The garrisons of up to 10,000 men can be very unreasonable making siege events that knock down defenders relatively pointless with too much emphasis on heavy frontal assault and over-prioritizing any kind of siege modifier, (offensive policy) because quite literally the game flow will span to 2 end game wars turn of the century in 1700 and then your experience is over.
Its also crazy that in the era of petards and active sapping, that not more could be done or encouraged in the direction of undermining the enemy with anything but statecraft and two barrage buttons. Even if you could amass 10k cannons (which was the bombard's historical purpose) to pelt the defenders nonstop at a cost of morale so they would be useless without periodic resting if you were counter attacked or they rallied out, it would substantially counter high garrisons which you only need to get to 0 to win, the real culprit and intended way to win lategame sieges.
Its also crazy that in the era of petards and active sapping, that not more could be done or encouraged in the direction of undermining the enemy with anything but statecraft and two barrage buttons. Even if you could amass 10k cannons (which was the bombard's historical purpose) to pelt the defenders nonstop at a cost of morale so they would be useless without periodic resting if you were counter attacked or they rallied out, it would substantially counter high garrisons which you only need to get to 0 to win, the real culprit and intended way to win lategame sieges.
- 1