 |
|
bbaws
|
|
I tend to have buckets and buckets of workers and so I end up building maginot lines. I build/warmonger. Once any city has the infrastructure it needs it builds units. I prefer to have those units on the border (a) watching the AI (b) deterring any attacks. When I go to war I aim to destroy an opponent completely. I generally secure any new border with a fresh maginot line b4 improving conquered lands beyond necessary road/RR links. Given the time it takes to build up the infrastructure in newly conquered lands (my main focus) a line of forts gives me a nice feeling of security and in my experience delays the next war indefinitely.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Explorer579
|
|
Chicago
May 2002 time: 23:22
|
|
I attacked the capital of the Iroquois yesterday, and it was fortified. It was going to be a long battle. I had 20 units at a time at their wall gates but still was difficult to catpure because my units could not attack in full strength as the enemy weekens them with the bowmen. Only after I landed workers and built a fort did I dominate. He could no more effectively attack me on his turn; and on my turn, my knights were attacking at full strength after landing in my fort which is next to his capital and close to seashore.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Gen.Dragolen
|
|
Tattila,
How much culture do we get from the WW I battlefields these days. Other than making for a solemn view in a Rememberance Day service, a 1000 year old fort is just an archeological site to me.
Now things like marketplaces, courthouses, banks and things like that should provide minimal culture and harbours should produce about half of what a temple does. In many sites, the harbour was the focus of the whole city with news, goods and ideas moving around as fast as you could move them. Venice in Renaissance Italy would be a good example since commerce was importing and exporting from one end of the Mediteranean to the other, and even into Persia, India and China. Marco Polo and his brothers for instance were traders first and explorers second and they brought numerous ideas back from China.
I've been toying with the idea of adding a cultural value to improvements, but haven't had a chance to test it yet.
D.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
mrmitchell
|
|
Adding cultural value to tile improvements would make it too easy to get culture, but if you just raised the culture victory requirement it'd work out. For example, you have a stronger feel when walking on a 4000 year old road than that of cruisin down a 20 year old hi way. Forts too, but it takes enough time for people to forget the hideous death and destruction surrounding them.
And as far as the question posed by the thread, not unless it's a chokehold or very short border, i.e. less than ten tiles. (Or if I've undoubtedly going to win and feel like wasting time on the Xerxes (Maginot) Line...)
|
|
|  |
 |
|
King of Rasslin
|
|
Forts are inferior to forests. Forts allow the useless "free shot" but forests take all of a unit's movement points. You should plant forests to slow an enemy advance, as well as get a defence bonus. Forts on forests could be done later.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
TbTimVa
|
|
I use them when I have only one source of a resource near a stronger opponent. I will build a fort and station
at least two defenders for protection.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:22. Apolyton Time is 00:22. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|