Sally forth...really?

[wizzam]

Does anybody else think that the Sally forth option in a defensive battle in stupid? I thought the whole point of seiging a town was to pin them in so you can fight them in the streets; my favourite way of dealing with bleeding HA armies...

[AboveAverageDuck]

if they couldn't sally forth you could besiege any size garrison with any size army and win by starving them out.

[wizzam]

Sorry, referring to the option when you start a seige battle and they can sally forth to meet you outside the city, not in it itself...

[jords321]

it depends, some units are better at swarming the enemy rather than fighting 1v1. like say if you were a barbarian faction defending against sparta/macedon; would you really want to fight in crowded streets vs spears/pikes? it'd be much better in the open

[AboveAverageDuck]

In previous TW titles, you did sally forth but still fought in the walls. The problem with that is it means the attacker can't always construct siege equipment. They changed it to fight outside the city walls so sallying forth removes the defenders advantage.

[AboveAverageDuck]

Originally posted by jords321:

it depends, some units are better at swarming the enemy rather than fighting 1v1. like say if you were a barbarian faction defending against sparta/macedon; would you really want to fight in crowded streets vs spears/pikes? it'd be much better in the open

also this. if you are playing a barbarian or nomadic faction, its usually better to fight in the field.

[ッ]

well it is pretty realistic that you would hav that option

[CASANINJA]

Not if you launched a surprise attack, good morning, you're under seige. Welp, wasn't anything you could've done about that, now was there?..I hate the "sally forth" option, imo it takes away from the game experience and the attacker should be prepared for a seige battle, therefore, the defender should have some kind of tactical advantage against odds, but not too much of one. Especially if they are outnumbered. This is all just another simple thing CA dosen't give a ♥♥♥♥ about, in their "realism" based game.

[darksear]

If you sally forth the objective for the enemy changes. Instead of taking a victory point they have to defeat your army. So if your garrison mainly consists of skirmish troops you might want to sally forth rather than try to hold a victory point that you know you are going to lose.

[CASANINJA]

^^WHAT!?....If your garrison consists of skirmish troops then you'll want castle walls to man them on, or a street so the attacker can get bottle necked and take a lot of casualties for the town.

[darksear]

Skirmish troops don't hold a line very well. The enemy will just chase the skirmishers away with cavalry and then march infantry in to take the point. The only time it makes sense to not sally forth with skirmishers is when it's the provincial capital.

[electricnomad]

I agree with the pro-sally points mentioned above. It's a useful feature for barbarian hordes and skirmishers in a settlement, and it avoids getting quickly steamrolled by elite, armored troops at a settlement's single victory point.

[AboveAverageDuck]

Originally posted by CASANINJA:

Not if you launched a surprise attack, good morning, you're under seige. Welp, wasn't anything you could've done about that, now was there?..I hate the "sally forth" option, imo it takes away from the game experience and the attacker should be prepared for a seige battle, therefore, the defender should have some kind of tactical advantage against odds, but not too much of one. Especially if they are outnumbered. This is all just another simple thing CA dosen't give a ♥♥♥♥ about, in their "realism" based game.

Launch a surprise attack on a large city? you do realise that you can't even enter the zone of control except to attack. also, taking a garrison outside walls in a pretty quick manuever.

[atombomb562000]

I too disagree if I attack a city I expect to attack a city since when did defenders who just got blind sided get to choose the battefield. It's there own damn fault anyway for allowing the enemy to get that close anyway. Just a cheap tactic by CA to claim theres more open field battles.

[Sarkin]

well since a turn takes a year(or month, or more) you could argue thats more the nenough time to sally out.

First, a province is a somewhat large place o.O and it wasn't uncommon for news of a marchign army to reach cities before the army did. armies do march /slowly/ most of the time. its only in movies and video games that they reach the town with in the 20 seconds after deciding to attack.

Second almost all towns have multiple gates, and sally ports. which means if they were to bring there army out one of those before you surroudned the town - noting towns also had sentries on duty close to 24/7- it wouldn't be unthinkable that your army reformed to defend the town.

If you want it realistic.. then really your army should be spread otu aroudn the whole town when the enemy sallies out when you are 'sieging' .

since a siege means blocking off access to the town an preventing anyone, from entering or leaving . which means you'd have to encircle the whole town not just one side. if you expected a siege to progress.

also if you 'know' the enemy were coming -which a surprise attack against a city for the sake of laying siege rarely would work simply because that means hiding over a thousand troops marching from point A to point B which when you have dozens of towns litered across the province and individual merchants , and spies being able to move much faster its not unlikely, nor impossible for the people who control the city to realize theres a sneak attack coming.

[atombomb562000]

Originally posted by Matsutabi:

well since a turn takes a year(or month, or more) you could argue thats more the nenough time to sally out.

Second a province is a somewhat large place o.O and it wasn't uncommon for news of a marchign army to reach cities before the army did. armies do march /slowly/ most of the time. its only in movies and video games that they reach the town with in the 20 seconds after deciding to attack.

second almost all towns have multiple gates, and sally ports. which means if they were to bring there army out one of those before you surroudned the town - noting towns also had sentries on duty close to 24/7- it wouldn't be unthinkable that your army reformed to defend the town.

If you want it realistic.. then really your army should be spread otu aroudn the whole town when the enemy sallies out when you are 'sieging' .

since a siege means blocking off access to the town an preventing anyone, from entering or leaving . which means you'd have to encircle the whole town not just one side. if you expected a siege to progress.

also if you 'know' the enemy were coming -which a surprise attack against a city for the sake of laying siege rarely would work simply because that means hiding over a thousand troops marching from point A to point B which when you have dozens of towns litered across the province and individual merchants , and spies being able to move much faster its not unlikely, nor impossible for the people who control the city to realize theres a sneak attack coming.

Then if the ai is just gonna sally forth then there isnt really any reason to create a siege army then with siege equipment. The problem is its too different then what it used too theres no town around it so they just give you an open field map. Before it was they sally forthed from the town or walled city now its just a open field battle.