sieges

[daidojisan]

Don't the besiegers suffer any casualties during a siege? reading through the manual it seems as if only the besieged can ever suffer hits. Surely the defending artillery can inflict losses during a siege?

[Pocus]

Not for now indeed. We will bring the discussion in the beta forum though.

[Spruce]

well that basicly depends on what type of siege that is. If it's a "starving" siege, the defenders will loose few men in the beginning and then when their supplies go out ... start dropping like flies.

If the attackter is trying to brake through the line of defenses - the attacker will suffer many casualties and the defender will loose some men - but not as many as the attacker.

[marecone]

Disscusion in beta forum started. You are welcomed to post your suggestions here.

Good point Spruce


Godspeed

[Spruce]

I think in a siege following options are needed as input in the algorithm =

1. Attackers option =
- encircle and starve out ... difficult for the defender to break out ... the siege will last for a long time (defender supplies) ... amount of casualties is low for the defenders in the beginning and high in the end.
- encircle and entrench ... more difficult for the defender to break out ... but more "costly" for the attacker in terms of supplies consumed to build the trenches,
- probe attack ... small scale attack ... not very likely to succeed ... but might succeed with sufficient weakened defenses ... defenders might have a small chance to break out during/after such an attack,
- all out assault ... large scale attack ... very costly for the attacker in terms of casualties ... but the biggest impact ... Defenders have a fair chance to break out during/after such an attack,

2. Defenders option =
- dig in ... defensive stance ... Best to hold off an attack,
- break out ... attack to escape the siege ... very risky and might crush the defenders if not succesfull,

[veji1]

If I may add, a sieging army is a sitting concentrated army that tends to suffer a significant attrition, because of the difficulties in supplying the army, and the hygene issues... A siege in the Mississipi Delta in summer would cause a significant attrition me thinks...

[Jonathan Palfrey]

A besieging army is a large concentration of men sitting around probably within range of the defenders. OK, probably the besiegers are mostly in trenches or otherwise protected; but nevertheless a little artillery fire from the defenders from time to time is quite likely to hit someone.

And yes, disease would kill more people, on both sides.

[frank7350]

personally, i'm against too much detail. theres already a level of control over the stance of your units, which i believe will effect the conduct of a siege. to provide additional options, well that strays from the grand theme of the game.... why then can't the player dictate the strategy for each battle...or fight the battle...or arm each individual unit.... or fire each weapon....

wow...now i'm just getting silly

[daidojisan]

personally, i'm against too much detail. theres already a level of control over the stance of your units, which i believe will effect the conduct of a siege. to provide additional options, well that strays from the grand theme of the game.... why then can't the player dictate the strategy for each battle...or fight the battle...or arm each individual unit.... or fire each weapon....

wow...now i'm just getting silly

Well more detail with sieges could perhaps be made available as a selectable option when you start the game?

I personally would welcome some additional detail/options , and i do not think that being able to instruct a general as to how aggressive he should make a siege is beyond a commander in chief's influence. Generals were often prodded during the ACW by both Lincoln and Davis.

[Spruce]

Well more detail with sieges could perhaps be made available as a selectable option when you start the game?

I personally would welcome some additional detail/options , and i do not think that being able to instruct a general as to how aggressive he should make a siege is beyond a commander in chief's influence. Generals were often prodded during the ACW by both Lincoln and Davis.

yeah, just exactly my toughts when I posted the idea's above. The attacker might want to "push" or "delay" the siege due to various tactical, strategical or political reasons. The defender might try to escape perhaps.

Nothing so frustrating as a grand siege turning into a lottery and nobody knows why ... Let's face it - some of the key moments in the war were related to sieges of confederate anchorpoints (Vicksburg, anaconda plan and stuff).

[Pocus]

For now you have the option to siege or assault. If you assault, the combat goes on until you rout, you win, or the general decide that he must stop the attack. The decision is taken by the Battle engine.

We have thought about adding a combat stance though, for all battles, which would influence the willingness to stop or continue the battle. This can definitively be added in a patch. This kind of additions has been common for BOA. To say the truth, Combat Stance is a feature we will add for VGN, our third game...

[General Quarters]

Vgn?

[jmlo]

Vgn?

Vainglory of Nation : http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=2566

French people like acronym !

[daidojisan]

A possibility for siege options could be

Attacker

1) Starve out: attacker simply waits for enemy supplies to run out, perhaps some small attrition of forces based on artillery advantage and generals

2) Bombardment: besieger artillery and siege artillery and besieged fort artillery and artillery batteries can fire. Possible reduction of the fort defensive strenght, casualties based on artillery strenghts and current fort strenght and generals.

3)Limited assault : besieger artillery and siege artillery can fire, infantry units perform a probing attack, the attack is halted when moderate casualties are taken. All defending units can fight. casualties based on opposing forces and fort defensive strenght and generals

4)Full attack : besieger artillery units can fire, infantry are ordered to charge the ramparts, attack is only halted after heavy casulaties are taken. All defending units fight.casualties based on opposing forces and fort defensive strenght and generals.

Depending on the attacking generals rating there should be a possibility of a fumbling of the attack ( either making a cold harbor type attack, or not making the attack at all something along those lines)

Possible defender options

1) conserve your ammo: defender artillery will not defend against enemy bombardment, this will conserve your ammo supplies but the enemy will have a better chance of reducing the fort defense strenght.

2) hold to the last man: supplies are rationed reducing the amount needed per turn but increasing attrition.

3) break out : defenders will try to break through the encirclement and escape with as many troops as possible. odds based on opposing troop strenght (cavalry regiments should give a bonus/penalty depending on who has the advantage here), duration of siege (the longer the siege has been in progress, the harder it will be to escape) and skill of generals.

4) Conditional surrender: the defender surrenders the fort but is allowed to leave with his forces unmolested.

Feel free to post you comments

[Pocus]

The engine allows you to do some already:

1. starve them. You siege, but don't assault.
2. bombardement. Is coupled with (1), you are supposed to shell somehow the enemy to harras him.
3. and 4. Here the battle engine do that for you, as in all combats. The commander evaluate each hour if he should retreat or can continue to press the attack.

Defender
1. 2. Basically 'do nothing' with a subtlety
3. You have a sortie order