but i think norfleet is correct .
i can't see any point why castling should be forbidden .
it gives you 1 turn time to react normally . a watchtower has no other advantages than this .
as norfleet said it gives you instead an early disadvantage . unless playing ermor ( there you have other castles which are worse ) you have
-reduced income in your capitol compared to the 40 admin castle
-much worse troop production capacity
if you have good capitol only troops you have a serious disadvantage in building them with a watchtower .
since a watchtower has no walls storming it is easy . it has very little defense so normally after 1 ! turn it can be stormed .
so in general the only thing a watchtower gives you is delaying the enemy attack 1!! turn and choosing if you want to react .
compared to the disadvantages i really don't see why most people here on the forums are whining about mad castling .
ihmo you have only 2 choices :
- cheap watchtower for castling every province .
- the 80 point 40 admin castle .
all other castles are suboptimal choices ihmo .
and another small argument for the watchtower :
some races like mictlan , machaka ... have quite resourcecheap national troops but crappy militia .
you need normally a 2-3 times bigger force to defeat an ulmish pd than to defeat an mackaka pd of equal size .
so any rules limiting use of castles are in favour of e.g. ulm which normally is better building only a few castles for troop production than castling everything . but they have better pd to compensate .
so forbidding mad castling as a mpgamerule is unfair and not the other way round .
norfleet is totally right
