More info needed for seige combats

[gwheelock]

One of the prime reasons to have a 1 factor garrison FIGHT a
seige combat is to find out the composition of the beseiging force.
(OTOH - If the garrison surrenders without a fight - this information should NOT be
revealed)

There needs to be more information (at least to the defending player; if
not to the public at large) of WHAT was in the army that attacked - not
just "Oh - they killed you!"

In this example; I (France) controlled the garrison in Straslund.
I SPECIFICALLY set it to fight so that I might find out exactly what
the Prussians had & did not get this info

[AresMars]

I would agree that this would be a VERY NICE to have.
 
It was one of the rare times that I would sacrifice Infantry (well Militia) for the exact reason given by gwheelock.
 
 

[JavaJoe]

ORIGINAL: AresMars

I would agree that this would be a VERY NICE to have.

It was one of the rare times that I would sacrifice Infantry (well Militia) for the exact reason given by gwheelock.

Recon by death

[Soapy Frog]

Agreed this is a serious lack in the game.

[pzgndr]

There needs to be more information (at least to the defending player; if
not to the public at large) of WHAT was in the army that attacked

From a computer game perspective, Marshall has an opportunity to apply some FOW effects that may be different than the board game. In cases of sieges and trivial combats involving odds of 5-1 or greater, would the smaller force necessarily know the complete composition of the larger force? Maybe not. It should be sufficient for the computer to verify 5-1 odds or greater and notify players of overwhelming force without detailing what that force is.

FOW itself could be split into basic and advanced options. Advanced FOW could apply more severe restrictions like reduced info for siege combats to make games more challenging. Things like this can be considered in a computer game.

[Grognot]

Indeed.  And likewise, if one side is completely trounced by another, it would not be entirely implausible for the lone survivors among the defeated to have an inaccurate, probably exaggerated assessment of what they were facing.

And in general, one side being much more ably led than another might distort each side's impression of what they were actually up against -- in particular, the worse-led forces might reasonably overestimate their opponent's numbers.

Having some FOW options providing more realistic uncertainty would be interesting, but I'd prefer to see fixes to critical bugs before more options.