Ancient siege warfare succeeded only for the richest armies due to enormous logistical costs.

Evidence

Most armies of Lachish’s day lacked the engineers, supplies, and time necessary for waging a prolonged siege. To starve out a defended city, or breach its walls, required tens of thousands of soldiers camped for many months—sometimes years—in hostile territory a long way from home. The invading army had to protect itself during this process, so they often built a fortress around their camp, which required huge quantities of food and timber. Also, since they would be far from home for an extended period, invaders needed to leave the bulk of their armies behind. That is, their armies had to be so vast, and so well organized, that they could move ten thousand troops to a foreign land without leaving their home cities vulnerable. All told, the logistics involved with successful siege warfare vastly exceeded the capabilities of all but the richest of armies. — Emlen, Douglas J, Animal Weapons_ The Evolution of Battle, 486

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Modern naval weapons cost billions and thus only wealthy nations can field them — Emlen, Douglas J, Animal Weapons_ The Evolution of Battle, 396

Related

• Siege equipment grew enormous, with towers pushed by thousands of men (similarity 0.81)
• Terrain and logistics prevented Mesoamerican empires from developing siege weapons (similarity 0.80)
• Pushing siege weapons to longer range only drove artillery growth (similarity 0.80)
• Assyrians multiplied assault points to overstretch thin defender coverage across the perimeter. (similarity 0.80)