AGEOD Forums

Has this been fixed in 1.16? What is the rationale behind a single, isolated cavalry unit with no guns being able to "besiege" and rapidly "breach" a fortress? It seems that everytime the AI pulls this trick, the cavalry "besiegers" immediately rip down the fortress walls, apparently by spitting at them, while naturally the pitiful 2-division force inside the fortress squats under the command of a frozen 3-initiative general. Isn't this going just a little[I][/I] too far? Granted that raiders such as Morgan and Forrest could force the surrender of forces 2-3 times larger than theirs, one uncommanded cavalry regiment should not be able to "besiege" a fortress.

Meanwhile, US Grant with 8 batteries of artillery can't put a scratch in Island #10 after three turns besieging it. Something is wrong with this formula.

-- Mal

I don't think I've ever seen single units breach a fort before? If the AI is really bothering you, just pull the force (or a portion of the force) out of the structure. Even with an unactivated commander, you'll move to 100% control and force the cav unit into offensive posture.

I'll try that trick, I'm tired of having my forts besieged by cavalry.
Not only do they breach on just about the first turn of their siege, one single-cavalry regiment totally breached Fort Monroe in one game I played. Fortunately it didn't follow up with an assault by a real army.

I don't mind when the AI does clever things, but it getting away with something stupid like that really annoys me.

-- Mal

malthaussen wrote:"one single-cavalry regiment totally breached Fort Monroe in one game I played."

Very valuable intel.
"Send word to General Longstreet to order a cavalry regiment to Fort Monroe post-haste!!!"

Those Reb horses are tough on masonry.

All seriousness aside, this is an interesting topic you submit.

I have been shying away from ordering cavalry in fort seiges opting to send them elsewhere, if feasable, where they may have more effect. I see here where my reasoning is flawed. Obviously cavalry can always dismount and provide a formidable force. So I suppose this is an explanation.

I'm interested in hearing the thoughts of the more knowledgeable and experienced players, which I am neither one!

I rarely ever even try sieges. If I can't take it in a lightning assault, I'd rather use my forces for other things. If they're in a structure without river access I might think about it, but i still don't like taking a large chunk of a department offline for siege duty.

malthaussen wrote:...while naturally the pitiful 2-division force inside the fortress squats under the command of a frozen 3-initiative general.
-- Mal

I have never had the problems you mention (offensively or defensively), but I think you would have fewer issues if you did not have a corps camping out in a fort... Those men could be far better used in other arenas and that would likely remove some of the pressure you are keeping them there to defend against.