's pretty much an insta-rout once they start raining death from behind. The foot javelins are just as deadly with more men = more ammo. Tightly packed melee in the streets mean you get a kill almost for every javelin thrown. They are all super cheap as well, especially when something like acontistae cost 120 to recruit and something like 60? to upkeep and they cap 100 kills if used right. After they run out of ammo send them in to combat and exhaust the enemy. Even if you lose them, your prize heavy infantry can walk in and mop the rest up with little to no losses

[Roman Soldier]

That is why I always force myself on the defensive side.
Whilst defending I can easily get Heroic victory against almost any size of force.

But sieges.. I am terrible in, you'd need a lot of siege equipment like catapults to bring down walls & have good infantry.

[LusitanPlayer]

different than all of you, i usually starve them and force them out, or else i just go for badly garrisoned settlements (i just took sofia from the byzantines that had only a general there)

[Silver Legionary]

Yes, as others have mentioned, high-lethality(like javelins, prime example.) units, infantry that's strong on defense(Dismounted Feudal Knights are a good standard for stats there), reducing the ramparts to dust(that's how it worked in history; emulate that!), and waiting them out(they'll lose troops FAST; you'll lose none in the time you wait) are all the ways of getting a siege headed by you going towards them won.

Annihilating them if they sally is good too; exploit the terrain, ESPECIALLY HILLS, archers/ranged units do much there when foes sally.

Good hunting!

[rb9o]

Another tip regarding ladders and siege towers. If the enemy have a large number of archers on the walls, send some offensive light infantry to sprint with ladders and get in among them to disrupt their ability to fire. Scottish Highlanders excel at this. Your heavy infantry units should be right behind in siege towers to assault the walls, preferably at weakly defended points. Never send heavy infantry up ladders. The losses of the first few to jump into the enemy are too expensive. If possible, open the gates with a ram, spy, catapult, capture it, etc. Then send archers to fire on defenders from below the interior of the wall. Once the defenders are kicked off the wall, place your ranged units on them and prepare for a very slow, conservative fight toward the central square. That's my general approach. I tend to lose a lot of light infantry that way, but I protect my expensive units and don't waste cavalry in street fighting. If you have siege engines, modify this strategy with a bombardment phase. Damage the walls underneath defenders just enough to kill them--no need to totally destroy the walls.

[rillstooney]

Also, If you have a really crappy unit that is mostly cannon fodder, then before sending in the ram and towers/ladders, send in that unit on loose formation and drawn out to as wide a line as the game allows and just have it stand there. It will absorb the fire away from your more valuable units.

[LusitanPlayer]

Also, If you have a really crappy unit that is mostly cannon fodder, then before sending in the ram and towers/ladders, send in that unit on loose formation and drawn out to as wide a line as the game allows and just have it stand there. It will absorb the fire away from your more valuable units.

damn thats real smart xD didnt think about that, and it such a simple thing hahaha

[Strengelicher]

Just basic strategy. Lost 1800 men to an 1100 garrison because I'm a moron. Does the AI get cheat bonuses, their knights seemed to perform alot better than knights should in an urban environment. Didn't get bogged down in infantry at all like mine always seem to do. And do crossbows shoot their allies at all or do they just shoot them in the back?

AFAIK knights do not suffer any penalties if fighting in a city type settlement. However, they may receive bonuses from defending a wall. Also keep in mind that the general's command value influences the fighting abilities of his units. So if the knights are commanded by a good general, they will fight better and last longer.

The basic rule which can be derived from this is that your general should have a higher command value that the defending general, if you want to attack a settlement. Also, try not to attack with ladders, as you receive penalties against the unit defending the corresponding wall section. Rather try to breach the gate or - better still - the walls.

Massing your troops in the breach can cause you to win the walls. This may cause the defending troops to abandon the walls and run for the city square - a good opportunity to cause them heavy casualties.

Mangonels are sometimes handy to weaken the defenders. If they have a particularly strong infantry unit, target that unit and burn it with the Mangonels before attacking.

[Saibot42]

AFAIK knights do not suffer any penalties if fighting in a city type settlement.

Yeah I didn't mean I expected them to get any statistical penalties, just that their usual strength is charging one unit in a field and they shouldn't do as well in close quarters with 3, 4 or 500 units surrounding them.

[sabaku_no_gaara]

Use Mangomels and Catapults and Trebuchets

I like to bombard the enemy with overwhelming fire power, shock and awe man, it works quite well

[Daerandir]

Just basic strategy. Lost 1800 men to an 1100 garrison because I'm a moron. Does the AI get cheat bonuses, their knights seemed to perform alot better than knights should in an urban environment. Didn't get bogged down in infantry at all like mine always seem to do. And do crossbows shoot their allies at all or do they just shoot them in the back?

The responses show many different approaches. I rarely self-command offensive sieges, letting time and starvation take their toll on the garrison until it either sallies or capitulates. Taking on a settlement with ballista towers is pretty difficult. There, the key is to attack multiple walls so some of your force isn't cut to pieces.

I almost always use big siege engines against the AI when I self-command. Trebuchets are good, but gunpowder units are much better for breaching the walls. Catapults are of marginal utility once stone walls show up - except to bring into the city behind your assault troops to disrupt the AI's defenders. Mangonels are useful, but only to attack the garrison units on the wall, or hiding behind the wall.

The folks are with when the say use assault troops - at least where you want to achieve a breakthrough. Putting large-volume, low-quality units in the assault is good to spread out the AI forces.

Lastly, I'll try to have a light cavalry unit that can exploit the breakthrough and race to the town center, pulling AI troops there to keep from losing the battle.

And, yes, friendly fire is a pain.

[Bardha]

Also keep in mind that the general's command value influences the fighting abilities of his units. So if the knights are commanded by a good general, they will fight better and last longer.

Does anyone know how this works exactly? I've been playing total war games for years and I still have no clue how exactly a three-star general differs from an eight-star general. Obviously I know that the eight-star general is much better, but I'd like to know how exactly he improves your army's effectiveness. Does he increase stats, increase stamina, a combination of both? Or something else all together?

[Geoffrey of Villehardouin]

The number of command stars only affects autoresolving.

[Byg]

The number of command stars only affects autoresolving.

I'm pretty sure that is not true. What is that based upon?

[Geoffrey of Villehardouin]

I'm pretty sure that is not true. What is that based upon?

I understand the consensus here was that command affects only autoresolving. Better morale can be explained by higher chivalry. It is difficult to test effects of command on morale since generals are not available in custom battles.

As Ishan said, it is all hardcoded but no other effect except on autoresolving has been established to my knowledge. What makes you think there are other effects?