I just did. Result: You CAN'T do that with a fort or a well.
The only difference between building a fort and building a well is a fort saves you nine turns and a well gets you 2
1 
.
Fort 'cheat' - is it a bug ? or design fault ?
- Thread starter Pilotis
- Start date
The only difference between building a fort and building a well is a fort saves you nine turns and a well gets you 2
1 .
bonafide11
Worker
Are you supposed to be able to build forts on someone else's land? I haven't seen anyone report this as a bug, but you can build forts on other people's land, and even destroy their improvements...
_alphaBeta_
King
Not sure about building them, but your units wouldn't receive the defensive bonus if it's in someone else's cultural borders I should think.
__________________________________________________
I did some more worldbuilder examples and did find a counter-example to what I said earlier. Somehow when I did this the first time it worked. It could have been related to starting techs, however. Astronomy seems to bend the rules a little bit.
The civlopedia says that forts:
Based on this I would expect that the below pictures would grant the horse resource, but this is not the case. What good are they if they don't help in the below scenario? What else could "act like a port" possibly mean?
Attachments
SewerStarFish
King
I believe the written rules had this but it's not in the game -- at least not for protection.
It is a bug if you can build forts into enemy territory (I think it has been reported to bugf forums). You should not get defence modifier from being in fort that isn't in your cultural area.
For me, the fort works as described. In your horse example, I would get the horse, if I have techs that enable over water trade-routes, have Animal Husbandry, road (and the road tech) and the tech for forts.
Don't know if you're missing some required tech?
_alphaBeta_
King
What other tech could affect this? I have animal husbandry, fishing & sailing. Sailing should permit trade along the coast, which is what is happening here.
I mentioned astronomy in my previous post, because it does work with that. In fact, you don't even need a fort. The pasture on the island is all you need (which also doesn't seem correct). The trade system seems a little buggy, or I'm not understanding the rules.
I think that in my example the fort should complete the connection. If I have to wait to get astronomy to get that horse, that's too long. If I can work the tile, it's unrealistic that I can't get the horse off the island somehow. I thought forts were now the answer to that.
I made extra tests, and that should be enough. With those techs, the horse resource should be connected to that city.
And indeed, it somewhat seems that it would work even without forts, with pure pasture(s).
When testing this with WB, I came to conclusion that it bugs somehow. I had several occasions where I didn't get the resource, and several occasions where I got it after modifying the "island" where I had the resource. I didn't see any pattern to how it sometimes decided that this resource now wont be connected, and now it is.
Yes, when I tested I:
- had the resource and the improvement (fort or the required improvement to use that resource) inside my culture borders
- had required techs
- had road on the tile
- had no ocean tiles between the city and the resource
Has someone made tests and found a pattern to those weird cases where the resource isn't connected?
One example I had: I had island of several tiles, and silver there, I WB'd a fort on that tile and a road, it was inside my cultural borders from a city on another island. it did not connect to that city. When I WB'd that silver island to remove some extra tiles from that island (made them water) suddenly the silver was connected to the city on that another island. When I remodified the water back to grassland (returned the island to its original form when the silver wasn't connected) it was still connected. Weird in my books. Its like the code that determines if resource is connected or not isn't checked every time. Pressing end of turn helped nothing, that wasn't the cause.
EDIT: Summa summarum, atleast with World Builder, the trade-route (connected or not connected) for resources in other islands ir highly irrational.
azzaman333
meh
The WB is crap.
You need astronomy to trade across the ocean. Since the island and the mainland do not share a common coast, then there is no trade.
Also you are automaticall connected to all resource squares in your city's fat cross once they have the improvement, no connecting to the port is not necessary.
My thoughts.
Jason
Also you are automaticall connected to all resource squares in your city's fat cross once they have the improvement, no connecting to the port is not necessary.
My thoughts.
Jason
It might supposed to mean that it acts like a port for Naval Units, you might be able to pull them into it.
Just a guess, I'm at work and can't verify
SewerStarFish
King
Your ships can utilize coastal forts as ports. You can not connect a chain of forts to form a canal.
seriously, what do you mean?
azzaman333
meh
It's confusing, it's buggy, you can't remove contact with a civ using it, you can't generate a map tweak it and let the game assign starting locations after tweaking it, you cant generate a map without any civs on it, it's extremely easy to accidently do something almost unreverseable, you can't add extra civs and the Civ 3 editor was vastly superior in every single way.
_alphaBeta_
King
It appears that astronomy allows the connection. Even so, in my example the two landmasses are still connected via coast, not ocean. Coast trading is enabled by sailing, which I had.
Resources are not automatically connected in the fat cross. See my example here. My gripe with this is that you can't get a resource in this type of scenario.
Roland Johansen
Deity
I've read another thread where the connection of the resource was dependent on the shape of the island (based on screen shots from someone who did some tests with it). Weird huh.
I've looked, but couldn't (easily) find this thread anymore. Too much posting about forts in this forum.
I think that this test was a mixup with this bug that I posted: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=240626
I would imagine that that person tested this "shape of island" theory with WB, and that way he got those (wrong) results.
Imo it has nothing to do with shape, just with the fact that the island has been modified with WB.
I could be wrong ofcourse..
Roland Johansen
Deity
Similar threads
