Outposts...

[ACR]

Are they really beneficial? It seems to me you could put a unit there and get much of the same befit and not loose the position when the first bad guy shows.

[The Last Conformist]

If placed on a mountain, an Outpost has longer sightlines than any unit. They don't cost maintenance either.

Nonetheless, I think they're as good as entirely useless.

[Theoden]

I never use them, but I once had a situation where it could have been beneficial. There was a lonely mountain sorrounded by flat land, and this flat land was where all the battles were fought. Having an outpost there would have given very valuable information about the war, even considering that i would have to defend that outpost with units. I just felt I couldn't spare any workers.

Advantages from having outpost instead of units
- It can see roughly twice as long
- It doesn't cost support

Disadvantages from having outpost instead of units
- It costs one worker
- It cannot defend itself

Theoden

[Flintlock]

No one has mentioned astectics? Having outposts (especially radar towers, tho) just LOOKS good.
For example, in one of my older games, it was the modern age, I controlled the entire continent. Well, at the very top of the map, I had to make sure the Romans didn't sneak their navy in, and, if they did, I would have to destroy it. Thus, I established an airbase and garrisoned 4 stealth bombers, 4 stealth fighers (for recon), and a few MIs in it. I even named it and everything! Sure, I could've put the stuff in a city two tiles away, but this just seemed so much nicer! ^^

[AbuHab]

Originally Posted by The Last Conformist

If placed on a mountain, an Outpost has longer sightlines than any unit. They don't cost maintenance either.

Are you sure about the range? I did a test not too long ago in C3C with the 1.22 patch. I wanted to keep an eye on an enemy border city, so I moved my worker unit to the border and then saved my game. I then did the following experiment. I built an outpost on a mountain that was two squares away from the city, a hill that was two squares away from the city, and a plain two squares away from the city. (After placing an outpost in a location, I'd see what effect it had, and then I'd open the saved game again and try placing the outpost in a different location.) I was unable to see the defending unit inside the city regardless of the terrain on which the outpost was built, so I came to the conclusion that outposts only have a range of 1, regardless of terrain. (And I know the city did have a defending unit, because I could see it when my worker unit moved onto the mountain square or the hill square.) My memory might be faulty, but I think I'm remembering correctly. I'll look for that saved game.

[citizen001]

Outposts would be great on a mountain looking into enemy territory with a fort and a barricade also built there.

[ACR]

How close does the enemy need to come to see your outpost? Is it the same as it would be if you just had a unit there?

[Ginger_Ale]

Originally Posted by citizen001

Outposts would be great on a mountain looking into enemy territory with a fort and a barricade also built there.

You can't have an outpost on the same tile as a fort/barricade, just like you can't have a Radar Tower with a fort, etc. You can't have a outpost/radar tower/airfield on the same tile as a fort/barricade.

Originally Posted by ACR

How close does the enemy need to come to see your outpost? Is it the same as it would be if you just had a unit there?

Yes, it's just as if you had a unit there. For a mountain/hill with all grassland infront of it, it's 2 tiles. If it's on grassland and you are 2 tiles away with grassland inbetween, you won't see it. Just the same as a unit.

[Jaybe]

An Outpost on a mountain sees 3 tiles (possibly 4, I don't remember). It sees that many tiles regardless of the intervening terrain (even other mountains).

I had a game a few months ago where they were quite useful in a couple locations spotting approaching enemy units, before railroads.

[Lord_Sidious]

to my game they were decesive!

[WarMonkeY]

Outposts are nearly just eyecandy to me... mmmm...eyecandy!

But seriously, when there is a 3-space strait with a mountain next to it, it could be supervised by a little outpost..and they are quite nice for looking 1 more tile into enemy territory..

[hIdDeN_eViL]

i don't like sacrificing a worker for an outpost, even on a mountain

but i never hesitate to use a useless captured worker. there not much good for anything else, (only working at 50%)

outposts are good for spying out enemy sneak attacks, though i only find them useful on mountains.

[joycem10]

Originally Posted by hIdDeN_eViL

i don't like sacrificing a worker for an outpost, even on a mountain

but i never hesitate to use a useless captured worker. there not much good for anything else, (only working at 50%)

outposts are good for spying out enemy sneak attacks, though i only find them useful on mountains.

captured workers, being free (ie no maintenance costs) are never useless.

[CheekyRich]

I always find outposts quite useful but I only ever use captured workers to make them. I don't purposely build workers for outposts seems such a waste...

[hIdDeN_eViL]

Originally Posted by joycem10

captured workers, being free (ie no maintenance costs) are never useless.

hey,
i never knew that...
thanks

[LLXerxes]

Originally Posted by The Last Conformist

If placed on a mountain, an Outpost has longer sightlines than any unit. They don't cost maintenance either.

Nonetheless, I think they're as good as entirely useless.

ditto. wole thing
it's fun to use them when your bored like using them in AoD.

they seem to be better and serve more puprose in RTS games like Rise of Nations and AoE II.

[Suchy_63]

Also, not sure how relevant this is because I never tried it, but if you are milking the game and don't want to settle all the territory that you just captured to avoid Domination limit, then it makes sense to put outpusts in there so that barbarians don't spawn. AFAIK, barbs only appear on the territory that is not visible by anybody else.

[Zakharov]

Originally Posted by Theoden

Disadvantages from having outpost instead of units
- It costs one worker

Here is exactly why I think outposts are not worth building. That worker could be so much better utilised building tile improvements instead.

Radar towers, however, provide a combat bonus to nearby units and so are slightly more useful.

[LLXerxes]

Originally Posted by Suchy_63

Also, not sure how relevant this is because I never tried it, but if you are milking the game and don't want to settle all the territory that you just captured to avoid Domination limit, then it makes sense to put outpusts in there so that barbarians don't spawn. AFAIK, barbs only appear on the territory that is not visible by anybody else.

maybe, but they also settle far from "Civilized" Civs.

[Strato]

I have used a few outposts in the early games to just keep an eye out for an approaching barbarian horde. Because I had a very unfriendly neighbour, I didn't want to keep too many forces dedicated to watching out for the barbarians. It means a quick mobilisation is needed, (and this is the early game, so only roads were around) but the expense of that one worker probably saved a whole lot more.

It all depends on the situation at hand.