Is this a bug? (Forts)

[prototypetolyfe]

I am glad you made this post and couldn't delete it. I just lernt a few things I never knew about forts.

Was any of these things documented anywhere? I don't ever remember reading about canals, getting a resource or air crafts landing on it.

How much air units can be stationed at a fort?

just rebase them there as you would if you were moving them to a city

 

[Tephros]

So nobody knows about the dynamic between espionage and forts?

I'd also like to point out that forts are more difficult to destroy with aircraft than improvements, but not impossible. Do your aircraft get destroyed if the fort gets destroyed by other aircraft? That would suck.

 

[RasmCiv]

2 great uses for this:

1. build a fort on a resource outside your BFC (Big Fat Cross City Radius). This gives you the resource, and you can station some units there as well.

• build a fort on oil. You will have access without having to wait to build a well.

then why arent everybody building forts instead of quarrys and stuff like that? isnt it cheaper in turns?

 

[Supr49er]

then why arent everybody building forts instead of quarrys and stuff like that? isnt it cheaper in turns?

Build a Quarry,etc. when the resource is in your BFC (City Radius), but consider a Fort if it's outside the BFC. You won't get the bonuses anyway, and the Fort can be useful.

As for oil, if you discover Scientific Method (which reveals oil) before you discover Combustion (which lets you build a Well), a Fort will give you access to the oil without a well.

 

[m2v22]

There have been other threads about forts canals, although I couldn't tell you where. While you cannot stack multiple forts in a row to make a canal, you can stack a fort and a city, allowing for a two tile canal.

Also, destorying the fort by air shouldn't destroy the units in the fort. However, I have noticed that the AI may stack sea units in a fort, making for an increadibly cheap kill if they don't guard the fort with land units. Essentially, as in a city, if a land unit attacks a fort, all sea and air units do not defend, and are destroyed once it's captured.

 

[Tephros]

Units attacking from forts should have a +10% attack bonus. In warfare forts were important to destroy or capture and adding that would make that more the case strategically.

I'm going to go into worldbuilder to check if spies can destroy forts and indirectly destroy air units posted there.

Edit: Okay I did a worldbuilder test. After the first turn I put a fort next to a foreign city. I put a great spy nearby who infiltrated the city and a bunch of spies on the fort. I put 4 jet fighters of his nationality in his fort, 1 jet fighter in his city, and a samurai also of his nationality in the fort. Upon destroying the fort, the jets were transferred to the city and the samurai stayed where he was. However, only 4 jets were in the city, so one of them was eliminated. Perhaps if he had another city it would have gone there.

 

[Solomwi]

There have been other threads about forts canals, although I couldn't tell you where. While you cannot stack multiple forts in a row to make a canal, you can stack a fort and a city, allowing for a two tile canal.

Actually, you can. Forts and cities act the same in this regard. As long as each fort/city borders at least one water tile, you can string as many as you like together to form a canal. There's also no difference between a fort and a city in this regard. Both allow ships if they border at least one water tile, and disallow ships if they don't.

 

[Skallagrimson]

The AI does like to build a lot of Forts.

So do I.

 

[Skallagrimson]

Actually, you can. Forts and cities act the same in this regard. As long as each fort/city borders at least one water tile, you can string as many as you like together to form a canal. There's also no difference between a fort and a city in this regard. Both allow ships if they border at least one water tile, and disallow ships if they don't.

So the max width of any canal-able terrain, then, would be 2.

 

[Solomwi]

So the max width of any canal-able terrain, then, would be 2.

Not quite. Consider the following setup (G = grassland, F = fort, C = coastal, including inland lakes):

GGGGCC
GGGFGG
GCFGGG
GGGFGG
GGGGCC

Here we have a three-tile canal enabled by the single-tile lake in line 3. By itself, the inland lake would be too far away to complete the canal, but it still allows the middle fort to accept ships, making the canal possible.

