[vanilla] Do you build walls?

[Jaycob]

I've done that with cities that I built myself, too. If it's a city on the outer edge of my empire, then it's not going to be a city with much in it. And it's much better to ruin one city, instead of losing the whole war. Think of it this way- a settler costs about as much as city walls, but it makes a much more effective defense.

I agree. Especially in ICS, it is much more effective to let a city fall than to lose units defending it. Often with an unexpected DoW, I will pull my units away from cities that are in danger while I wait for my army to arrive. First, enemy units take damage every time they attack your city. Second, it seems the AI likes to capture cities with their best units, so capture/pull out (with mounted units)/retake and kill their unit inside is a very easy way to deal with an AI that is technologically superior.
Because of that, walls are weak imo. If your city is captured, then you likely just wasted 500g or however much production it cost (the price to ally a CS...). They can be useful, but like you said, production/gold is usually better spent elsewhere.

 

[Callonia]

Neglect the defenses of your city at your own risk, for GDR can one hit a city quite easily. Especially when they barely have any defenses at all, I love taking cities like those, GDR barely gets a scratch for taking a city with no defense.

I'd trade losing one gdr to ruin a city of my enemy quickly depending on my resource production.

 

[pickle]

built them once, got sneak attacked by ghandi he came at my city with all he had and my army was a couple turns away (had a bottleneck to negotiate on the way) it was a bit iffy if I would keep the city until the reinforcements started getting there the next turn so I built a wall instead of a unit that would have been no use until the next turn when the city might be taken. in the end I lost the city (took it back a turn later) but it cost them a lot more to take it than it would have without the walls.

 

[wurstburst]

I've never built walls (but my puppet army seems to like them). I usually only have 2 non-puppet cities, so there is always something more important to build than walls. And I never leave those 2 cities undefended - too important to lose.

If I was under attack, I'd rather rush buy a unit - even a spearman if it came to that - rather than walls. A unit can serve the same purpose of slowing down the attack, by clogging up the approaches, distracting the attackers from the city target, and hey, maybe even taking out a pesky ranged unit. And if it survives, bonus!

 

[grandad1982]

Walls came in handy for for me near the start of my current Babylon game (I know its a UB rather than standard walls buy hey) when Bismark was getting pissed off with me settling not really anywhere near him (there was a sea in the way!). I had an early blocking city the otherside of a choke point and hadn't build a road to it at this point. He showed up with his usually flock of Landskneckts and I only had 2 Bowmen in place one of which died early. The walls gave me the time I needed to respond before the city could fall. I might even build a castle here as Germany are still a problem and now I'm not very popular as the diplo modle in this game is confusing at best.

Generally though in this and all the other civs I've played since civ2 I never really bother with walls. Spend the hammers on something more useful (a unit or an economic structure) and flexible. However if the right situation arrives the forget your aversions to walls as they can work pretty well.

 

[Nefelia]

Never have built walls in any SP civ game. If you are letting the AI attack your cities, then you aren't doing it right. Take out aggressive neighbors early and often to give you the defensive buffer.

Start with Mongolia as your neighbour and you might change your tune.

 

[Arumath]

In my current game I have built some walls in critical cities as I have a vast empire spread al lover africa india and north america so my troops are always off on some campaign in the far reaches of the empire.

But back home I have neighbors right next door and france could march an army on Rome easily and it might take a turn or two for my European garrison to march there to assist with defense so walls and castle are a must there.

Why didn't I just eliminate the french early? I was going fora historical feel invading greece and carthage early then moving on to turkey and Egpyt and just going from there.

 

[Snapp]

Ive built them in MP when the city formed a major chokepoint and I knew that they would have to attack through that city.

In SP, i have never really felt the need for them.

 

[stormerne]

Ive built them in MP when the city formed a major chokepoint and I knew that they would have to attack through that city.

In SP, i have never really felt the need for them.

Good reasoning. Though for such a major chokepoint, that might be the exceptional time I use a GG for a citadel.

 

[Supr49er]

Almost never build them - it would require just the right situation to build one.
Oh, even when playing as India, I am reluctant to build them even though they are required for the Mughal Forts.

 

[budweiser]

Do walls have any deterrent effect on the AIs decision to declare war?

I usually build them on border towns.

 

[Slowpoke]

Do walls have any deterrent effect on the AIs decision to declare war?

I usually build them on border towns.

They do in fact It's a drop in a bucket, though. (And I think a warrior does more to deter them lol)

 

[Varanid]

border towns if I'm near someone aggressive. Mostly to get to castles; those two plus kremlin and sufferage and your cities are potent.

 

[eric_]

I build walls in areas that are tactically exposed (border cities) and cities with high defensive value (cities near choke points, etc).

 

[Rathelon]

Although, I recently played my India game and you need to build walls in order to build the Mughal Fort.

 

[neilkaz]

I've found them marginally effective whenever I have a city that's in an obvious war zone. Not very effective though- much better to rely on letting them take the city, and trapping their units inside.

As an Immortal level player it is quite important to try to use what I call killing fields for enemy units. This is likely even more important on Deity. Anyhow, I am often trading a border civ back and forth with the AI a few times in wars, usually trapping and killing their unit inside of it, while when they retake it, my unit that is able to move after taking the city has moved out.

As for walls, on this level of play, on my usual small Pangaea-like maps, I may build them occasionally in exposed and conquered border cites, like Persopolis in my Mongol game that I am wrapping up. I took Persopolis over a hundred turns ago and it had 8 wonders and 12 pop after capture and the last thing I want to do is to lose it while warring on the other front. Walls/castle have helped me to not need to leave a big defensive force there, noting it has been attacked by 3 different civs at times.

As Babz I will also sometimes build walls since they are better than normal walls and aid city bombardment of attacking units.

.. neilkaz ..

 

[Duke Blackstone]

I built them because they look pretty.

 

[bryanw1995]

In vanilla, no (except in OCC games).

With aforess improved city defense, Thals balance-combined, or my mod, you bet.

yeah, I'm having a difficult time in my first balance-combined game right now b/c darius built walls at the very start. he has a 20 strength city with 30 hp, also 2 immortals and an archer garrisoned in city vs my 11 str horsemen... looks like the army of the apocalypse might need some reinforcements!

 

[CharonJr]

Just had to build my first wall here, it is a deity game and the Greeks had such a strong position that I was unable to take them out (took England instead ).

When some CCs started to arrive at my borders I threw up a wall, I highly doubt that the city (my capital actually) would have survived without it.

CharonJr