Printable View
Correct me if I'm wrong, but there seems to be a general consensus that forts are pretty rubbish.
In certain circumstances (where there are serious choke points) I've found them really useful. Especially when an enemy is throwing huge waves of armies at you, you can stop them constantly beseiging your cities and interrupting your production and at the very least buy yourself time before they get through.
Everything I've found on the posts have slated them. Does anyone else use forts heavily?
I use them all the time.
Nothing wrong with buying a little peace and quiet from the AI factions imho ~:)
They also seem to be good for keeping the rebels and brigands under control.
I heard this too. Apparently if there is a fort in the area they appear less frequently.
Forts defefending border:
2 onagers, 2 archers, 2 infantry, and I sally every turn when beseiged. Worst case scenario is that you take a huge chunk out of the enemy every turn until the fort falls or they quit. In the mean time you can get a proper army into the area.
Anyway, with all the problems with squalor surely it's better to barrack troops outside the city as far as possible. This being said, I've yet to see a positive thing written about them bar the rebel issue.
One other nice thing about the fort: sometimes (esp in mtn passes) the AI is completely stumped by them. It can be effective enough that I remember one post calling their use "an exploit"; I don't think they're that good...but they can be nice ~:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonny Dangerously
I use forts and watch towers ....I put a fort between two city's that you can't reach in 1 turn but now can with fort. ...
so put a good army in fort and just leave Gov. and maybe 1 other unit in city to keep taxes on VH ......also like stated before any choke point is great place and I heard 1 guy said he built forts side by side and surounded all his lands and blocked out every one lol extreme but may work :D :charge:
Forts can be quite nice when maneuvering in enemy territory. I usually build one at the end of a march. Decreases the chance I'll get side-swiped, and if I do, I've got some defenses to use.
I don't tend to use them in my own territory because the AI seems somewhat buggy regarding their attack decisions, and because I'd rather defend a city.
Bh
I once did a row of about 8 vertically through North Africa. I just stuck one unit in each and had one army on the enemy side taking on successive waves of Roman armies. Then they started rocking up with the plague and although my army and a couple of fort garrisons succumbed, they acted as a screen stopping it spreading into my cities.Quote:
Originally Posted by URPLUMCRAZY
Still, you'd have to be pretty bored, or have a serious micro-manageament fetish to build forts around your entire empire.
Jonny
Also those large Nubian territories are good place to build them as a fort acts as a nearby city when it comes to a retreat
In the early stages of the Seleucid campaign forts in the mtns above Tarsus and Hattra are helpful in deterring Pontus and Armenian from attacking. They usually give me enough time to crush Egypt and then turn north. In my first try as Seleucia, I didn't build forts and had three wars going at once.
i build them at the end of a march through snowy enemy territories, if i don't want to fight in winter... so i wait behind my walls for better weather... there is no need to give enemies a chance to use their snow bonus...
A reason not many people use forts is that it feels like cheating, as the ai doesn't use them (unless they are down to one or 2 cities)
i use forts all the time ,they are nice to make pressure in enemy and better protection in our borders
When I play as Carthage or Greek factions the Blue Roman faction all most all ways builds a fort at carthage/Roman border by Messana in 1st 5 years or so,Quote:
Originally Posted by sapi
but other then there you are right not many times have I seen AI build but never thought of it as cheating tho. :charge:
I've seen almost every faction build forts at one time or another {under A.I. control} . They just don't use them very often .
Playing as Gaul I usually see Julii build one whilst it stews and mutters in its' virtual beard that I won't give it opportunity to take my Italian lands for example .
It might be that on higher difficulty settings the A.I. doen't consider them cost effective {they don't make money nor units , nor keep a city from revolting nor can they attack or move troops etc - the A.I. might not realise how useful they can be therefore as their use is somewhat vauge from the pointof view of pure pedantic logic which is what a computer uses} .
They are certainly handy in some situations though ; I have one Greek Cities campaign going where Scipii doesn't know what to do to as I've blocked access to Syracuse with forts and I'm playing "head-games" with them with my diplomats {every time they try to take Cathages' city , I send a diplomat to see how much the army not under the Faction leader is asking for bribing this season , and they panic and race home ~D } .
Forts can function as a good way to keep trespassing Neutral armies out of your territory, as well as hindering any invasion attempt (they can't assault right away unless they have Elephants or Siege Artillery).
In essence you can defend your borders with one large army that moves towards any nearby border forts that are under threat.
As has been said chokepoints are the key for their use and even if they have just one unit of peasants inside it can give you a warning of an enemy approaching.
They are also great when used in enemy territory as a fortified camp, if your army is in danger of being counterattacked by one of many enemy stacks.
I don't use them.
If I'm on the offensive in enemy territory, I consider getting attacked a nice bonus as it's a lot easier to defend than attack.
On early game defense (hopefully there isn't any late game defense) I rely on perimeter towers to identify threats and large garrisons in a few key cities. Squalor isn't a problem yet in the early game.
All in all, I prefer mobility to static defense.
I don't use them unless my army goes on a long walk, but after reading a few post here, I'll think I'll start using them more often.
I use them in mid-game (when I have the cash to spare but only a few big armies). They're great if you're, say, moving through woodland (such as Germanic terrtories) and don't want to get ambushed.
A favourite fort position is in the western alps, gauls or julii, to deter the other faction from attacking. Early game mainly, you might as well leave them after you conquer both sides of the mountains.
I used them with bribed units. For instance, I was playing Parthia and bribed a Roman family member near Carthage. My closest army was in Cyrencia.
Everything in the bribed familly member's stack disbanded, except for his bodyguard. However, he hired some mercenaries, built a fort and stayed there four or five turns until my invasion arrived, no problem. The invasion force was all cavalry, but the bribed familly member's mercs included the infantry needed to carry out the siege as soon as the invaders arrived.
========
I bribed a huge stack of really lousy units once. Rather than disband them, I sent them back into the territory of their former owners and built a fort. Then I advanced them another march the next turn and built another fort.
Meanwhile, an all-cavalry Parthian army marched up from the south and whipped up on the enemy. I also sent out more diplomats to bribe more units. The cavalry was able to crush any unbribed enemy forces and put cities in siege, then my lousy infantry was there to carry out the siege assaults and garrison the conquered cities.
Although i rarely use forts (i do still use them though) i have found them to be absolutely great no matter what situation your in.
I use them in my Brutii campaings to distract the macedonians whilst i finish of the Greeks or take Carthage or something of that sort.
In summary "HOORAY 4 FORTS" ~:cheers: