Are castles worth the points?

[Bluebird]

Somehow I don't see why I should pay the points for the more expensive castles. Specially the defense value seems to be massively overrated. Watchtowers and Mausoleums are good enough. Fortresses are nice because of their Admin value, but not more than than.

Castles just cost too many points and specially the build-time and costs are just not worth it.

Anybody here who likes 'Hill Fortesses', 'Citadels', 'Dark Citadels' or 'Mountain Citadels'? I have never seen anybody use them ...

[tinkthank]

This has been discussed in quite some detail in the last couple of weeks (if you search for +fortress you will find quite a bit), and there seems to be a large consensus that human players will never choose these forts you list in MP, and for good reason too.

It isn't bad that the Impossible AI can choose some of these, since they never build castles, but of course this is a poor argument overall, since it would be wonderful if they did.

Changing the ways that Forts work is *probably* a major issue in dom3, or at least an issue. Currently, Castle build-time is static and paired with cost. This will probably or possibly be different in dom3.

If you check out the Wishlist of the past 5 pages or so, I think you will run across some good discussions of how this could be improved.

[Chazar]

Yes! Two examples, followed by a big but:

• A Hill Fortress proved to be an excellent idea when I played C'tis Miasma for the first time:
  It took Ulm quite some time to breach the walls despite bringing a few sappers (but still too few compared to the Ctis City Guards). So the Ulmish knights retreated, collected more sappers and returned, but still the siege took 3 turns. The Ulmish siege was also faught back, since their precious knights were stuck in the narrow passage blocked by undead chaff. A couple of poison slingers dealt damage to them. The two ulmish earth kings (equipped as combatants and not as caster) flew inside thanks to their symphalian wings, but got quickly disposed by my opposition casting shamen communion.
  
  So a couple of city guards, two marshmasters and 5 or 6 shamen hold back a large number of ulmish knights, 5 smiths and two earth kings! Of course, quite a few knights survived the poison damage and retreated - but being diseased prohibits healing, so those units were doomed! All 5 smiths were also diseased at the time of battle!
  
• As Caelum, I usually take the WizardTower. Caelians are hungry, so quickly building a high admin castle is important to yield enough supply over some distance to prevent starving. (BTW, its a pity that again the all-important admin score is used, and that the supply-score is not even a factor for distance feeding!) My Caelian armies are hence usually followed by a trail of Wizard Towers. I agree that for merely pumping out Caelian Wizards, a WizardTower is a poor choice compared to Watchtowers, since on may afford more WatchTowers+Wizards than WizardTowers+Wizards...
  
• However, I usually play short crowded games which are already finished by turn 60! Like 7 players on inland with only a couple of victory points. Most of our games are even decided earlier, around turn 40ish (guessing). I am convinced that the time of castles is over, as soon as national troops have become obsolete!!! Well, SCs and excessive Magic is natuarlly worse than gunpowder!

[BigDaddy]

If it wasn't for ghost riders, you could defend yourself from overland spell with PD. However, with Ghost riders only the cheapest castles make sense

[Edi]

That depends on what kind of map you play. A small crowded map means that the people who use the cheapest castles are likely not going to be able to produce enough armies to stand up to people who take the 60 or 80 point forts and pump out large numbers of troops to crush their neighbors before they get anywhere near Ghost Riders. It is an issue in long games on large maps, though.

Edi

[Tuidjy]

BigDaddy said:
If it wasn't for ghost riders, you could defend yourself from overland spell with PD.

No, it is not just ghost riders. By the time ghost riders are researched, there
are dozens of attacks (teleporting/trapezing mages, imprints, remote zombies,
phantasmal attacks, horrors, etc...) that can rip through any kind of PD.

PD has two functions: it prevents basic scouts from taking over provinces, and
it tells you what ended up taking them. This is achieved by having 15 golds
worth of it, max. Some PDs can fight off knights/barbarians, but these are the
exception. Most PDs cannot fight off an equiped assassin, and I do not think
that any can fight off a well equiped black servant.

And you know what? I like it this way. In an age of magic, local yokels cannot
be expected to stop a determined attack. From a balance point of view, one
should not be able to stop a mage team worth 1000 golds with PD worth 100
golds. From an enjoyment point of few, defense should not beat offense.

[The_Tauren13]

From an enjoyment point of few, there should be some alternative to blanket castling.

[tinkthank]

Oooh -- another mad castling thread! Yay!

[NTJedi]

Ways I see to stop mad castling:

1) Improve Province Defense... my ideas posted On WishList sticky page_19... Date: 01/17/05 05:21 PM

2) Have some terrain where it's impossible to build. This is logical since several areas in the world it is impossible when comparing the building technology used in the game. Examples= Swamps, High Mountains, Rain Forests
Also building time should be increased for Wastelands.

3) Make the more expensive castles much more powerful in terms of DEFENSE pts and stronger battle defensives. Such as boulders falling or flaming arrows or something more.

4) Make the more expensive castles give bonuses to defending troops. Some examples = such as 20% air shield, morale bonus, attack bonus against flyers, etc.

5) Add spells which target destruction of castles. Spells could target overall castle defense and thus weaker castle-types would fall using fewer gems. The most expensive castle-types can be immune or rarely crumble. The capital can be immune to this spell.

6) Provide an option for the host to remove building castle-types completely. Since it's an option players will decide whether or not to include this feature.

[PrinzMegaherz]

And allow nations to have more than one castle type available. Most of the more expensive castles are inferior to the cheaper ones, if you can only have either one or the other. If you could take fortified cities and Watchtowers, one could build some capitals (fortified cities) and defend minor provinces with watchtowers.