Situation: Assaulting Fortifications

[egamma]

I'd like to see a series of threads about what the best formations are, depending on a given situation.

For this thread, I'd like to assume that the enemy is using fortification defense mode, and has fortifications. The rest of the variables are up to you.

But what is the best formation to use to conquer the fortifications? Infantry charge, archer opening, other? Would it depend on what level the fortifications are, the number of defenders, and force makeups on both sides?

Throw out some numbers and what you would do in a given situation.

[Bedwyr]

If you have enough of an advantage in archers to make up the difference in the damage reduced by the fortifications (call it ten percent per level of fortifications, though I don't really know how accurate that number is), then I'd say archer opening.  Otherwise, infantry charge!

[Shizzle]

Use catapults to shoot your cav over the wall, gg

[Foundation]

Wait, wait, wait, guys, this is the War Islands forum, right?

[egamma]

Wait, wait, wait, guys, this is the War Islands forum, right?

Ah, regular BM needs its own Strategies forum.

[Chenier]

This might have been moved, but this is the BM subsection, not the WI one.

[Tom]

yes, I moved it.

[Luegg]

If all the melee troops have enough siege engines put them into one line otherwise the guys with SE one line infront those without.

If the attacking army has a greater force in archers even when taking reduced damage due to walls into account, best way to attack is  to put archers front (actually all  ranged units), and everyone else in the rear (or those with SE back those without rear). This provides the best damage a superior archer force can score, as they have much more time to fire on the besieged army.

If archer force of the attacker is not great, have everyone in front, or again two lines of infantry.

I am not sure what unit settings (line, box or wedge) are best for the melee units. I would go for line. Archers I would keep in skirmish unless You expect a really close battle in which case line.

[Gustav Kuriga]

Unless they have a level 7 stronghold. Then you should just build up a bunch of large suicidal infantry units with SE and do as much damage to the walls as possible. If you win (which you won't if they have even a paltry amount of militia inside the walls), raze fortifications until it gets to lvl 6, then rinse and repeat. What we did to Thulsoma, seems to work (save we didn't use sacrificial units the first time, it would have helped though).

[Sacha]

Nonsense, walls are only as strong as the people manning them. If you have an adequate enough army, not even a level 9 wall is going to stop you.

[Munro]

Nonsense, walls are only as strong as the people manning them. If you have an adequate enough army, not even a level 9 wall is going to stop you.

I agree. I was under the assumption that walls count for almost nothing if you take enough Siege Engines with you? (and enough men to at least equal the defenders).

[Indirik]

I agree. I was under the assumption that walls count for almost nothing if you take enough Siege Engines with you? (and enough men to at least equal the defenders).

Walls still count for a lot. They greatly reduce the damage the defenders take. You'll need a substantially larger force than the defenders, unless the force mix is way unbalanced (defender has 75% archers or something) or the defender lines up in some stupid formation like Delay and Wound. (Yes, I saw this once...)

More SEs does help, though. The more you have, the better off you'll be.

[Sacha]

As your enemy's walls become stronger, archers become more useless in the attacking army. What you need is infantry, as heavy as you can get it, stocked with siege engines and banners. The more siege engines you have, the easier they will manage to get onto the ramparts. Once you're on them, the quality of your troops' equipment and their training and cohesion can be the difference between victory and defeat.

People tend to think that it comes down to raw CS, but in a siege battle I would much rather fight with a 40 man unit at 600 CS than an 80 man unit of the same strength. Some people still believe that as long as your enemy doesn't have at least 2:1 odds in CS, they will not be able to win a siege of a fortress (level 5 wall), which is a bunch of crock. About a month ago, Darka, Eston and BoM besieged a city of Coria which had a level 5 wall. The total CS values were 19,000 for the attackers vs 11,000 CS for the defenders. A lot of people would think that Coria should have won a close victory, but when the battle was over the attackers had won, with over 14,000 CS still standing (excluding wounded troops that healed later on), whereas the defenders were almost completely wiped out. The reasons: The attackers had about 4 times as much infantry as the defenders, of much better quality. The attacking infantry was well-trained, well-equipped and well-organized, whereas the defenders were mostly mediocre, poorly trained, unorganized militia.

Taking a lot of banners with you will also help a great deal, as your men will keep their morale high, and as a result they will be able to put in a bit of extra 'oomph', as they say. They will be able to take a lot more punishment before being forced off the walls or off the battlefield. In the siege I mentioned, the attackers had a whopping 20 siege engines and 51 banners in the first round of battle on the walls. As a result of this, and the superior quality of their troops, not a single unit of attackers was repelled from the walls in the first round, which proved to be crucial. The defenders managed to hold their ground for another turn, but after that, it was more a slaughter than a battle.

[Indirik]

In the siege I mentioned, the attackers had a whopping 20 siege engines and 51 banners in the first round of battle on the walls.

If I had known it would only be 20, I would have been nervous. :\ I would have wanted at least twice that. 20 SE in that battle wasn't anywhere near the typical "1 per 20 men", which I think isn't enough anyway.

But still, like you said, we wiped them out because of the completely lopsided, archer-heavy defending force.

[Munro]

But still, like you said, we wiped them out because of the completely lopsided, archer-heavy defending force.

Nah you won because the Duke of the City was not there to recruit a decent amount of Infantry militia at the time of the assault Some nifty politics were to blame for that, but it was a decent strategy by the enemy nonetheless.

Merlin had constantly been in the city so that he was able to do so in that eventuality, however, having been asked to travel to Anost, that was why he was not there.

But yeah, it just goes to show, CS matters little in such circumstances.