Garrison choosing to fight in open field is a bug?

[lostangelonline]

Hi guys, just lost my heavily fortified capital, because my stupid garrison, when the enemy army entered the region and attacked the 1 unit I was using to "scout" the enemy army, decided to help the poor guys, thous been butchered and lost the region with no casualties for the enemy. Will this repeat if I always "scout" the enemy army and it attacks the scout? Should we consider this a bug?

[Hendricus]

Must be a brave scout, not retreating behind the safety of the walls. Are you sure you have to be outside the city to do your scouting ?

[Lysimachos]

Military units geve insight visual of the bordering provinces also if garrisoning the walls of the city ...

[jimwinsor]

I don't think it's a bug, but rather a game mechanic. The game assumes that if you have any forces outside a city wall you intend to defend the region outside the city wall, and the city garrison will join you in the field. For better or worse.

This is a tricky one, because there are instances where you certainly would find the additional field troops useful. And the game cannot interrupt turn resolution to inquire as to your preference.

[lostangelonline]

Thanks guys. I checked on a new SP game and indeed I have vision in neighboring regions, even when garrisoned. From now on I will always garrison my scouts.

As for the unrealistic choice of the garrisons to join a suicidal defense of 1 unit outside the walls, as I thought happened, the realistic explanation is that they were ordered (by me, as i decided to not garrison that scout) to fight any enemy that might besiege the region, in the open field.

[Ludendorf]

In Pike and Shot, the garrison would only join the fight if they had a realistic chance of influencing the result. Maybe something like that could be implemented?

(I'm still not sure that's exactly how it works. Does defeating garrison troops on the battlefield in P&S Campaigns make the region itself easier to take by siege?)