Fortresses, castles and Custom Castle building

[PROMETHEUS ts]

So I have not really clear how CA is going to manage that aspect of ancient historical warfare .

Romans were famous builders and did build lots of fortresses to guard special access positions, a special resource , a region etc ...

those varied in forms and dimensions but were permanent and not just build up enchampments , eventually in time those might heave evolved or not into whole cities and towns ... but the case is here if Romans and few others can Build different Forts and fortresses, castles , castra around the map to presidiate special or particular location ...


a Special feature I woudl like is the following :


1) According to the development of the region you can have a certain amount of points to spend in the province in order to build a limited number of castles or fortresses ...

2) according to the technology level of the province you can have a roster of different types of constructions

3 ) when you decide to place a fortress in a special location ( enough distant from local cities ) the battlefield map opens and allows you to either place directly the Castle / fortress / castrum ( premade asembled model ) etc in the specific location that you think woudl suit best for the defense ( eventually evenifieing the terrain under it once place on ground ) Or to manually add and edit the position of turrets , walls , gate etc ...

4) Also it could simply allow a larger control zone for the specified area nd allow the stack of a certain number of units inside according to the tech level of the building and allow the non necessary presence of a General .


5) the army inside could have a limited action of movement to the surroundings of the castrum and so without a general could still not get much far from its relocation .

6) the Actual fortification of a zone can also be not necessary a fortress but coudl also be just a series of defensive works like ditches , walls, palizades etc all done to slow down the eventual incoming enemy .

This of course could lead to an increase of the siege battles , but on a smaller scale than a city of course and won't affect much the difference from a field battle apart the required siege engines .

[panzerschreck]

Indeed, that's an interesting matter, the truth is that we have very very few informations on all the game when we think about it.

[freakkriek]

as usual well worked out ideas but still... don't see it happen.

Prometheus you often take us on a trip into your mind and let us marvel at the wonders of which the game can consist of but i do hope you realise how specific your ideas are, and how difficult to implement. Since each integration of one of your ideas will trigger that mind of yours to create, admitted marvelous, numerous others....

In conclusion, fun idea but don't get too attached

[osros]

as usual well worked out ideas but still... don't see it happen.

Prometheus you often take us on a trip into your mind and let us marvel at the wonders of which the game can consist of but i do hope you realise how specific your ideas are, and how difficult to implement. Since each integration of one of your ideas will trigger that mind of yours to create, admitted marvelous, numerous others....

In conclusion, fun idea but don't get too attached

True, always good stuff from Prometheus perhaps it can be implemented in a simpler form but what good is that? CA is making a "Game" for the masses and not a Simulation. Most of the folks here want a Simulation but dont think we will have it with CA, I hope im wrong. Everytime I read these good ideas. facts, and accuracy requests just makes it worse cause you know it mostly not going to be there, we can hope for the best though. It seems if we get a Simulation we dont get the graphics, battle animations and gameplay, when we get a Game we dont get the strategy, accuracy, AI and all the other goodness a simulation can do. I said this before CA and a Sim Developer get married and the child will be the greatest Simulation/Game ever and will cater to both tribes of the game world. Glorious! Time to wake up now.....

[1cmanny1]

It would be a cool feature, but I doubt they have thought about it.

[oOIYvYIOo]

I think the best solution would be when playing with Roma on their borders,depending of the country where it is it would depend the type of construction (wood,stone) , everytime a battle would happen near by ,the Romans would have on their side (as defenders logically) that type of defendsive structures. But not on all the frontiers as is was not on all the Roman empire that they use those type of defensive infrastructures .
Or simply , you would have that option on the capital province to build that would give only some places of the province borders those type of structures .

[Woodrow Skillson]

All this would do is make the game even more based around sieges which they are trying to prevent. It would also massively favor the human player since there is no way they can code the pathfinding of the AI to solve a maze the human player can plop down on the map. This essentially will make human controlled regions impregnable to AI attackers.

[torongill]

Romans were famous builders and did build lots of fortresses to guard special access positions, a special resource , a region etc ...

those varied in forms and dimensions but were permanent and not just build up enchampments , eventually in time those might heave evolved or not into whole cities and towns ... but the case is here if Romans and few others can Build different Forts and fortresses, castles , castra around the map to presidiate special or particular location ...

This would be a cool cosmetic feature in general, although it's outside the timeframe, except for the latest handful of turns. What purpose will it serve in-game?

This of course could lead to an increase of the siege battles , but on a smaller scale than a city of course and won't affect much the difference from a field battle apart the required siege engines .

We already know that there will be a defensive stance of the army, in which the Romans will get a fortified camp, unlike most other cultures. I don't think anything more is needed, because it will encourage mini-turtling of the player.
The second problem is that not that this could lead to an increase of siege battles. No, this is going to lead to an increase of siege battles and that's what CA are trying to minimise. So no, I don't see this feature being implemented.

[PROMETHEUS ts]

This would be a cool cosmetic feature in general, although it's outside the timeframe, except for the latest handful of turns. What purpose will it serve in-game?

I didn't sugest to have this evolution Fort to town , it was just a reference to what happened historically .

We already know that there will be a defensive stance of the army, in which the Romans will get a fortified camp, unlike most other cultures. I don't think anything more is needed, because it will encourage mini-turtling of the player.
The second problem is that not that this could lead to an increase of siege battles. No, this is going to lead to an increase of siege battles and that's what CA are trying to minimise. So no, I don't see this feature being implemented.

My proposition is not a defencive stance of an army wich is a temporary measure , but to have some points to spend to "fortify" the region , with a limited pool of points to spend in that aspect , the region could be fortified in a custom way with fortresses , pass guards, castles , castra etc ...

those coudl be either abandoned if you do not want to garrison it or used for a garrison , ofc it would grant to the garrison inside a increased awarness of the surrounding , a limited radius of movement endependantly from having or not a general in and also a more control over the land to repress rebellions etc ...

Now on the topic of the increased sieges .

I think CA decided to minimize the sieges because in RTWII those will be massive , we will have huge cities with multiple attack points to conquer and will take lot of efforts and time to conquer one ... but those instead woudl just be small fortresses comared to a city with a single capture point ... its basically like a field battle with defenders inside a walled fortification that can vary in size , dimension and defences ... but is surely not as massive as the city sieges .

[tungri_centurio]

I dont see its gonna be a feature but it shoud be in.it was the way for the romans to pacify newly conquered lands.
I still hope its in.

[Toho]

they said major settlements get siege settlements and if you are using defensive stance you can build fortifications.
doesn't sound like there will be castles or fortresses in the game.

maybe with TED but in the campaign? highly unlikely if you followed anything CA has said so far.

[PROMETHEUS ts]

Where did theybwrite that?
As for camps and temporary forts its a different thing from what I have sugested that is instead a regional fortification that allows local garrisoning .

[Toho]

jack lusted in his explanation about regions (stickied) and the camps I am not sure, I think it was an article.