Forts?

[JanusTalaiini]

Are there types of tiles where I can't build forts? I haven't been able to find documentation, but the button to build a fort is nonexistent when I'm on a plains tile, but shows up on a grasslands hills tile.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

They should be buildable on any land tie. All of them seem to be listed in its <TerrainMakesValids>.


Maybe the plains had a feature (like a forest or jungle) that you didn't have the tech to clear yet?

 

[JanusTalaiini]

Nope, I've got all those techs. I also just encountered another situation where the "build fort" button was there for one floodplains tile, but not for an identical tile right next to it.

Odd.

 

[Wauthan]

Placement was changed in a recent patch to stop the AI spamming. Forts can now only be built on hills, riversides and forests.

 

[Ahwaric]

Actually it is hills, riverside and marsh - terrain that grants any extra defense. Features do not count.
AI simply loves fort spamming too much, and I think that fort in featureless plain is a kind of weird.

I think I will try to limit building to not allow tile by tile fort placement. That would disable defensive lines, so I am not sure if that would be better.

 

[arkham4269]

...and I think that fort in featureless plain is a kind of weird.

I think I will try to limit building to not allow tile by tile fort placement. That would disable defensive lines, so I am not sure if that would be better.

Actually during the Indian Wars (or more rightly "We're going to kill enough of you and ship the rest of you off to a gulag" Wars) the US Army had bases like that out in the middle of no where.

The idea was that you set up enough bases so that 'convoys' would travel something like a week's worth of distance and be at another fort.

While I totally understand the need for the change, it does sort of put a crimp in using forts to claim land/resource if no hill or marsh is around.

Also, any way that it could be coded that forts couldn't be built inside the two tile radius of a city? I just can't see the economics of a fort in a tile next to a city; the land would be too valuable for other things, but the AI does it all the time.

 

[Ahwaric]

Well, indians lacked means to lay siege, but in europe, you really wanted your castle to be at some defensive position. The ladders are a nightmare

But I agree, when I finally have time I will try to code it differently and allow forts on more diverse terrain, just not one next to another. Also, I really need to block the open-borders fort claiming.

But for now, I am more concerned with differences of human and gorilla skeletons

 

[arkham4269]

A long time ago I was posted about how in Orbis, forts almost work like Kuriotates settlements in that you can use them to claim land.

I mentioned then, and want to ask again, that it would seem that since these forts over time get bigger, they almost become settlements and thus you'd think if you later dropped a settler on the fort, you'd be able to get a population bonus by absorbing the fort's supporting population.

I mean I've played games where I come across a fort during the exploration phase and take it over and find it's in a nice spot for a city when I get the chance to safely get a settler there. By the time I do this, the fort generally has gotten pretty big and has it's own cultural radius and I've sometimes already managed to get a worker there and have some improvements ready. It just seems like it would be a nice game mechanic to create the city on the fort and then maybe even get a 'free' unit with the fort commander being converted to a unit of your choice (depending on your tech level).

 

[civ_king]

or you could simply have an upgrade to the fort commander called "City Commander" and it is the same thing basically, the difference is that it gets a bonus in a city, additionally depending on what
level the fort is at it could be able to get a free palisade or city walls city walls to top level, palisade to mid-level, but that probably would be a nightmare to code (may you could set it so that if the fort get destroyed, it could yield a 0 movement unit that builds a palisade or walls, probably easier to code)

 

[sputnik323]

How about a completely new mechanic... Instead of making them like Kuriotates settlements or cities. How about a new thing called Outposts. Outpost commanders make the fort act like a city in taking food to grow, have an upkeep cost, produce hammers, culture, and have religion and guilds, but only capable of building a small select number of military buildings and units. Maybe everything that it produces can be capped or have a set rate to further make them different than settlements. --- I think it would be better to have something new or just make no changes than to have them become kuriotates style settlements. Otherwise as the Kurios wouldn't everyone just spam forts everywhere?

 

[arkham4269]

How about a completely new mechanic... Instead of making them like Kuriotates settlements or cities. How about a new thing called Outposts. Outpost commanders make the fort act like a city in taking food to grow, have an upkeep cost, produce hammers, culture, and have religion and guilds, but only capable of building a small select number of military buildings and units. Maybe everything that it produces can be capped or have a set rate to further make them different than settlements. --- I think it would be better to have something new or just make no changes than to have them become kuriotates style settlements. Otherwise as the Kurios wouldn't everyone just spam forts everywhere?

Well I posted a while ago in the old main thread that in Orbis, forts acted as almost like settlements did for the Kuriotates and thus in some way nerfed that Civ. To me, the forts sort of grow into 'Garrison towns' since they over time can get a 1 tile radius of culture and you can build improvements.

Due to this, I feel that a few of the Kuriotates settlements should be allowed after a certain number of turns (100?) should be allowed to grow a bit. The Jotnar mod has a mechanic where the Giants cities only have a 1 hex radius. So I'm thinking depending on the world size, a few of the Kuriotates settlements would be allowed to grow into these 'stunted' cities. Otherwise by using forts, other Civs can pretty much due what the Kuriotates do with their settlements and thus take away a bit from that civ.

 

[Ahwaric]

Due to this, I feel that a few of the Kuriotates settlements should be allowed after a certain number of turns (100?) should be allowed to grow a bit. The Jotnar mod has a mechanic where the Giants cities only have a 1 hex radius. Otherwise by using forts, other Civs can pretty much due what the Kuriotates do with their settlements and thus take away a bit from that civ.

I guess you did not check Kurios for a while (nor read the changelog ).
From 0.22 base changelog:
"Kuriotate settlements are now normal cities (including maintenance), but get 1 tle radius, can't build projects & wonders, can't conscript & hurry"
So, they work this way from the start, no change needed

How about a completely new mechanic... Instead of making them like Kuriotates settlements or cities. How about a new thing called Outposts. Outpost commanders make the fort act like a city in taking food to grow, have an upkeep cost, Otherwise as the Kurios wouldn't everyone just spam forts everywhere?

Well, that is exactly how Kurios settlements work - except they can build all units and buildings, just no wonders.
I do not think forts should have anything to do with food, or produce anything. Forts are garrisoned, troops are sent from elsewhere, even if as conscripts to train.

 

[arkham4269]

I guess you did not check Kurios for a while (nor read the changelog ).

Why should I play such a lame Civ when there is Mahala with cool woad tattoos to play?

Yes, well sometimes between FfH, FF and all the rest of the mods I play (like Planetfall) it's easy to miss things like this.

It does, however, explain a recent game how the Kuriotates were able to build a lot more units than I thought they should have been able to with just 3 cities!