Author Topic: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.  (Read 667 times)

Dystopian

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 157
  • Karma: +4/-0
    • View Profile
Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« on: May 28, 2017, 05:05:56 PM »
Literally was about to win a siege when 600+ men join in at the last second to win the day. Im fine with them winning but the fact that literally no damage is done to the enemy at all and then they can somehow force there way through the siege lines and get the benefits of stone defenses is enraging. It was literally at 99% but they can still save the day. Thats just not right it seems to me, it doesnt make sense.

I mean you can just keep joining the "battle" which apparently only happens in the last .5% of the battle to keep extending the time to keep joining it with more characters and getting more and more men to get stone defenses its pretty ridiculous. I understand why the battles dont happen until the end in theory but you have to admit its still unrealistic. "Maneuvering" isnt 99.5% of a battle, casualties will start from the scouting phase. Being untouched the whole battle when you are outnumbered by a lot and then being able to enter that same town that is being attacked and use its defenses with other troops that werent present at the beginning just sucks honestly.

Just for reference. We attacked with more or less 500 men against about 120 and this was for 99% of the battle. Now that 600+ men have joined they have 400 archers and 120 heavy infantry compared to the 20 and 5 that were present before. And the battle is now at 96%. So more men will be joining. And they will not take any casualties at all.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2017, 05:21:40 PM by Dystopian »

Dystopian

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 157
  • Karma: +4/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #1 on: May 28, 2017, 06:10:50 PM »
And in conclusion, almost all our nobles are killed wounded or captured and the enemy took basically no casualties. If i hadnt just come back to this game this would make me leave it again.

Andrew

  • Game Master / Lead Developer
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1770
  • Karma: +75/-7
  • Mildly Amused
    • View Profile
    • Lemuria Community Fan Site
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #2 on: May 28, 2017, 06:12:59 PM »
Think of it like last minute reinforcements for the enemy side? It sucks, but it's a thing.
Standing for the creation of interesting things since Year 1, Week 5, Day 4.
Favorite cold beverage: Strawberry Shake
My hobbies: Fixing computers, video games, anime, manga, some other stuff, sleep (in no particular order)

Dystopian

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 157
  • Karma: +4/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #3 on: May 28, 2017, 06:54:44 PM »
Do you understand my points about it that seem to work illogically? No casualties done to an enemy after getting a battle to 99% but then taking massive casualties when somehow 600 men broke into the settlement without fighting us and stood on the walls to kill us? It doesn't seem to make sense to me that they could enter the settlement first and then decide to join the battle.

Demivar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 128
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • Purveyor of cunning plans.
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #4 on: May 28, 2017, 07:07:41 PM »
The reinforcements were delayed regardless. Two Dark Forest parties were set to block the roads, but weren't given enough men to delay the reinforcements by long enough. Both parties were wiped out, with one First One being killed and the second being captured.


I understand your frustration, but particularly in assaults you can consider it to be the battle preparation phase. You don't just appear at Stone walls and attack them, there needs to be time to make siege equipment and prepare for an assault. The men guarding the road were swept aside as they were too few and too weak, and there was enough time for reinforcements to get to the settlement before the assault started.
22:34 - Roran Hawkins: Radovid's like you
22:34 - Roran Hawkins: but then insane
22:34 - Roran Hawkins: Dijkstra is like you

Dorian

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 219
  • Karma: +26/-11
  • Playing since 2015.
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #5 on: May 28, 2017, 07:35:34 PM »
Is it possible to have one noble block the area around the town while the other one makes the siege and they simultaneously support each other in battles? That could be a way to prevent what seems to be an issue here. Also, placing some quick troops around the siege perimeter to stall the reinforcements would be a good idea too. Make some advanced tactical planning.

Andrew

  • Game Master / Lead Developer
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1770
  • Karma: +75/-7
  • Mildly Amused
    • View Profile
    • Lemuria Community Fan Site
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #6 on: May 28, 2017, 07:52:43 PM »
It is possible to block travel around a town. I'm not entirely sure how the mechanics on it work (if someone knows or finds out, please tell me) but it should be possible.

Actual siege mechanics are on the TODO list though.
Standing for the creation of interesting things since Year 1, Week 5, Day 4.
Favorite cold beverage: Strawberry Shake
My hobbies: Fixing computers, video games, anime, manga, some other stuff, sleep (in no particular order)

Demivar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 128
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • Purveyor of cunning plans.
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #7 on: May 28, 2017, 07:56:48 PM »
Blocking area does work, provided you bring enough men, which wasn't the case.

Whilst I think that a Siege system would work really well in M&F, things can still be explained in most cases using the existing mechanics and a bit of filling in the blanks. Whilst the system isn't perfect, it's functional.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2017, 08:04:45 PM by Demivar »
22:34 - Roran Hawkins: Radovid's like you
22:34 - Roran Hawkins: but then insane
22:34 - Roran Hawkins: Dijkstra is like you

Constantine

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 244
  • Karma: +19/-10
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #8 on: May 28, 2017, 10:05:08 PM »
M&F combat is unrealistic and often feels unfair. But you knew it works that way and would probably done the exact same thing if tables were turned. So no reason to feel cheated, next time just be the one to game the mechanics in your favour.

