Siege does not block defender movement?

[raw flume]

So, is it intended that when I'm sieging a city, the defenders move in and out of the city freely and even attack stray units I left vulnerable, then go back in? Shouldn't they at least initiate a battle with sieging army if they want to get out of the city?

[half orchid]

It's weird, yes. And it's been talked about before. To be frank, if the game is going to punish the offender with obese siege times, then it's only fair that it would pin the defending stack. But alas, there are just as many folks who argue otherwise.

[buoyant stag]

Imo overland armies should have zone of control like in combat to control enemy army movement

[floral valve]

I mean as it stands defends don't really have a benefit when fighting in a siege

[narrow zinc]

Sending out sorties is a time honored method of breaking a siege, but I know what you are saying. I think the idea is that defending units can run away through secret passages unless the city is totally surrounded.

What if the defender had to spend twice as many movement points to move into or out of besieged cities? And maybe make a city structure (called Bolt Holes or something) that negated that penalty?

Or perhaps take a fourth stack to the siege, splitting it up and surrounding the city? Then the defender would have to face 2 stacks plus the split?

[floral valve]

Technically circling a city is a possibly, but if you wanted what's listed above defenders would need a bigger Buff for defending a city

[subtle trellis]

Defenders get punished HARD during the siege. If they don’t want to attempt to break the siege then they’ll suffer more resource losses. I would still like to see what you’re suggesting but also allow that if an outside army attacks the sieging army, then that army attacking the siege army will start behind the sieging army while the besieged city’s army will still be coming from the city and its walls. I could see that being too much though, especially with city defenses giving an additional edge.

[muted harbor]

IMO, splitting in two the defenders' armies, even to surround the attackers, is clearly weakening the defenders. It's too easy for the attacker just to focus on one half of the armies at a time, stomping them.

[subtle trellis]

Thats fair..unless the defenders were allowed 1 additional army if it came from an outside source..also it’d be hard to gain a real advantage if the defenders flanked ya with one of the two groups

[rigid marsh]

The entire siege system is pretty clearly an abstraction, and a "best effort" given the limitations of the combat engine and the AI. Of all the things wrong with it, this one is pretty minor.

[raw flume]

what about towers, catapults, etc? I'm not sure as I haven't really played many sieges myself, I usually auto

[raw flume]

I'm ok with the "run away through secret passages" idea, in which case there should be a chance to be caught, also, rather than going in and out freely, maybe units should be treated as if they had fled a battle (show up in the nearest city in a few turns?) Area of influence of armies should solve much of these issues, so that a player can't walk past another character without a fight (without some sort of special trait perhaps)

[raw flume]

I mean, sieges SHOULD feel punishing, right? And yes, defender should want to attack the attackers, using the advantage of the towers, catapults, and whatever defenses they have built, before the enemy takes them down during the siege. What you say about the army attacking siegers starting behind, totally agree, would be great.

[subtle trellis]

Yup, definitely agree that sieges should be punishing. The punishment feels just about perfect to me.

[quartz owl]

A "secret passage" for someone ok (only for heroes ?), but not for an army and not for "heavy" units like mounted or machines ?!

[half orchid]

If it was easy to just walk out of besieged fortifications and settlements, no army would ever have waited to receive it.

But you know what? Fine. I'll meet you in the middle. Give us the ability to just walk into undefeated cities without waiting 3-6 turns.

[rigid marsh]

The siege system would benefit from a complete overhaul, really. This is just part of what's wrong with it.

[narrow zinc]

Walls and fortification strength was designed to counteract this problem. And the solution of leaving 1 unit to man the walls is too facile, it changes nothing. I like the siege system. I think the original point is that people can run away too freely.