Why forts rule!

[Ming]

Nice when it works... but still not proof of your statement that they ALWAYS attack. They don't, and that's a fact

[wodan11]

I daresay the incidence of AIs attacking forts rises when the human actually builds some forts.

Could that have something to do with this debate?

[Ming]

While you make a valid point, it still doesn't change the FACT that the AI doesn't always attack forts, which is key to the debate

I prefer to have a defensive force handy that can deal with an enemy attack no matter where they are, then depend on a tactic like building forts that may or may not slow the enemy down. The best defense is a better offense. Far more predictable and dependable.

[wodan11]

Yeah.

Anyway when I build forts it's usually either because there's a rare true bottleneck, some funky canal thing, or as a base from which to sally my counterattack force (which I agree with you it's my preferred tactic).

When there's the possibility of AI SODs numbering 50-100+ units, and my counterattack force is 1/3 to 1/2 that, it's necessary to have a safe place to attack. Otherwise, you kill half the SOD and are then left bent over with your pants down, for the other half of the SOD to kick you right where it doesn't grow back. Worst thing in the world is to have your weakened units get wacked simply because you had to attack from the open.

[Hauptman]

I had been watching his military grow to rather uncomfortable sizes. He had parked his SoD in a city that i could see, and it was big. I wanted war, because i wanted africa so i waited for rifling and steel before i declared.

Since his sod wasnt moving i built 3 forts that were in "range" of what i assumed would be an invasion route. Ploped 4 units in each and waited for his stack to choose a city.

True to form, his stack found a fort, and attacked. Because they ALWAYS do

4 units killed off all of his trebs and a sizable number of units, mostly knights. Now with no arty in his stack i was 100% comfortable with letting him pull it up to the castled city before i juiced it.

Now im not saying I dont keep a mobile force handy, of course i do. But i also keep forts with a few defensive units up. Because its a cheap way to kill off large numbers of bad guys. Now he only attacked 1 fort, so 2 were a "waste", but as soon as i knew where he was going i was able to empty them out and use the defenders for the counter attack as welll as having ready made garrison units for the newly captured cities.

[Boracks]

Mid to late game, forts also act as airbases, sometimes useful when using airships for recon to get that little extra range.

[Ming]

True to form, his stack found a fort, and attacked. Because they ALWAYS do

Uhhh... no they don't. I understand a lot of what you are saying, but it's getting hard to take it all very seriously when you continue to be mistaken on one of the very simple game concepts... and that being that the enemy doesn't always attack a unit when it starts next to it.

It can be a real waste of time and resources to build and staff multiple forts with no guarantee that they will do any good. Because the facts are plain, the AI doens't ALWAYS attack forts, regardless of what you keep saying

[Hauptman]

it is 100% my experience that an enemy Stack does always always ALWAYS attack forts if it meets one enroute to a city. It has to be a stack of doom to behave this way. Believe i explained that earlier. That last screenshot is the best proof i can provide. It wasnt blocking his path to the city, he could have bypassed, but he didnt. He saw 4 units in a fort, delayed his attack on the city to kill those 4 units at great loss to his force. and gave me three more turns to move units into position.

[Ming]

I have run multiple tests and it's not even close to 100%. Your "one posted" example isn't proof of 100%. The stronger the stack in the fort, the less likely an enemy SOD will attack it. Yes, if it looks like the SoD can easily slaughter the units in a force, it will attack... but if the stack on defense is strong, an SoD will just as avoid it as it is to attack.

Your 100% comment is still wrong. If you want to say that an SoD will always slaughter smaller and far weaker stacks on it's way to it's destination, I'm willing to buy that, since my tests seem to point that to be true. But to claim a SOD will ALWAYS attack a fort is just plain wrong.

[Hauptman]

Well, that is my point. I only use 3 or 4 units. I dont try to actually defend those forts. I simply use them as bait to kill enemy units. That last fort had 1 rifle, 1 musket, and 2 longbows. Hammer cost was cheap. workers were done improving tiles, so it's not like wasted worker turns cost me anything. My main force was sitting in that city, or on it's way. after he cleared the fort out he went after the city and my cannons toasted him. took 3 turns total to kill off all his units after it actually got out of the forests. It was a big stack. Had i not already destroyed his trebs and cats via the fort. He could have actually done some semblance of damage to me, even if only bombarding walls. but as it was, he move to my city, got cannoned and rifled, then tried to run. His entire military might was succesful in killing 4 units (not counting my unlucky RNG rolls killing his units). That is the point im trying to make. 3 or 4 units in a fort and they will attack it. With all the defensive bonuses on the right tiles those 4 units can do incredible damage. Making cities remain safe and unmolested.

[One_more_turn]

That's what the 300 did at Thermopylae.

[Ming]

You've been arguing that they ALWAYS attack a fort. One more time... THAT IS NOT TRUE!

NOW, at least you are backing down and saying that if you don't have many units in the fort, it will attack. I've never argued that point.

And I would still argue that it's a waste. Instead of building a bunch of forts and stocking them with units, those units could all be in a single location and you wouldn't be needing to weaken his stack with forts, you could just take him straight up. In my opinion, any time you let an enemy use his colateral damage units in your territory, it's not very smart.

Sure, forts are great for true choke points, getting oil quicker, canals... but to build a loose string of forts and then stocking them with units is a waste. Just ask how well it worked for the French in WWII

[rah]

It depends on the units.
If the SOD is big enough to ensure that the 4 or so unit will be lost, I don't want to waste the experience points. I'd rather attack out and keep the points. Especially If I have cannons and the AI doesn't have any 12 strength units yet. I don't worry that much about the enemy siege units because my flanking units will usually take them and it may delay the SOD from attacking for a turn while it takes down the walls since as long as the stack has siege units it will usually take the walls down prior to attacking

[rah]

It depends on the units.
If the SOD is big enough to ensure that the 4 or so unit will be lost, I don't want to waste the experience points. I'd rather attack out and keep the points. Especially If I have cannons and the AI doesn't have any 12 strength units yet. I don't worry that much about the enemy siege units because my flanking units will usually take them and it may delay the SOD from attacking for a turn while it takes down the walls since as long as the stack has siege units it will usually take the walls down prior to attacking

[wodan11]

Rah, if you value the XP, why are you wasting it on flanking kills?