Garrison and Army defending city start battle outside city

[German Orca]

I posted before on this issue. A full 100-man garrison, 18-hundred man army have painstakingly prepared brilliant defenses. Kill sacs, zeroed guns, fire lanes, TRPs, ambushes, sniper hides, and reinforced all the lovely protective multi-story buildings. Moral is high. Who could possibly take this redoubt from the men. An enemy army approaches, sizable, but we are undeterred. We take aim when suddenly....every man, woman and vehicle is teleported outside the city. Soldiers look at each other in disbelief. How did this happen. Indeed, how is this egregious feature in the game still. Is it an oversight, bug, balance decision? No matter the reason, this is incredibly lame and so immersion breaking. So many things to love about the game, but I can no longer bear a defending army and garrison starting outside the city they sat in for two months preparing to defend. Explanation? I'd love to hear it. Great progress on all the updates, the game has a great future. I'll check back in a few months.

[Nash_Bridges]

Greetings.

Originally posted by German Orca:

Explanation?

You don't like the vehicles appearing outside of the city, on the edge of the map? If so, please describe to me how you would do it?

[German Orca]

@Nash_Bridges: I'd kindly ask you to read the issue behind my post and the title of the post. The garrison INSIDE the city and army defending INSIDE the city, with vehicles or not, start the battle OUTSIDE the city when attacked. Do you see how this looks in reality? Imagine you are a commander and are in perfectly defensible positions in a city. Your soldiers are happy behind solid concrete cover, in elevated positions. Your AFVs are in keyhole positions, zeroed in down streets, tucked behind buildings for cover. An enemy army approaches. You decide to give the order for every single fighting man and woman to leave the city and fight the enemy OUTSIDE the city. The silly thing is the battle ends up taking place in the city anyways as each side starts on opposite sides of the city. Think in ASL. A leader, his two squads and heavy machine gun, leave a two story +3 building to go fight the enemy in clear ground instead. Mount and Blade. If your army is attacked in the city, the fight starts with your army in the city defending the walls. Total War. If your army is in the city and you are attacked, the fight starts with your army IN the city in defensible positions IN the city. In this game why does the developer not have the garrison and/or an army that is IN the city start the battle within the city but rather REMOVES them from the city to fight outside the city. I don't think I can explain / illustrate this any different or clearer. But thank you for responding!

[Nash_Bridges]

Originally posted by German Orca:

@Nash_Bridges: I'd kindly ask you to read the issue behind my post and the title of the post. The garrison INSIDE the city and army defending INSIDE the city, with vehicles or not, start the battle OUTSIDE the city when attacked. Do you see how this looks in reality? Imagine you are a commander and are in perfectly defensible positions in a city. Your soldiers are happy behind solid concrete cover, in elevated positions. Your AFVs are in keyhole positions, zeroed in down streets, tucked behind buildings for cover. An enemy army approaches. You decide to give the order for every single fighting man and woman to leave the city and fight the enemy OUTSIDE the city. The silly thing is the battle ends up taking place in the city anyways as each side starts on opposite sides of the city. Think in ASL. A leader, his two squads and heavy machine gun, leave a two story +3 building to go fight the enemy in clear ground instead. Mount and Blade. If your army is attacked in the city, the fight starts with your army in the city defending the walls. Total War. If your army is in the city and you are attacked, the fight starts with your army IN the city in defensible positions IN the city. In this game why does the developer not have the garrison and/or an army that is IN the city start the battle within the city but rather REMOVES them from the city to fight outside the city. I don't think I can explain / illustrate this any different or clearer. But thank you for responding!

I knew what you meant the first time. I'm asking you, how would you implement it in the game? Spawn in the center of the city? Then your troops will be attacked at the start of the game by enemy artillery, and they will continue to appear there and immediately die... In addition to enemy artillery, it would take less time for all new enemy troops to approach your spawn point. The ideal solution for this would be of course to increase all maps in 2-3 times, but so far these plans are only for the very distant future.

[German Orca]

I see what you are saying now. Thank you for clarifying and forgive my misunderstanding. To answer your questions in general, I’d say of course, if a garrison and/or army is defending in a city, start the troops in the city. How else should it be? The problems you mention - getting attacked immediately by the enemy, spawning in close to the enemy - you provided the solution. Make the deployment start points farther away from each other. Bigger maps. I say this not to be a jerk, but the current workaround is a kludge and terribly unrealistic (of course within the confines of a video game). Did this topic come up in playtesting? Is the player-base collective OK with getting kicked out of a city they are defending, having to fight back into the city they were just occupying because the maps are too small? I’m just one guy voicing my opinion on this topic, so take it for what its worth. Thanks for taking the time to respond to this thread!