Fortresses

[dreiche2]

Also, it's not like you can attack freely, after all your unit will still be badly hurt after retreating, has to heal for some turns and is vulnerable to counter attacks if there is no strong defense force in the fort...

 

[Unser Giftzwerg]

I don't see what's wrong with the units in forts being able to attack adjacent tiles whenever they feel like it. It would make forts pretty powerful, but I'm sure something could be done with the AI to make sure they used it, too.

Also, if withdraw chances can be worked in this way, combat advantages should be able to as well. If units are significantly stronger and have a very high withdraw rate when attacking anything next to a fort, then the fort would be able to serve its purpose much more effectively. It's all subject to playtesting, of course.

Sure, it's all in how strong you want your forts. I'm hedging towards the conservative in this issue, because if we make forts too nifty, they rival the fortified city itself.

This of course, leads to eager calls to Kael for adding +Withdrawal chances to Walls and Castles, of course.

I agree it's all subject to playtest. I'm just flinging out the opinion set that exists today.

 

[Unser Giftzwerg]

ya, thats a possibility for the Forts as improvements (double the amount of improvements to add tho).

so far ive gotten Forts as Features to work, which allows improvements to exist there and the Fort (though it cant exist with a forest). so far im really enjoying it.

And not-doubling the number of improvements is another reason to NOT offer certain improvements in a Fortified version.

On a related-but-not issue, shouldn't the Malakim be allowed to build some sort of improvement on Oases? Just throwing it out there.

 

[Chandrasekhar]

Well, they already get an extra from them because Varn's financial, but maybe some sort of bonus couldn't hurt. Will they be able to move across them without losing extra movement points in the next version?

 

[Sureshot]

im guessing yes, since oasis' are like forests (theyre both features costing 2 movement), and like walking around forest hills with double-hill movement, the feature has no effect if you have the terrains double mover promotion

 

[Jono]

Maybe archery units fortified on a fortress would cayse for extra defence in adjacent tiles? how about forts built on sentry forts would give an additional bonus for units fortified on the tile?

 

[QES]

Sure, it's all in how strong you want your forts. I'm hedging towards the conservative in this issue, because if we make forts too nifty, they rival the fortified city itself.

This of course, leads to eager calls to Kael for adding +Withdrawal chances to Walls and Castles, of course.

I agree it's all subject to playtest. I'm just flinging out the opinion set that exists today.

Personally i think forts SHOULD rival if not exceed a fortified city in defensive capabilites. After all its a tile dedicated to defence, and nothing else, not production, not research, not population, or society, its a fort. It OUGHT to be harder to take than a city.
-Qes

 

[dreiche2]

I think gameplay- and flavourwise forts need to be implemented in such a way that they are not spammed all over the map (especially if they are strong). The difficulty would be again to make the AI use them if they simply cannot place them on top of everything for whatever reason

 

[QES]

I think gameplay- and flavourwise forts need to be implemented in such a way that they are not spammed all over the map (especially if they are strong). The difficulty would be again to make the AI use them if they simply cannot place them on top of everything for whatever reason

Considering that one cannot produce on a tile in which there is a fort, I dont see "Spaming" being very likely. Perhaps they also require upkeep? Every fort could be a drain on the economy? Each fort in ones territory reduces income in that civ by 2, 3, or 5 gold each? Something like this would also help. I dont suspect "spaming" will normally occur, it could also take "forever" to build, thus neglecting other important things.
-Qes

 

[tyrantpimp]

I think gameplay- and flavourwise forts need to be implemented in such a way that they are not spammed all over the map (especially if they are strong). The difficulty would be again to make the AI use them if they simply cannot place them on top of everything for whatever reason

Maybe forts should have some maintenance costs involved and the more upgraded the fort the more it costs. And if a fort is in a city zone perhaps some sort of negative monetary and food effect but a positive happy effect.

Come to think of it maybe forts should cost some food even outside a citys radius as well, i mean all those people in that garrison are gonna need to eat and im sure they have support staff etc.

 

[strategyonly]

I think the forts ought to have mini towers once a unit has built them and is fortified by a unit, just like in Warlords when the attacking units sometimes have a tower with them thats shoots arrows. I always put forts scatterd thoughout my maps, i like them for better defensive value.

 

[Sureshot]

a mechanic like pirates coves would prevent spamming (consume worker and must be three tiles apart), upkeep seems a bit crazy considering atm no one would ever consider building a fort lol

 

[Chandrasekhar]

Would it be possible to make a fort dynamically change based on how many units are in it? Something like:

0-3 units: +25% defense
4-5 units: +40% defense, +10% withdraw rate
6-8 units: +60% defense, +30% withdraw rate, +5% attack
9-10 units: +75% defense, +50% withdraw rate, +20% attack
11-15 units: +85% defense, +60% withdraw rate, +35% attack
16+ units: +100% defense, +70% withdraw rate, +50% attack

The attack and withdraw rates would give something approximating an area of control. It could be built by a worker, and then it would just change based on how many units are in it. Alternately, a worker might have to build a new fort over the old one to get the benefits of more defenders, but the benefits would automatically go down when defenders left/were killed.

This would keep people from spamming forts (because who wants to put 10 units every three tiles to make it effective?), and it would make them powerful. The exact % values are subject to change, if you think better, worse, or differently balanced ones would be better.

 

[Jono]

Overloading on units wouldn't give too much defence, maybe it could grow by working on it (like towns).

 

[tyrantpimp]

A combination of any of these penalties sounds good to me

 

[Chandrasekhar]

I think I'd probably rather plop down a cottage and work it than have to spend a valuable citizen powering up a fort.

 

[Jono]

Maybe the city could get defence aswell after a while.

 

[QES]

A fort should be a realatively simple thing. Maybe there should be better and better forts available through technology (requireing re-construction), but im not sure we want variable forts. They're merely hardpoints. Though limiting where they could be placed, within radii from each other sounds like a good idea. Get your fort in first and fast. .
-Qes

 

[Tortanick]

Maybe archery units fortified on a fortress would cayse for extra defence in adjacent tiles? how about forts built on sentry forts would give an additional bonus for units fortified on the tile?

Won't the city defence promotion, that can only be given in high levels to archers, suffice?

However one thing I think that no one else noticed is that forts should provide an immuntiy from marksmen, I'd hate to ride out with high level units, retreat safely, then get sniped. It defeats the point and its unrealistic.

 

[Unser Giftzwerg]

Personally i think forts SHOULD rival if not exceed a fortified city in defensive capabilites. After all its a tile dedicated to defence, and nothing else, not production, not research, not population, or society, its a fort. It OUGHT to be harder to take than a city.
-Qes

It's not devoted to pure defense, if forts are implimented via the "Fortified Mine" workaround.

Personally, I don't see how a small fort cound be considered to be as strong as a fortified city surrounded by miles of multi-layered walls etc, but that's sort of besides the point. It'd have to come to how the system played out using the Civ engine. I don't know enough about the AI nuts and bolts to really predict what would work best. I'm just hedging to the conservative side on this topic is all.