The or-or challenges

[Unoriginal]

Hey guys,
I have a situation, where PCs will find themselves in a besieged town. Town is actively being besieged as bresiegers are launching incineary projectiles into town and setting it on fire. In this situation, I would like to present the PCs with a few situations, where they may contribute to the town being saved/defended by picking between several choices, given to them by the local leaders.

I have in mind simple things like:
- Hey, wise adventurers, should we place the militia on the town walls or assign more men to put out the fires?
- Hey wise adventurers, the town orphanage and granary are on fire. Which one should we save? We can only save one.
- Hey, wise adventurers. We have a number of badly burnt victims in a local temple - should we distribute potions of healing evenly, or give all of them to those who can man the walls?

Disclaimers: PCs may find solutions of their own to these challenges, but I would like for then to be properly conceptually challenged - not just "we split the party, one third sets out to put out the orphanage fire, the second third the granary fire, the remaining third of the party will help man the walls".
There will be no "muahaha, the granary has burnt down, hunger sets in", but I would like some challenges that challebge party a bit, so the duality might be needed to be written a bit smarter then an average CRPG style "sell the child or kill the mother" with a 60 sec timer. Even if PCs find the solutions of their own, I would like to give them the run for their money as much as I can.

Any other ideas on what choices I could present to them?

Thanks!

Personally, as a player, having choices during a siege be presented as "either X or Y, the one you don't choose is screwed" would ruin the flow and take me right out of the action.

If the PCs are in charge, then they get to make some choices/give orders before the siege, like "people who fight have priority for the healing potions" or "protect the food over buildings, we can't win if we starve". You can even have a military aide ask them those specific either/or questions, since the aide would know which issue needs to be decided.

During the siege, the things the PCs can't perceive themselves would need to be told to them by various messengers, and they're not likely to meet each other, synthetise what the issue is, then present an either/or choice to those in charge. The situation, IMO, should more be "first messenger shows up, give report, wait for orders, and the next messenger shows up either before or after the first left", which keeps the situation changing. Sometime the PCs will have to change their orders after giving them, contributing to the chaos and stress of the siege.

Also, it should be possible that some things aren't reported because no one is able to witness the thing, or becsuse the messenger is blocked before they can tell their intel. Or, sometime, the messenger carrying the PC's orders back to the troops would be the one getting blocked, meaning the troops will have to work with what their immediate leader think should be done, or break into chaos if the situation is dire enough.

Of course if PCs notice the order hasn't reached its place, they can do something about it.