You are a Troll
BobThat too is an odd discrepancy. However, so far and for another year + another roadmap, getting inside a settlement has nothing really to do with capturing a settlement.
It's hard to judge, because the compensating advantages might come from totally different features. Perhaps those settlements already have certain advantages, and the fact that they don't get as much benefit from this feature as some other settlements do actually makes things more balanced. Or perhaps another scheduled feature will benefit them more than others. What we're shooting for is to make sure that everyone gets at least some positive advantage out of this change (everyone can do some layering) and nobody gets too much positive advantage (like a permanently-defensible position). Our focus is on making any fixes needed to avoid those extremes.
Ultimately, we want every settlement location to be valuable to somebody, for no locations to be so inherently valuable that nothing else is worth bothering with, and for different locations to be valued differently by varying groups of players. If there are locations that truly offer no worthwhile advantages to anyone, then we'll need to revisit those, but I'm not aware of any locations that are that problematic at the moment (aside from some well-known raw material distribution issues, which I'll be fiddling with a bit for EE 13).
Seems pretty clear to me: not every settlement is, or should be, equal in all respects even as it pertains to game mechanics. How about those *dry moats* some settlements have that you can't get out of allowing access to the settlement only along the roads?
Glad it was pointed out, but as Hobson said, time to move along and just deal with it. No King, nor their kingdom, does (or should) last forever. Some silly people even build castles in swamps, and when they sink, rebuild them there!
How many hexes have to be taken to pick apart the puzzle of how to get all core six hexes so you can siege a settlement has everything to do with capturing a settlement.