Uses for forteresses

Do you use forteresses?

  • Yes, often

    Votes: 6 6.9%
  • Sometimes

    Votes: 35 40.2%
  • Hardly ever/never

    Votes: 34 39.1%
  • I don't know how to use them effectively

    Votes: 12 13.8%

  • Total voters
    87

man o' war

AKA Kristophski
Joined
Jan 25, 2004
Messages
355
Location
Hole in a field, Cambridge, England
Who actually builds forteresses?

They always seemed to be to be quite useless, and many people I have asked agree. In my most recent game, however, I discovered just how useful forteresses can be if used properly.

Does anyone here use forteresses? How?
 
whats the point: if you use the terrain effeciently then fortresses shouldnt really be needed. The problem with fortresses is: you really shouldnt need to use them for a long time. unless you play way above yourself, you ought to be able to push your enemy back. using cannon and such to damage an advancing horde and using mountain and hill terrain should work just as well. Lets face it - where do you build your fortresses (on mountains and hills I bet!) which means you already have an advantage over your enemy. So, unless your having real problems, dont expect to be able to push back you enemy and are way behind in tech, then you should be able to go the whole game without even thinking about a fortress.
 
You forget - forteresses give the units inside a zone of control, which is very useful early in the game when little or no units have one.

And no, there's no point in building forteresses on hills or mountains, but I do on, for example, plains between mountains which would usually be considered choke points. I would post a screenshot, but i'm not sure how...
 
I have used them on ocassion. One memorable situation was when I realized I had a three-mountain choke point guarding my entire lands. So I built barricades there and placed a large defensive force. The arabs, who were right next to me, had saltpeter(which I normally wouldn't care too much about, saltpeter being the least useful resource IMO, but I was France, so I wanted my UU) So I up and declared war :mischief: It was enjoyable to watch the piddling ansar warriors smash themselves against my fortified mountain barricade pikemen with trebuchet support. Lets see...3*1.25(fortify)=3.75*2(mountain)=7.5*2(baricade)=...15 :eek: is that right? wow. :spear: you could see quite a lot of that. :goodjob: So they CAN be useful.
 
The problem with building a fort is that once you do, you need to keep a garrison inside or the enemy will waltz in and then it becomes their fortress. That said, I will build forts on resources and luxuries if they are on my borders. I will also fortify short 3 to 6 tile chokepoints on borders with civs that I dont want to fight. You can do a better job of defense with less troops.

If I play on a continent map, I'll use forts during my 'colonial' period if I make a landing on the other continent and I need to preserve my limited troops there. My troops are usually better quality but you still want to protect them as much as possible because they will almost assuredly be outnumbered.

If I am on a pangea map and I have long borders, I like to use the draft later on and place an inf or rifle on every border square. This keeps out the rif-raf. I dont bother so much after I get mech.

I use a lot of workers and I'm just starting to drag more workers along with my middle age armies. I'd like to try and bring enough workers along to make a fort in one turn inside enemy lands. A good reason to switch from republic to democray is worker speed so there you go. Dont stay in republic too long.
 
This sounds wasteful, but it can be a good idea to tear down your own forteresses if you can't afford to keep a garrison there.

Another good use for forteresses in on shorelines. I you are on an island surrounded by mere infantry in forteresses, you are nearly invincible, as the only units that can attack you are marines. You would need to keep a couple of tanks hanging around "inside" the island, however, just in case of paratroopers.
 
I often use fortresses when I get to a point of needing a "wall of steel" to cover a chokepoint after it becomes obvious my culture wont advance any more. If units are going to garrison then you might as well build them with the spare workers while you are waiting for railways or pollution to start.

Any other garrison use, like on mountain/hill borders to keep an eye out for advancing enemies.
 
yeh i was gunna say - I only really "waste time" building forteresses when my workers have nothing to do
 
In some specific situations, they can be very valuable. But such situations are rare.

Basically, if you know ahead of time that you're going to have to defend against an SoD from one particular tile, and the SoD is big enough that you need every edge you can get, a fortress can help out a great deal. Yes, even on Mountains/Hills... in fact, I'd go so far as to say fortresses should usually be on Mountains/Hills, since in most situations where you'd need a fortress at all, you'll need the terrain bonus TOO.

Of course, how often do you know what tile you'll have to occupy to stop an SoD ahead of time (and simultaneously have time to build the fortress)? Not much.
 
xane said:
I often use fortresses when I get to a point of needing a "wall of steel" to cover a chokepoint after it becomes obvious my culture wont advance any more. If units are going to garrison then you might as well build them with the spare workers while you are waiting for railways or pollution to start.
Same here. If I've got a potentially hostile neighbor and a relatively short border, I'll put up 2-3 layers of barricades (the improvement after fortresses) with railroads and garrison the first layer. I'll destroy all roads into AI territory on the far side of the barricades. Now if my neighbor decides to suddenly attack me, the AI slow units (infantry) can't hit me in one turn, while the AI fast units (cavalry/tanks) are left by themselves.
When the Stack Of Doom arrives, so what? It's under cannon/artillery bombardment the whole time, and even if it takes a barricaded tile, the SoD is still surrounded by fortified units in barricades, being bombarded by massed artillery.
For real amusement, I'll make outrageous demands for tribute every turn until the AI attacks me, then execute the plan above. After the AI has exhausted itself throwing units at me, the counterattack is much easier.
 
budweiser said:
The problem with building a fort is that once you do, you need to keep a garrison inside or the enemy will waltz in and then it becomes their fortress.

Only if their culture borders include the fortress? I thought enemy units couldn't use forts in your territory.
 
I would only build forts if I have the KT and the crusaders have nothing else to do. My workers have far better things to be doing than building forts.
 
Will have to check that, maybe it is scenario specific? I'm sure I've read elsewhere that it is also dependant on who owns the territory.
 
Forts are useful in chokepoints.

Once I had city next to enemy capital only a chokepoint between them.
That enemy later declared war against me and they had to go around the whole lake to attack me OR attack my barricade in mountain :goodjob:
XXXXXXXX
XLLLLLLLX
XLLLLLLLX
XLLLLLLLX
XLLLLLLLX
XLLLLLLLX
C X F X E
SSSSSXX
SSSSSSS

X=empty land
L=lake
C=my city
F=fort
E=enemy capital
S=sea
 
I have only built one fort. Going against the Aztecs who controlled an entire continent, I took Tenochitlan which was 3 squares off the water. I built a fort on the coast and stationed two muketmen there to protect workers as they were ferried across.
 
What about Coastal ones? I am not new to the game, but why do my Coastal Fortresses never fire on enemy ships? Do I need cannons or something in the city or what? Thanks!
 
I think the enemy ship has to stop in an apprpreate square. But you must be at war.
 
Back
Top Bottom