Throughout ancient history, there is a very strange phenomenon - when two armies fight, they are attacked by city after city. Usually, the way to capture a city is to directly attack the city gate, take the city gate and then enter the city.
Knowing that the other side has deployed troops on the city, the siege is not as easy as imagined, and it may even pay a huge price and suffer heavy losses. In addition, a lot of work needs to be done before the siege. Siege armies would surround castles or enemy fortifications to prevent soldiers from escaping or breaking through. However, this project is very large and will consume a lot of manpower and material resources. Why did the ancients still insist on besieging the city, bypassing the city wall and entering the city?
To know the reason why the ancients chose to siege the city, we have to start from the environment and other factors at that time, and the ancients were not stupid. In ancient times, transportation was far less developed than it is now. Generally speaking, the road is the flattest and widest, and it is not an official road, which happens to be the only way to enter the city. The other roads are some rough paths. Moreover, most of the cities and pools are built on fortresses that choke land and waterways, and there is a trend of "one husband and one man should be closed, and everyone cannot open it". Therefore, for the siege troops, the best choice to enter the city is to take the official road, which is convenient for the passage of chariots, horses and large troops, and can also block the reinforcements who come to support.
If they take that kind of path, after being discovered by the enemy, it is easy to be scattered or divided into several parts, the battle line is too long, and the only way for them to wait is a dead end, and it is difficult to break through. If the official road is surrounded, it is easier for large troops to resist the enemy and break through, after all, there are many people and great strength.
If you take the small road, you still face a problem. The road is rough, the soldiers climb the mountains and mountains by their feet, and their physical strength is greatly consumed. By the time they reached the enemy camp, they were already physically and mentally exhausted, and their combat effectiveness had greatly declined. If on the way, it is found by the enemy. If the enemy uses the terrain to snatch away or destroy the grain and grass, it will definitely cause the army to be disturbed, and how can it fight?
In addition, choosing to go around the city will make yourself suffer from the enemy. The army enters, and the enemy scouts cannot be unaware. Some of the guards will send troops to intercept and kill, disrupting the formation of the troops. The clever guards pretended not to know where the troops were moving, and then quietly sent troops to surround them and catch turtles in an urn. Even if the troops are not completely destroyed, they will suffer heavy losses.
Therefore, on the surface, the risk of going around the city is less risky than the risk of directly attacking the city. In fact, no, the risk of going around the city is even greater, extremely dangerous, and if it is not done well, the entire army will be destroyed. After capturing a city, the food, grass, men and horses of the defenders can be used for their own use, replenishing the food, grass and strength of the troops. If you fail to capture the city, it is easy to retreat. Why not enjoy it in one fell swoop?