For a more trivial, but perhaps also more illustrative, example, consider a 20-tile string of forts along a coastline. Each one allows ships to enter and leave, so you have, in effect, a 20-tile canal, even though it's not very useful for shortening trip times around the landmass.

 

[FriendoftheDork]

I am glad you made this post and couldn't delete it. I just lernt a few things I never knew about forts.

Was any of these things documented anywhere? I don't ever remember reading about canals, getting a resource or air crafts landing on it.

How much air units can be stationed at a fort?

Civilopedia, BTS changes, forts. Almost everything is there although not all is clear. It also took me time to realize that forts connect resources in the way they do.

Regardless I think forts could do well with +75% defense bonus rather than measly 25%, but they shouldn't recieve bonus from jungle or forest as it makes no sense to have forts in a middle of a forest, rather you would clear forest around the fort for better view and early warning. Hills is a totally different matter, I'd be happy with 50% base fort bonus and +50% from hills.

In short, forts are generally best for everything but defending your units there Stationing units near a city is stupid compared to stationing them in the city itself.

 

[DCL]

"In short, forts are generally best for everything but defending your units there Stationing units near a city is stupid compared to stationing them in the city itself."

Exactly, that's what, before I started this thread, had me scratching my head as to why the developers included them in the game.

The only reason i can think of for having a fort with units in them is at a 1 square wide choke point where you would maybe want to prevent the enemy from breaking though to pillage you lands. Of course the enemy could just bypass that by landing a transport. :/

 

[FriendoftheDork]

"In short, forts are generally best for everything but defending your units there Stationing units near a city is stupid compared to stationing them in the city itself."

Exactly, that's what, before I started this thread, had me scratching my head as to why the developers included them in the game.

The only reason i can think of for having a fort with units in them is at a 1 square wide choke point where you would maybe want to prevent the enemy from breaking though to pillage you lands. Of course the enemy could just bypass that by landing a transport. :/

Ehm... tradition? Forts were even more useless pre-BTS, even though defensive bonus was higher in civ2. Not that forts are useless, just not normally used for what you might think. I still use them to create canals, connect resources on 2 square islands and occasionally as airbases.

 

[Ramesses]

I just fell in love with the game all over again. I mean, forts providing access to resources? My mind has been blown.

 

[azzaman333]

Build a Quarry,etc. when the resource is in your BFC (City Radius), but consider a Fort if it's outside the BFC. You won't get the bonuses anyway, and the Fort can be useful.

As for oil, if you discover Scientific Method (which reveals oil) before you discover Combustion (which lets you build a Well), a Fort will give you access to the oil without a well.

Important to note that you only save the turns required to build the well. You don't actually gain access to the resource until you learn Combustion. (IIRC)

Not quite. Consider the following setup (G = grassland, F = fort, C = coastal, including inland lakes):

GGGGCC
GGGFGG
GCFGGG
GGGFGG
GGGGCC

Here we have a three-tile canal enabled by the single-tile lake in line 3. By itself, the inland lake would be too far away to complete the canal, but it still allows the middle fort to accept ships, making the canal possible.

For a more trivial, but perhaps also more illustrative, example, consider a 20-tile string of forts along a coastline. Each one allows ships to enter and leave, so you have, in effect, a 20-tile canal, even though it's not very useful for shortening trip times around the landmass.

I made this a while ago to help illustrate how canals work.

The bottom one is like your example, if you replace the tile 1S of the middle fort with coast. (which would change it from not working, to working.)

 

[Da_V_Man]

I once had a large lake in my continent, and i had two cities there and some forts, and then I had a harbour I could use to hide my ships from others.

Or, in the case of that game, one of the cities was owned by Sitting bull, so I sailed my ships into the lake and owned him.

 

[Deego3]

fort-city-fort also works.

 

[Ramesses]

fort-city-fort also works.

Only if the city is coastal.

 

[Minor Annoyance]

Has anyone checked to see if a fort is harder for a spy to destroy than other improvements?

 

[UWHabs]

I know you can destroy a fort, since I just lost my iron for about 4 turns in my current game...