Reasons to build Walls

[AdamCrock]

@OP: Reason 10th : why not ?

They are cheap anyway so any city can build them quickly if needed but why not build a trebuchet instead ? Why insist on defense when there is an opportunity for offense ? "Offense is the best defense"

 

[rfcfanatic]

I build walls (even in cities at safe distance from frontline), because I want to build castles for an extra trade route as soon as I research Engineering. I just can't wait until Economics or beeline it by neglecting important military techs of the medieval era.

 

[rah]

I always figure that if the AI is making it to my cities and attacking, I've done something wrong. So walls are rarely built.

 

[TheWilltoAct]

When I have stone and running OR, might build it to get overflow to get chance to whip forge next turn after getting MC.. situational but used few times (and actually I like also how it looks on map)

I thought this kind of production overflow trick was no longer possible with the 3.19 patch but I'm not confident of the specifics. It seems like the bonus hammers for building with stone / marble will not be applied if you switch production to a building with no production boosting resource.

 

[TheMulattoMaker]

I build walls (even in cities at safe distance from frontline), because I want to build castles for an extra trade route as soon as I research Engineering.

Seconded. Even as short-lived as they are, I don't think there's any other building that gives you as many different benefits as Castles. Which means (as an actual answer to this thread) I'm one-turning Walls all over my empire- almost as an afterthought- when I see Engineering on the horizon.

 

[AdamCrock]

Seconded. Even as short-lived as they are, I don't think there's any other building that gives you as many different benefits as Castles. Which means (as an actual answer to this thread) I'm one-turning Walls all over my empire- almost as an afterthought- when I see Engineering on the horizon.

C'mon guys ? Are castles really that important ? True trade route value is defined by the strong diplo and open borders if those prerequisites are not met than what's the point ? Good espionage ? A good catapult surely is better against enemy stack ?! - Seriously what do You expect ? Walls and castles are not wonders - they are meant for defense not for trade

 

[Tristan_C]

I thought this kind of production overflow trick was no longer possible with the 3.19 patch but I'm not confident of the specifics. It seems like the bonus hammers for building with stone / marble will not be applied if you switch production to a building with no production boosting resource.

3.17 and before:

PRO+Stone, pre-chop your entire BFC and whip the wall. Instant GM trade mission basically, huge deficit research pool.​

As things stand, and as has been said before, unitspam or Wealth is much better than walls and castles. Units always welcome. Early Wealth builds always pay off.

 

[MilesBeyond]

Heh, Castles are hilarious buildings. It's like, the devs just kept pouring more and more benefits on them, hoping people would use them, without noticing that the reason people don't like them has to do with a short lifespan and a crappy pre-req building.

Even if all Castles did was give +1 trade route, I would gladly build the crap out of those things - if they didn't require Walls

 

[Antilogic]

You've got units out your arse and have nothing else to build.

You can never have enough troops.

Heh, Castles are hilarious buildings. It's like, the devs just kept pouring more and more benefits on them, hoping people would use them, without noticing that the reason people don't like them has to do with a short lifespan and a crappy pre-req building.

Even if all Castles did was give +1 trade route, I would gladly build the crap out of those things - if they didn't require Walls

This sounds familiar...

I think the problem with the castle is it gives a variety of bonuses with no particular focus. Already, it reduces bombardment damage from artillery since the patch, it gives a defense bonus, and it gives a trade route. Unfortunately, most of these become useless at Economics...

For Protective, I changed the castle building. The castle is a really unfocused building: it has culture, espionage, city defense, and trade routes. It seems like Firaxis just kept adding benefits to it because few players wanted to build the original...

Castles do everything, poorly. All the good buildings have a couple major focuses (like libraries are science and culture, granaries are population growth and health, markets are money and happiness, etc.). Firaxis should have made a more purpose-designed building or two instead of tacking trade, espionage, culture, city defense, and how much else all onto a single building that obsoletes more quickly than a monument did in the original game.

I had a bit of fun going back and searching my old posts for this. Brought back a lot of memories.

 

[lindsay40k]

Thing with Castles for me is the Engineering tech.

I tend to make Ivory a high priority acquisition for a pre-Bureaucracy war to bagsy an extra GG, so Pikemen don't interest me much.

A Spy does the trick to take down defences, and a city can make a pocketful of Catapults if I want to go in deep for a capital.

Notre Dame? If I'm warmongering, my Vassals and their resources make my people happy, and if I'm culturing, my spending keep them schtum.

Extra trade routes? If I'm running a trade economy, I want to get Customs Houses online as well - and they sit next to Liberalism.

It's just not a high priority tech if I'm not running an Espionage economy, and almost always just gets backfilled en route to or after Liberalism. By then, Economics is so near, why bother with Castles?

If Engineering gave a free GE to the first discoverer, then we'd be in business. Instead of that freebie being at the end of the tech tree, when we have nothing left to rush - and can run 10 Engineers in a GP farm if we've reached Fusion and victory somehow still hangs on Mining or CreCon.

