Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: What's so bad about forts?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Default Re: What's so bad about forts?

    Due to their cramped confines and total lack of defenses, they're no better (usually worse) than an open field battle.

    The real clencher for me, though, is that unlike a field battle, you always count as being besieged, so if you lose, everyone dies.

    No benefits plus insta-death if defeated equals a terrible place to fight.

    I do construct them in chokepoints and man them with a few cheap archers. They work nicely for slowing and whittling down an invading enemy.
    Last edited by Rhedd; 08-23-2007 at 07:19.

  2. #2
    Ranting madman of the .org Senior Member Fly Shoot Champion, Helicopter Champion, Pedestrian Killer Champion, Sharpshooter Champion, NFS Underground Champion Rhyfelwyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    In a hopeless place with no future
    Posts
    8,646

    Default Re: What's so bad about forts?

    Forts across the Alps can keep you protected from the HRE, France, Hungary, and really slow down any of their attacks.
    At the end of the day politics is just trash compared to the Gospel.

  3. #3
    Member Member tarbanrael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    The West of Ireland
    Posts
    23

    Default Re: What's so bad about forts?

    forts are very useful as well for the Pyrenees to prevent the guys from the other side crossing over and drooling over your cities... It's particularly useful if you play Venice or Milan to seal off the Italian peninsula.

    and as a cheat, it's brilliant to protect your merchants...

  4. #4
    Ricardus Insanusaum Member Bob the Insane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,911

    Default Re: What's so bad about forts?

    I used them a lot in RTW but not so much in M2TW...

    I find it more effective to simply leave a decent sized army in a strategically sound position...

    Where is can be benficial is guarding a group of bridges. Rather than having a large army on each. You have a fort with a single unit your side of each bridge and station a large army withing a single turn's move of all the forts.

    While this may appear to give the bridge to the attacking unit, if you place you defending army next to the besieged fort and then attack from within the fort it counts as a sally battle and you fight on the fort square and not on the bridge. This also prevents the attacking army bringing reinforcements from the other side of the bridge...
    Last edited by Bob the Insane; 08-23-2007 at 16:04.

  5. #5

    Default Re: What's so bad about forts?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob the Insane
    I used them a lot in RTW but not so much in M2TW...

    I find it more effective to simply leave a decent sized army in a strategically sound position...

    Where is can be benficial is guarding a group of bridges. Rather than having a large army on each. You have a fort with a single unit your side of each bridge and station a large army withing a single turn's move of all the forts.

    While this may appear to give the bridge to the attacking unit, if you place you defending army next to the besieged fort and then attack from within the fort it counts as a sally battle and you fight on the fort square and not on the bridge. This also prevents the attacking army bringing reinforcements from the other side of the bridge...
    Can you (or anyone) show me a screenshot of your use of forts please?

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO