StrideColossus
Warlord
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2010
- Messages
- 277
and Oxford isn't even that good a university.
Yeah only second place this year, losers!

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2016/world-ranking
and Oxford isn't even that good a university.
Also, Oxford University will not be in the city of mainz (or New York or Kyoto) it will be on a tile... that tile will be the "town/minor city/suburb of Oxford"..which was totally unimportant until a University was built there.
It was show in a previous playthrought (with France I guess) where Teddy was obsessed by a Relic (a skull) and was constantly trying to buy it for 20 gold.
I hope it's a bug where the AI values it wrongly and that after they fix it the price should rather be 600 gold.
Sent from my Redmi Note 3 using Tapatalk
Great Zimbabwe:
+ 1 Trade Route Capacity. Trade routes from this city generate +2 gold for every bonus resource in this city's territory. Must be built adjacent to Cattle resource and Commercial Hub with Market. + 5 gold. + 2 Great merchant Points per turn.
It's generally a common observation that V is a slower game than previous titles in the series in most respects, because of 1UPT. If units were produced at the same speed in V as they were in past games, the map would fill up very quickly. And yes, it is slower to move those units.
Did we have this info on forts before?
Also, it says "Roman fort", so could standard fort be different (less powerful)?
Spoiler :![]()
No ... also, +4 defense seems pretty lame, so I really don't hope normal form is even less powerful?Did we have this info on forts before?
Also, it says "Roman fort", so could standard fort be different (less powerful)?
Spoiler :![]()
Did we have this info on forts before?
Also, it says "Roman fort", so could standard fort be different (less powerful)?
Spoiler :![]()
No ... also, +4 defense seems pretty lame, so I really don't hope normal form is even less powerful?
No ... also, +4 defense seems pretty lame, so I really don't hope normal form is even less powerful?
+4 seems lame considering that a swordsman has something like 35 in CS if I'm not mistaken - so this is roughly a 10 % bonus. You might have a point about the instant fortification bonus being valuable, I never really looked into the specifics on how the Civ5 version worked, but the text says +50 % combat strength for defending unit which to me seems a whole lot better than +4 flat bonus even if you don't get to fortify on the fist turn (couldn't you do that if you had a road, or did it take a full turn to fortify?).How is it lame?
+4 alone seems to have solid impact from what we've seen.
But you also get automatic fortification bonus for any unit standing there. Which means that you can replace (heavily damaged) unit which was defending a choke-point with next one (fresh) and still get the fortification bonus same turn - which was impossible in Civ 5, if I understood it correctly (I always thought fortification bonus applies from the next turn on).
A constant buff is actually a lot better. This means that the early game will benefit from forts, and late game wont be getting much use of forts. Who uses forts today? No one... yet another good change.
+4 seems lame considering that a swordsman has something like 35 in CS if I'm not mistaken - so this is roughly a 10 % bonus.
Fortification bonus + 4 strength just from standing in the fort is extreamly powerful. In total that is maybe +10 strength or so (do not know how much the fortification bonus is).
A legionary standing in a fort is pretty much unkillable, it will have like 50 strength and it can even attack from the fort while still keeping the fortification bonus so the enemy can basically not counterattack it. This mean a few legionaries in forts can block a whole army.