Are castles worth building in cities that aren't on the front line?

[Tennyson]

For me it's not so much that they obsolete so early it's also that they are only available to build for a short time anyway, the Engineering=>Economics timeline is pretty short, plus you first need walls to build them. Being protective and/or having stone makes the a fair choice but only for coastal or frontline cities IMO.

'They're only available for a short time' is why 'They obsolete so early'.

I'd like to see Castles available until Electricity. This way they wouldn't be obsolete until bunkers.

 

[Permanganate]

IMO, there is only one reason to build a castle; if your neighbor is likely to attack you with a gigantic stack of units, it's very useful in the city they attack. (Usually you know which city that it before the war - if not, whip once it starts.) They're too expensive for their duration to do anything else; you have more important things to be building.

It makes me feel sorry for the Spanish.

I'd like to see Castles available until Electricity. This way they wouldn't be obsolete until bunkers.

Castles had been obsolete for centuries by that point. It would make more sense to have them arrive earlier and go obsolete with Gunpowder, or Chemistry at the latest (to represent sappers' explosives).

 

[BYC]

Mathematics and Construction probably would make the most sense from re-teching the Castle. One allows the fort, which would lead into the castle. The other allows colosseum, which is another major building project. It would also open up early spies since other than Great Wall and Courthouse, there isn't really a way to get more points.

 

[Sephlock]

What probably happens in those circumstances are that you build the G Lighthouse, for example.... but at that point in the game, you either don't have any coastal trade routes available, or don't have many coastal cities... so you don't see an increase immediately. This isn't always the case - last game I built the G Lighthouse, my income nearly doubled - it depends on the circumstances.

Doubled? Are you sure you didn't just hallucinate that? Trade routes don't seem to bring very much money at all in the early game*, and in lategame it would be too late to build the G Lighthouse...


*In the game I just played, I built a work boat to travel along the coast and establish trade routes with other civs. I ran into Babylon, which was WAAAAY on the far side of the continent... I check my capital, and sure enough, I have a trade route with Babylon.... providing 2 commerce.

TWO COMMERCE? ARE YOU ******* KIDDING ME?

 

[Grimz101]

just played a game with hannibal, had great lighthouse, it was continents with lots of my cities coastal, i had colossous aswell, his unique building is +1 trade route, i had temple of artemis(SP?) and castles on my coastal cities.. my economy was so strong it was crazed

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Perhaps have Castles obsolete with Steel (since Cannons were really the thing that made them pointless)

 

[Tennyson]

Castles had been obsolete for centuries by that point. It would make more sense to have them arrive earlier and go obsolete with Gunpowder, or Chemistry at the latest (to represent sappers' explosives).

Depends on whether you're thinking about the military benefits strictly or the espionage/organizational benefits. Castles were still being built after gunpowder; they just weren't primarily defensive structures anymore. So to be detailed, what I'm suggesting is this:

1) Castles only provide a defensive bonus against non-gunpowder units.
2) Castles provide espionage benefits until Electricty; and defensive bonuses against non-gunpowder units.
3) Castles can be built until Electricity.

 

[sansloi37]

The time of the castle contributing to defense lasted a bit longer than many think. Well after gunpowder and cannons made their appearance, castles were still built and still provided substantial defense. In point of fact, during the Turkish sieges of Rhodes (1480 - 1522) "an old fashioned trebuchet"* was built specifically for the siege, since cannons weren't as effective as hoped.
However, before someone protests, yes after the latter half of the 1500's cannon technology had improved, but for awhile after gunpowder showed up castles still helped.


*Caoursin's Account of the Siege of Rhodes in 1480

 

[Sephlock]

While we're on the subject of trade and such, is there a cap on the amount of money you can get from a merchant GP? I sent him to the nearest capital to see how much money I'd get from sacrificing him. 900 gold.

I went to the next furthest capital.

900 gold.

I went to the NEXT furthest capital.

900 gold.

I go ALL THE WAY TO THE FAR SIDE OF THE CONTINENT (on a terra map).

900 gold.

o_O?

 

[KMadCandy]

i was complaining to hubby that i was getting NO random events in my current game. at all. my first random event literally happened to bismarck, a wedding between our nations he picked the give money for a present i guess, since he now has a +1 towards me, but it wasn't an event for me, it was for him. i had nothing, more nothing, a mine destroyed, then lots more nothing.

then i finally got something. something really really spiffy!

so that castle was worth it i built it just for the trade route and spy 25%, didn't even know this was possible. yeehaw! if i hadn't had the 267g i could have gotten a bit of free money, or 2 free pikemen ... i'm glad i was relatively rich, that would have been a bummer to miss out on.

Sephlock if there's a cap it's based on size and trade routes, but there's definitely not a rule that every city will be the same. you don't actually have to travel to the cities to see how much you'll get. if you've seen the cities before, you can check while you're safe at home. with the merchant active, hold down the shift key and right click on the destination city. hover over the trade route button -- it'll be greyed out, since of course you can't do it remotely, but it will show you the amount of gold you'd get. cancel that order before he ever starts to move, repeat for another city, etc, til you find the best bargain.

 

[Commander Bello]

[...]
Castles had been obsolete for centuries by that point. It would make more sense to have them arrive earlier and go obsolete with Gunpowder, or Chemistry at the latest (to represent sappers' explosives).

Unfortunately, you are pretty wrong. The medieval castles may have been obsoleted - to a certain degree - by gunpowder weapons, but their successors, the fortresses were built until the mid of the 20th century.

Think of the Maginot Line, the Westwall, the fort Eben-Emael in Belgium (all in use until WW2).

Think of the French blowing up literally every castle in western Germany during the Napoleonic wars (and before, mainly in the 17th and 18th century). Powder was not that abundant at that time, and for sure they had good reasons for doing so...

[...]
However, before someone protests, yes after the latter half of the 1500's cannon technology had improved, but for awhile after gunpowder showed up castles still helped. [...]

Take the example of the Ottoman's siege to Vienna. Vienna at that time was regarded to be the best or at least amongst the strongest fortifications in Europe. And its fortifications, although constantly shot at and attacked by sub-ground explosive mines, hindered the Ottomans to get in.

Castles did play a significant role in warfare - at least up to the time of tanks and airdrops.
Therefore, making them obsolete with Economics and limit their usefulness by gunpowder units just is a bad and big mistake.

 

[Permanganate]

1) Castles only provide a defensive bonus against non-gunpowder units.
2) Castles provide espionage benefits until Electricty; and defensive bonuses against non-gunpowder units.
3) Castles can be built until Electricity.

This isn't a bad idea, now that I think more about it.

Unfortunately, you are pretty wrong. The medieval castles may have been obsoleted - to a certain degree - by gunpowder weapons, but their successors, the fortresses were built until the mid of the 20th century.

Think of the Maginot Line, the Westwall, the fort Eben-Emael in Belgium (all in use until WW2).

It's clear to me that these are generally portrayed in Civ4 as fort improvements, intended for country defense; the Westwall and Maginot Line were not simply a castle on the edge of a town!

Think of the French blowing up literally every castle in western Germany during the Napoleonic wars (and before, mainly in the 17th and 18th century). Powder was not that abundant at that time, and for sure they had good reasons for doing so...

They could have been organizational centers for a resisting power if they hadn't been destroyed. That they were relatively easy to destroy (sieges of castles during the building's heyday could take years!) shows that they were militarily obsolete by that period.