Frequently Asked Questions

[Starship]

Xuenay - I'll update the FAQ this weekend. I should have a few hours to get it done. Kael, I'll get that question in first.

 

[strategyonly]

There used to be a FORT you could build, that adds defense to a known location, what ever happend to that, and would it still be useful now?

 

[Kael]

There used to be a FORT you could build, that adds defense to a known location, what ever happend to that, and would it still be useful now?

Forts should still be in.

 

[strategyonly]

Forts should still be in.

How do you build then then? i believe they have a 50% defensive bonus for being on them?

 

[Kael]

How do you build then then? i believe they have a 50% defensive bonus for being on them?

All workers should be able to build forts with the appropriate tech (mathematics).

 

[strategyonly]

All workers should be able to build forts with the appropriate tech (mathematics).

i knew that but sometimes you have to ask questions, so they get posted.

 

[H.GrenadeFrenzy]

With Strategyonly's approach, the forts defese bonus stacks if on hills right and what about forests and do they cost anything extra? These are good questions and can be found in the book, I believe(an important read for new players) But does this mod change these factors?

Note: I build them often but these Questions I get from people even on the phone when converting to Civ4 or your MODs, Civ3 players remember.

 

[strategyonly]

These are good questions and can be found in the book, I believe(an important read for new players)

BOOK?
Anyways i build the forts to heighten my defensive outreach area(all near the borders), so i could ford off an attack, and when i put those darn workers on "auto" they rebuilt something else over them, darn workers anyways, LOL. Anyway we could like have bigger forts called castles(permanent like forts) that have a bombard range and unit(s) that ford off the mighty offending units? Or is this not feasible?

 

[H.GrenadeFrenzy]

These are good questions and can be found in the book, I believe(an important read for new players)

BOOK?
Anyways i build the forts to heighten my defensive outreach area(all near the borders), so i could ford off an attack, and when i put those darn workers on "auto" they rebuilt something else over them, darn workers anyways, LOL. Anyway we could like have bigger forts called castles(permanent like forts) that have a bombard range and unit(s) that ford off the mighty offending units? Or is this not feasible?

Idunmno...but there is a buiding called castle already so what did they call those buildings in Civ3 that you could put units and cannons into that required the sacrifice of two workers...were those forts? Fortifications? Defense Post? I'll go look and get back later.....those were permant.

 

[vorshlumpf]

Information on sentry towers and ancient temples should be added to this FAQ.

- Niilo

 

[QES]

Idunmno...but there is a buiding called castle already so what did they call those buildings in Civ3 that you could put units and cannons into that required the sacrifice of two workers...were those forts? Fortifications? Defense Post? I'll go look and get back later.....those were permant.

The Castle thing bugs me a bit. In fantasy worlds casltes are bastions of grand derring do, and lavish feasts and halls and such, so yes, as a building it makes sense. But ALSO, castles were primiarily built as offensive buildings. You'd plant one in a land you wanted to control, or to wrest control of the land from someone else. WHen we think of the castle, we think of it as defensive, because that's how it fought...but its PURPOSE was very very offensive. The use of the castle was for intimidation, and for command and control of an area, somewhere were troops could come to and from, and thereby subjugate the nearby.

I am advocating for Forts to be reintroduced as stronger more nasty little buggers. Perhaps each fort provides culture (for one ring around it) and a zone of control (old civ2 style) to any units inside it......there by making it impossible simply to "bypass". Youd have to take the long way around, and in choke points...or in grids of forts, this would be impossible, youll have to actually assult the fort (which makes it's purpose offensive as intended).

WHOS WITH ME?
<notices chirping of crickets and grasshoppers>
-Qes

 

[H.GrenadeFrenzy]

The Castle thing bugs me a bit. In fantasy worlds casltes are bastions of grand derring do, and lavish feasts and halls and such, so yes, as a building it makes sense. But ALSO, castles were primiarily built as offensive buildings. You'd plant one in a land you wanted to control, or to wrest control of the land from someone else. WHen we think of the castle, we think of it as defensive, because that's how it fought...but its PURPOSE was very very offensive. The use of the castle was for intimidation, and for command and control of an area, somewhere were troops could come to and from, and thereby subjugate the nearby.

