Making Fortresses a viable strategy

[Silver Marmot]

I think forts should have 50% defense (plus 25% if they're on a hill), should heal 15 points/turn, and should have minor upkeep costs (maybe 1 gold/turn for the first 5, 2 gold/turn for any additional ones). They should not be allowed to be built in enemy territory.

 

[pvzh]

They should not be allowed to be built in enemy territory.

That is the only useful thing that they can have. Otherwise, they would not be much better than they are now

 

[ptpan]

The original proposal, and al the discussions contributed thus far are very interesting, and would essentially make the game more strategically/tactically fun...if it can be used effectively by all parties.

In single games, except for the lone human player who would undoubtedly take advantage of it (building fort on/near precious resources too far from home, establing blockade line ect..), all the AI would not be intelligent enough to know how to exploit this new rule, and thus rendered unfairly weak from the start...

Unless you add extra python codes to help them (?), the default programming would not allow them to realize this newly improved but complex rule of play...(by current game rule, they would not build any fort, how are they supposed to realize that forts are now much more useful strategically? Certainly not by reading the new rule in an XML file, then make the interpretation, calculation by themselves...)

 

[albefranks]

The original proposal, and al the discussions contributed thus far are very interesting, and would essentially make the game more strategically/tactically fun...if it can be used effectively by all parties.

In single games, except for the lone human player who would undoubtedly take advantage of it (building fort on/near precious resources too far from home, establing blockade line ect..), all the AI would not be intelligent enough to know how to exploit this new rule, and thus rendered unfairly weak from the start...

Unless you add extra python codes to help them (?), the default programming would not allow them to realize this newly improved but complex rule of play...(by current game rule, they would not build any fort, how are they supposed to realize that forts are now much more useful strategically? Certainly not by reading the new rule in an XML file, then make the interpretation, calculation by themselves...)

Yeah i was thinking about that too. And for the person who said that fortress were used for launching attacks. Yes this did happen in a lot of wars. But through history fortress were built after you won the territory not before. Then with the fortress garrison you were able to defend and also lauch attacks if needed to in advance.

I am not a huge huge history buff. but i am a large one enough to remember that war was conducted in that matter.

To actually try to build a fortress in enemy territory or near enemy territory without properly succuring the area has always and will always be a bad tactical decision. It uses to many resources man and material.


As for the AI. I was thinking about that. I dont know enough code to actually implement that kind of decision making for the AI. maybe we could get Fixaris to create an update that does so. Other then that it would be come an unfair advantage for humans playing solo. But in online multiplayer it would be quite a show.

Still working on updating the XML's sorry it's taking so long