This could bring down even the strongest tower. One of the greatest vulnerabilities of a castle was being undermined. The ones that survive intact into the modern age were the very best, Dover castle lasted long enough to be hardened against cannon fire with the best technology of the age. If your attackers are in a hurry and going for the attack you're probably in luck as defenders, castles were good, well designed and well built they gave significant advantage to the defending force. Far cheaper and safer to sit out the siege for as long as it lasts, and it could last for years (the siege of Donnington castle lasted from July 1644 to April 1646). Long enough for either the attackers to run out of food or money (or healthy men), or for a relief force to reach the castle to break the siege.ĭirectly assaulting a castle is fairly rare, it's expensive and risky. Castles are not the purely functional buildings that modern bunkers tend to be.Ī castle didn't have to hold out forever when under siege, it just had to hold out for long enough. It also acts as garrison, prison, armoury, residence, administrative centre, and food store. It allows a smaller force to hold a territory against much larger numbers until reinforcements can be gathered. Why a castle?Ĭastles are a statement of control as well as a tool of war, you see it dominating a landscape and it tells the world that there's someone here willing to put up a fight to keep a region. Whether to sally forth with troops, or simply to shoot from the relative safety of the battlements, a castle is more than just a reinforced concrete box. One of the key features of castles is the ability to counter attack. This is the problem you risk if you make a fortress that's truly impregnable, it could become the prison you spend the rest of your life in. by focusing on the materials and construction techniques rather than on particular devices)Ĭolditz Castle An impregnable fortress.
If "impregnable" is impossible, then "as strong/durable as possible".īonus points if the answer manages to give a great solution to the problem without needing overly complicated technology to keep working (e.g. What are the materials and techniques best suited to withstand the problems listed? Of course, good and cheap is better than good and expensive but good and expensive is much better than crappy but cheap. Let's say something around $5B just to give you an idea. The resource limit is what realistically could be done by an entity in our society, so obviously no "just build an actual mountain the size of China, made of concrete and steel and hate". Resource and time limit: no time limit, and suppose the area isn't attacked or sabotaged in any way during the construction. Let's assume that everyone is completely loyal and would die sooner than "betray the castle". Population: as many people as possible as long as it doesn't compromise security and provisions. It also needs to function as any "regular" castle (allow movement of troops and people in and out, allow counter attacks and so on) Location constraints: any location is allowed, provided it is suitable for a medieval population (e.g. For example, if a carbon fiber wall gets damaged, they will repair it with stones/bricks/concrete. This means they won't be able to repair or replicate anything beyond their level of technology.
#Medieval total war 1 troops on castle walls how to
It is assumed that the inhabitants will learn perfectly how to operate every device/building/etc., but will not be able to understand how/why they work. (I say "possibly" because it would be a nice addition, but as long as the other 3 problems are covered, this can be handled by the soldiers.)