Purpose of Forts

[Arvedui01]

You have the option to build a fort or a watchtower with any general. The question is, are forts/fortresses actually worth your money? They're not really much of a defense tbh, so what is the point? All I can envision is using them as speed bumps for enemy stacks. Full stack against full stack, the fortress seems like more of a liability, given the increased difficulty of deployment. I would only ever want to keep a unit or two in a fortress to slow down the enemy at choke points.

[The Juggernaut]

That's usually what I do, hold a huge army off for several turns with lines of forts manned by a single peasant. Cheap, I know, but it works.

[The Noble Lord]

That's usually what I do, hold a huge army off for several turns with lines of forts manned by a single peasant. Cheap, I know, but it works.

That's what I do as well, and also I build forts when entering hostile enemy territory and it's obvious they would attack me the next turn. I had some great battles defending the forts, there was some heavy and memorable fighting in the forts. Plus they are also good to show your presence on the border and along the rivers, it may keep the enemy at bay before they eventually attack. As for the watchtowers, never really build them, no use for them much.

[tudor93]

As for the watchtowers, never really build them, no use for them much.

I have to disagree with you here .... they are very useful (for example If you play Egypt/Seleucid Empire etc. and you need to watch your own regions) unless you use the toggle_fow, but that's cheating and you know ... a game is not fun with cheats

[_Suetonius_]

As for the watchtowers, never really build them, no use for them much.

I have to disagree too. Watchtowers are very usefull. You quickly know where enemys are. If you haven't got any watchtowers you can't see if the enemy is going to strike you and where he is going to do that.

[tudor93]

Hmm I may be wrong but I red somewhere that forts actualy decrease the chances of rebels to spawn, is this true ?

[Chris Death]

Well theoretically you could use a fort aswell to buy some time to get reinforcements in when e.g.
you got a very small army with a general in enemy terrain figuring out you're surrounded and the
needed reinforcements can't reach you in a single turn.

A fort would need at least three more end-turn clicks until the enemy could attack you, except they
got wallbreakers with them (what they usually don't).

~S~ CD

[akwey]

You can hold off pretty much any army the AI will throw at you with a couple phalanx units. I usually put them next to cities on the front line that get attacked more often and the AI tends to attack them first so it doesn't disrupt my trade and construction.

A good example of when to use them would be when you play as the Greek City States. In the early game Pontus is constantly sending massive stacks of low quality infantry that can easily be cut down by a few militia phalanx units stacked on the entrance. It's a good idea to use them on Sicily too since the Romans are always sending smaller armies in.

[xcorps]

I like to use them as mustering points for building armies, but not much else.

[Justinian Australis]

I use them as delayers at choke points on the map, manned by a few ordinary troops

[Silverdoomer]

As others have said, using them at chokepoints tends to be what I would consider their primary focus; and they do it very well! For example, playing as Macedon, where the mountain ranges have only a few direct in's and out's to keep an eye on, fielding small phalanx armies in a few forts will keep the Roman invaders at bay whilst you deal with the pesky Greeks and Thracians to your respective south and northern borders!

[Walkers_Shade]

I build them at choke points in mountain ranges and the like but whenever I have my legions marching across the world I always put down a fort when my move turns are done for the turn. For me, at least, seems to cut down on ambushes, and it also does help slow the enemy down when they lay siege to it.

I also tend to build them at bridges. I don't know why everyone makes not doing that a house rule. That's an excellent place to put a fort.

[Chris Death]

Why would yo waste a bridge for a fort?

I mean a fort can get surrounded while a bridge cannot.

~S~ CD

[Brusilov]

Why would yo waste a bridge for a fort?

I mean a fort can get surrounded while a bridge cannot.

~S~ CD

Well, the idea is to use forts to close avenues of approach of enemy armies. This means if an army wants to invade your territory you will know as they lay siege to the fort rather than wander around your territories causing unrest.

There is no reason to not use forts at river crossings as they are clearly a natural choke point.

I use watchtowers to ensure that no part of my empire is hidden. This has the advantage that if one does not work it means that there is a slave/rebel army that's been attracted to it.

[MortenJessen]

Hi there.
I tend to use forts as a mean to keep track of my legions (or, if not roman, my armies), as it gives my campaigns a bit of realism, using forts at end-turn, stationing legions in forts at frontiers, camping in the middle of Germania......
M. Jessen

[Magicman2051]

I find all manner of use for the Watchtowers as having some advance warning to a sudden enemy push can be a lifesaver although I don't get as much use out of forts. Normally I'll stick one down along a larger border with a hostile nation though, and keep it occupied.

[Maiar93]

It'll help too yeah. If i have surrounded a hostile region i dont usually take it, i surround it with watchtowers so i see the whole region, and leave it there. I'll kill the armies off there, and surround the town with one sizeable force to take out any they are sending out.


Later i can take it and use it as a gift to a dying ally or something.

[ccgr1121]

There is no reason to not use forts at river crossings as they are clearly a natural choke point.

Excuse me, but have you ever played a bridge battle against the AI? They are the easiest battle scenario in RTW.

Forts, on the other hand, are too cramped to have an effective army setup and almost always involve you sallying forth, which I personally don't like (although that is just my personal dislike, I'm sure others enjoy them), as the AI does not bring or build siege equipment.

Thus, since both are natural choke points, why spend 500dn when the bridge does it for you?

[Just my £0.02]

[mesor]

Im with ccgr on this.

A fort the enemy will batter down normally 3 parts of the wall requiring u to use some 3-6 units to hold them or ull get flanked a bridge u can stick 1 phalanx unit and ur done or in the case of rome my personal favourite is to make a 3 sided box at my end consisting of 6 units of hastati/principles and hold there fire till the enemy is massed up in the box then let them throw.600+ spears at point blank range decimates them and sends half of them running for the hills ur units each take less damage then using just 1 would and u gain xp for multiple units at low cost.

[Brusilov]

Excuse me, but have you ever played a bridge battle against the AI? They are the easiest battle scenario in RTW.

Forts, on the other hand, are too cramped to have an effective army setup and almost always involve you sallying forth, which I personally don't like (although that is just my personal dislike, I'm sure others enjoy them), as the AI does not bring or build siege equipment.

Thus, since both are natural choke points, why spend 500dn when the bridge does it for you?

[Just my £0.02]

I've been playing R:TW since it was released and yes I have fought bridge battles and yes they are easy. Your point is?

If I have a single army against multiple AI armies I will defend at a bridge. I don't care if it's easy or not - it's one way to put the odds in my favour.

I put a single weakest unit in the forts - which I failed to mention. If the AI attack them I autoresolve the battle. I don't ever put my 'field armies' in forts - these are the armies that I fight with.

Why place an army there when I can erect a fort with one cheap unit? I usually have an army in the area to react to the invasion. The fort is simply there to slow down the advance of the enemy army into my territory.