As it is, the most tempting thing about the tech for me is faster road movement. But my late medieval sights are on Sankore, Spiral and Oxford at this stage; big game-changers, not a grab-bag of nice-to-haves.

 

[kochman]

- You're Celtia and you want Guerilla 3 other than on Gallic Swordsmen

- You're PRO and/or have Stone, are running a GLH economy, have Engineering and won't touch Economics for a while

- A massive AI stack is heading for the city and you need to buy a few more turns for your own stack to intervene

- You're running an espionage economy and the Castles will be made of win

- You've got the Best Defence quest

- Ragnar just got Astronomy and your coastal city is a ways off 40% defence

- Future Wall Street city wants a chance at +1 gold

- You've got no strategic resources and Monty lives next door

- They've pushed your borders right back to your city and it's vulnerable to a surprise attack

What else?

Once most of the available land has been settled, I usually build walls in my border cities, in order of which AI is more likely to attack me... because they are the first line of defense...

I rarely build them around my inner cities unless I think that extra trade route from a later castle will be helpful... but I'd rather get economics ASAP.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Predict AI target city ---> put "a walls" there ---> can leave less standing forces because of the defenses and because the AI will stupidly waste an eternity bombarding it, allowing you to spam out double or triple the #defenders in an emergency.

A castle is even funnier. In particularly bad AI invasion stacks they'll come in with 4 cata or 2 treb and be willing to talk peace before they actually attack...

No need to put these structures everywhere, or if you know you won't be attacked. But if you have the chance of being attacked they're a cheap method of defense that lets you buy time to reinforce.

Even if all Castles did was give +1 trade route, I would gladly build the crap out of those things - if they didn't require Walls

With PRO/stone walls + castle are cheaper than most buildings even when combined.

They'd actually be great investments if they didn't obsolete so quickly. Could you imagine if castles didn't obsolete on the economic side until something like industrialism?! Players would fish for stone just to spam them everywhere, especially when using espionage.

 

[jarhead_leif]

C'mon guys ? Are castles really that important ? True trade route value is defined by the strong diplo and open borders if those prerequisites are not met than what's the point ? Good espionage ? A good catapult surely is better against enemy stack ?! - Seriously what do You expect ? Walls and castles are not wonders - they are meant for defense not for trade

If only castles don't get obsolete with gunpowdered units. I'll probably be spamming walls all over my empire.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

If only castles don't get obsolete with gunpowdered units. I'll probably be spamming walls all over my empire.

They resist all forms of bombardment until Steel, and the AI gets that pretty late.

While muskets and cuirs can "ignore walls", they don't ignore culture defenses, and the castles actually slow down THAT bombardment too, making castles a giant pain in the rear for the unprepared significantly longer than just gunpowder.

They're not amazing, but I build them more often than crap like customs houses or bunkers.

 

[AdamCrock]

They resist all forms of bombardment until Steel, and the AI gets that pretty late.

While muskets and cuirs can "ignore walls", they don't ignore culture defenses, and the castles actually slow down THAT bombardment too, making castles a giant pain in the rear for the unprepared significantly longer than just gunpowder.

They're not amazing, but I build them more often than crap like customs houses or bunkers.

Yup the Steel makes all castles and Izzy Citadels pretty much obsolated.

"Warriors of Steel" bring forth Your units ! I am not affraid with my catapult stack (covered by cavalry) in army

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Izzy's citadels are a special case. They themselves can allow for 10 XP cannons and even artillery out of every city, as long as you run either vassalage or theocracy.

CR III on cannons and arty are extremely powerful. If you're in need of a little extra oomph after conq stomping fools, the super cannon follow-up isn't a bad option at all.

 

[AdamCrock]

Izzy's citadels are a special case. They themselves can allow for 10 XP cannons and even artillery out of every city, as long as you run either vassalage or theocracy.

CR III on cannons and arty are extremely powerful. If you're in need of a little extra oomph after conq stomping fools, the super cannon follow-up isn't a bad option at all.

It was therefore sensible with 3.19 version to "not allow them to capture". As You have stated the "artilerry units" are essential to victory and (argueably?) therefore rendered them the most important unit in game, Don't forget about the collateral damage which seems essential in the most parts

 

[DroopyTofu]

I've always thought modern cities looked cool with the wall art around them, so I sometimes build them just because they make my cities look much cooler.

 

[AdamCrock]

I've always thought modern cities looked cool with the wall art around them, so I sometimes build them just because they make my cities look much cooler.

Totally opposite in my case as I found cities with walls looking ugly It is just me but nevertheless I've found some mods that could "lift off the curse of an walled city

 

[jarhead_leif]

If Engineering gave a free GE to the first discoverer, then we'd be in business. Instead of that freebie being at the end of the tech tree, when we have nothing left to rush - and can run 10 Engineers in a GP farm if we've reached Fusion and victory somehow still hangs on Mining or CreCon.

I guess that Engineer has something to do with the SpaceElevator wonder.

Speaking of walls,
Even the Celtic duns are almost useless. Maybe good for the AI.
__________________

cute^^