Siege or Assault?

[MrWhereItsAt]

So when you are about to attack a town with fortifications, there is usually the choice of assaulting the fortress or of besieging it. From history I'd imagine that besieging the city would be far less costly for your troops than assaulting it, yet I have seen little difference in the few short games I have started. Admittedly I have not made any kind of quantitative analysis on this, but can anyone tell me if I'm missing something? I know attrition due to the province not being able to support so many troops is a possibility, but is there anything else I've missed, or is assaulting the best way to go if you want your army to survive to another province?

[Nikolai]

Assaulting is costly. But if you have 1) a good gap between you and your rival tech wise(in a positive manner) or/and 2) the fortification has been damaged(less than 0 is my choice), I think it can be good to assault. All this is just my thoughts, for all I know, it might be all wrong. I'm only a "normal" player, not an expert as some others.

[CerberusIV]

Easier, cheaper (in terms of losses) and almost as quick to use lots of artillery (40 guns per fortification level). Most places have only level 1 or 2 forts and can be flattened within a few months.

If it is a winter province, attack as soon as the snow melts and you should be able to take the province before the next winter with this level of artillery.

Having said that artillery is a fairly major investment and if you build a siege army you should be planning to make fairly heavy use of it.

[ravagon]

A good practice with assaults is to lay siege to the fortress in question for a while first. If you keep it up until you've breached the walls then you can assault with little or no penalty. On the down side this often takes a while.
Assaulting a fortress right from the start is much more costly in terms of men lost but may be the better option if you're otherwise facing a long siege in a low infrastructure province.
Cavalry, unfortunately won't take part, I've tried pointing them to the word 'Dragoon' in the dictionary but most of the dummies can't read. Or so they say.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Originally posted by CerberusIV
Easier, cheaper (in terms of losses) and almost as quick to use lots of artillery (40 guns per fortification level). Most places have only level 1 or 2 forts and can be flattened within a few months.

So I take it that Arty makes sieges more effective, but what about assaults? Is there any point in having Arty during one of those?

[CerberusIV]

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt


So I take it that Arty makes sieges more effective, but what about assaults? Is there any point in having Arty during one of those?

Yes. Artillery speeds up sieges. If you are really in a hurry but don't want too many losses the compromise is to sit with an infantry and artillery army until the siege has progressed a bit and then, when the fortress is weakened, send in the assault. The assault is best done once the picture shows several red breaches or the number on the right has gone down to zero or less. This way the assault costs fewer casualties.

[Velociryx]

Rules of thumb I use:

* A long siege in a province with low support and/or long winters can be devastating. In those cases, it's generally much better to do a quick assault and end the matter there.

* Assaults are easier (and less costly in terms of manpower), the wider your tech gap.

* Assaults are easier (and less costlyl in terms of manpower) the smaller the fortification level.

* Your chances of succeeding increase dramatically if the fortifications have been breeched (noted by a small "V" shape appearing in the fortification wall section.

* To increase your chances of success, you must keep your morale up. This can be accomplished by feeding troops into the province where an assault is currently ongoing, as these will automatically be added TO the assault, and their morale averaged in with the morale of the troops already there. This implies a strategy of beginning an assault with the bare minimum number of troops needed for a classic siege, and timing other "waves" of assaulters to arrive in ~ 1 week incriments, and in sufficient numbers to significantly impact the morale of the army they're being added into.

(example for assaulting a small fortress:
Initial attack force = 10k troops (5k * fortification level)
Assault begins
~1 Week later, another 6k troops arrive.
~1 Week later, another 10k troops arrive.

This should extend the assault long enough, by preserving your morale long enough to wear the defenders out. Thus, the fight ends in three weeks' time, and you can move onto the next province, making for extremely fast conquests.

In general, however, I prefer a "smother and siege" approach.

Lock down all enemy territories with covering forces, and settle in for a long series of sieges, slowly griding away at your opponent, but assaulting has its uses...

This enables you to cherry pick provinces, and lets the enemy build up gold which you can later confiscate...

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

Artillery has enormous "shock value" in combat (about twice as much as cavalry), and as such, during the shock phase of combat resolution, will kill great numbers of enemy troops.

They are, however, frightfully expensive to maintain.

I rarely use them any more against the AI, because I prefer flexibility and fluidity over the raw addition of firepower, but if you create a force of 70 or so arty, and wheel them out for really BIG nasty forts, they can speed things along.

-=Vel=-

[Heresson]

I rarley assault unless the besieged have low morale - I often siege rebel-held cities, or the ones with weak forts