De-Legro

  • M&F Dev Team
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3073
  • Karma: +105/-54
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #9 on: May 29, 2017, 12:50:59 AM »
It is a compromise. If we didn't delay battles and allow others to join, super active and coordinated realms would have even more of an advantage then they have now. Realms need the time to march to assist each other, and it can advantage both side of the conflict.

Also realistically against stonewalls, even the first numbers given were not a sure victory.
He who was once known as Blackfyre

Dystopian

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 157
  • Karma: +4/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #10 on: May 29, 2017, 06:20:17 AM »
I understand your frustration, but particularly in assaults you can consider it to be the battle preparation phase. You don't just appear at Stone walls and attack them, there needs to be time to make siege equipment and prepare for an assault. The men guarding the road were swept aside as they were too few and too weak, and there was enough time for reinforcements to get to the settlement before the assault started.


Yes this is assuming it wasn't 99% done, are the siege engines only constructed in the last 1% of the battle preparations? This is what I mean by 600 men marching through the siege lines right at the end of a battle as if nothing at all is going on. You totally missed my point here mate. Like this actually makes me think you didn't read my post at all. I said I was fine with losing, its just these circumstances are illogical. We were encamped outside the town, circling it for days in game. We obviously built siege engines during the 99% of time that we were there. Being able to just march in and get defensive bonuses doesn't make sense. If you think that I'm not sure how you reached that conclusion. They might be able to attack us from behind sure, but march through the siege line without a battle? Arnheim is no Antioch, we surrounded that baby easily. Come on.


I'm totally fine with losing  ;D  most of the time that is what happens in this game, for me at least. Its just these circumstances are kind of ridiculous.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2017, 06:42:39 AM by Dystopian »

Gustav Kuriga

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 459
  • Karma: +22/-34
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #11 on: May 29, 2017, 06:48:52 AM »

Yes this is assuming it wasn't 99% done, are the siege engines only constructed in the last 1% of the battle preparations? This is what I mean by 600 men marching through the siege lines right at the end of a battle as if nothing at all is going on. You totally missed my point here mate. Like this actually makes me think you didn't read my post at all. I said I was fine with losing, its just these circumstances are illogical. We were encamped outside the town, circling it for days in game. We obviously built siege engines during the 99% of time that we were there. Being able to just march in and get defensive bonuses doesn't make sense. If you think that I'm not sure how you reached that conclusion. They might be able to attack us from behind sure, but march through the siege line without a battle? Arnheim is no Antioch, we surrounded that baby easily. Come on.


I'm totally fine with losing  ;D  most of the time that is what happens in this game, for me at least. Its just these circumstances are kind of ridiculous.

An army that is caught in the middle of the assault phase in a siege would actually be in a worse position than if they were merely outside the walls holding position. This is because their units on the frontline of the assault would be unable to break contact to turn and face the reinforcements, while if they were still in the siege phase they could destroy the reinforcements with almost the entirety of their forces. Just be glad you don't get an additional penalty when reinforcements arrive for a siege battle on top of the stone walls.

De-Legro

  • M&F Dev Team
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3073
  • Karma: +105/-54
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #12 on: May 29, 2017, 07:01:51 AM »
An army that is caught in the middle of the assault phase in a siege would actually be in a worse position than if they were merely outside the walls holding position. This is because their units on the frontline of the assault would be unable to break contact to turn and face the reinforcements, while if they were still in the siege phase they could destroy the reinforcements with almost the entirety of their forces. Just be glad you don't get an additional penalty when reinforcements arrive for a siege battle on top of the stone walls.

This is completly true. To block entry requires encirlation, which means dividing your force, with all that comes with it. I believe it was the last siege of Julius Caesar against the Gauls where he built his own wall around his siege force in order to manage the risk of enemy forces arriving against his siege force.
He who was once known as Blackfyre

Dystopian

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 157
  • Karma: +4/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #13 on: May 29, 2017, 07:33:50 AM »
An army that is caught in the middle of the assault phase in a siege would actually be in a worse position than if they were merely outside the walls holding position. This is because their units on the frontline of the assault would be unable to break contact to turn and face the reinforcements, while if they were still in the siege phase they could destroy the reinforcements with almost the entirety of their forces. Just be glad you don't get an additional penalty when reinforcements arrive for a siege battle on top of the stone walls.


...
(Never said we'd be better off or we'd win or anything like that, apparently its hard to understand thats not what I'm talking about at all.)

Yes I know, this point still doesn't address how it doesn't make sense that 600 men (which is a third of the total population of the settlement) can walk into a settlement that is currently being attacked without joining the battle at all and take no casualties. We would have at least killed some of them if this wasn't a feature, being able to teleport through an attack and use stone defenses that is. It's a moot point as I can see that there isn't even anywhere to take this complaint. Just the rage zone.  ;D
« Last Edit: May 29, 2017, 07:37:49 AM by Dystopian »

Weaver

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 248
  • Karma: +53/-42
    • View Profile
Re: Joining battles at 99% especially siege ones.
« Reply #14 on: May 29, 2017, 07:44:34 AM »
It's how the game was designed to allow people to join into the battle, because it's a real time strategy. There is nothing else to it. If you wanted to prevent someone joining the battle, you should've dedicated troops to blocking movement. That's just the reality of it. Many experienced players will leave a city looking vulnerable, and you will siege it, only to see three times your numbers come out of the woodwork to defend the walls.