I am advocating for Forts to be reintroduced as stronger more nasty little buggers. Perhaps each fort provides culture (for one ring around it) and a zone of control (old civ2 style) to any units inside it......there by making it impossible simply to "bypass". Youd have to take the long way around, and in choke points...or in grids of forts, this would be impossible, youll have to actually assult the fort (which makes it's purpose offensive as intended).

WHOS WITH ME?
<notices chirping of crickets and grasshoppers>
-Qes

maybe......but what about resource affects on the tile with that fort.....will they remain or be lost?.......because for some reason some of those resources are pretty damn hard to get and If they are lost for good....I don't know.....have to chew on that dried ration awhile.

 

[QES]

maybe......but what about resource affects on the tile with that fort.....will they remain or be lost?.......because for some reason some of those resources are pretty damn hard to get and If they are lost for good....I don't know.....have to chew on that dried ration awhile.

Id say "not accessable" so youd want your fort NEXT to that favorite resource, not on it. That reflects reality, besides most forts will be used in very defensive positions, like in choke points in valleys between peaks, or (if i have my way) in floodplains along a river......as deserts will become impassible, and floodplains would be the only moving-allowed sections in deserts.

 

[vorshlumpf]

I agree that forts need some juice. I'd be happy if they even gave +1 to line of sight for all units within them and nothing else, but of course I'd like to see more.

And, I think, being able to build them in unsettled lands should be possible (unless we're given some way to plop down culture on a wild square).

- Niilo

 

[QES]

I agree that forts need some juice. I'd be happy if they even gave +1 to line of sight for all units within them and nothing else, but of course I'd like to see more.

And, I think, being able to build them in unsettled lands should be possible (unless we're given some way to plop down culture on a wild square).

- Niilo

I'm for building forts in the wilderness. But as kael said (somewhere) the problem is to get the AI to understand forts, their use, and their inherant defensiveness, and how to set up "grids" and patterns, so that your whole boarder is protected, instead of just a few random points.
As far as i know right now its an AI problem.
-Qes

EDIT: The AI does seem to know to (in times of woe) put units on important resources, like iron, so that it can continue to make its units. IF this could be translated to "important choke points" and "Important culture points" then its possible to get the AI to want to defend those points. And then, i would think, a fort could be tied into this desire. But frankly, i dont know anything about the code, or in what WAY the computer thinks that its important to guard the iron. For AI's the obvious never is.

 

[Starship]

YO! This thread is for asking questions that need answers, and posting questions you want in the FAQ. Kindly take your Fort conversation to another thread.

 

[AgnosticMonk]

Alright, I have virtually no knowledge of modding, and was wondering if there is a way to unlock the currently non-playable civilizations even in their incomplete state?

Thanks for the great mod, I've been enjoying it quite a bit.

 

[Kael]

Alright, I have virtually no knowledge of modding, and was wondering if there is a way to unlock the currently non-playable civilizations even in their incomplete state?

Thanks for the great mod, I've been enjoying it quite a bit.

Thats discussed in this thread: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=174493

 

[Sarisin]

What do you need to play FFh?

Sounds simple, but I will be heading back to the U.S. in October and I want to set my machine up to play FFh.

I know you need to have Civilization IV, but do you also need the three patches? Will Warlords include all the patches?

I don't think I will be able to buy Warlords here in Thailand before October (I will not buy the pirated version), so I will wait until I am back in the US.

Finally, will future versions of FFh require Warlords?

Thanks.

PS. I guess Warlords is out now and I would love to hear impressions of it - not in this thread but elsewhere from FFh'ers.

 

[Kael]

Alright I see Warlords is in stores so here is the scoop:

There are no plans to make Fall from Heaven 2 into a warlords mod. There are some advantages to doing it, we would be able to use things like vassal states. But players without Warlords would be unable to play FfH (and there is no way we would try to maintain 2 versions).

At some later point we may switch it to a Warlords mod if that makes sense. But for now we will steal art, resources and cool ideas from Warlords that can be backreved and keep it a Civ4 only mod so that the largest possible amount of players can play it.

If there are any questions let me know. There is a link to the main FfH2 thread on the warlords CD in one of the mod readme's, Im curious to see how many new players it brings.