Forts in cities should be walls

[Chehabian]

Someone had a great idea in Reddit, but I thought I would share this here. (I didn't want to take credit, so I'm sharing the link too)

Here's the link below: https://www.reddit.com/r/Imperator/comments/mapx3f
It really does make sense though. Especially this section that someone added in some of the comments.

Here are some quotes from that thread that I think are really good illustrations of what this system should/could look like.

There is no reason a city state that can muster just 5000 men to defend itself would have them fight a futile battle against 20,000 outside the city walls before the enemy lays siege to the city walls. They would just lock the gates and wait inside. Even better if your army can enter and exit through an unblockaded port or if the city does not tick in seige while the port is open but a breach could be made.

An army should be able to shelter within the walls and not have to initiate a battle until the walls fall. As a result a smaller force could wait out a larger force if they bring insufficient food

 

[IsaacCAT]

The speed and pace of battles is very important.

If we ever reach battles resolved in one day instead of weeks, forts should be a stop point where you can hold an army while your walls endure the siege.

Placing the army inside the walls and opting not to battle can be a strategic option to block enemy armies while being able to defend the city when the walls fall.

I am in favor of upgrading the role of fortifications and shorten the duration of battles.

 

[Bovrick]

Suggestion 1: Cities should have Walls rather than Forts - completely moot point, they're fortification levels, makes no difference.
Suggestion 2: City Walls should be graphically represented - this sounds like a lot more effort than it is worth, with the way that City Sprawl has been established
Suggestion 3: Armies in Fortified Territories should be able to remain within the Fortifications rather than immediately made to battle - this is something I can see working, with a sally option to reflect the Assault option. If you can find a way to make the Food that the defending army is carrying matter then you could see legitimate delaying tactics be balanced. I've always wanted to see Fortified Territories have their own Food Supply values, which would work well with this.

But on the core suggestion of walls...meh.

 

[IsaacCAT]

Suggestion 1: Cities should have Walls rather than Forts - completely moot point, they're fortification levels, makes no difference.
Suggestion 2: City Walls should be graphically represented - this sounds like a lot more effort than it is worth, with the way that City Sprawl has been established
Suggestion 3: Armies in Fortified Territories should be able to remain within the Fortifications rather than immediately made to battle - this is something I can see working, with a sally option to reflect the Assault option. If you can find a way to make the Food that the defending army is carrying matter then you could see legitimate delaying tactics be balanced. I've always wanted to see Fortified Territories have their own Food Supply values, which would work well with this.

But on the core suggestion of walls...meh.

I got less the graphic side but the need of each city to have walls. The money and PI you use to found the city should include the fortification level 2.

The AI should not delete them if we make war score based in battles and taking cities only.

 

[Rabid]

Suggestion 1: Cities should have Walls rather than Forts - completely moot point, they're fortification levels, makes no difference.
Suggestion 2: City Walls should be graphically represented - this sounds like a lot more effort than it is worth, with the way that City Sprawl has been established
Suggestion 3: Armies in Fortified Territories should be able to remain within the Fortifications rather than immediately made to battle - this is something I can see working, with a sally option to reflect the Assault option. If you can find a way to make the Food that the defending army is carrying matter then you could see legitimate delaying tactics be balanced. I've always wanted to see Fortified Territories have their own Food Supply values, which would work well with this.

But on the core suggestion of walls...meh.

I like the idea of city walls / fortifications not having ZoC but being improved in some other sense (reduced build and/or upkeep cost, larger garrisons, etc).

Cities shouldn't generally be easy targets for armies which can be sacked in just a couple of weeks, but equally we shouldn't be covering every province with ZoC-projecting forts.

 

[Chehabian]

A part of me actually doesn't mind the zone of control. I like the idea that you can actually create a defensive strategy that funnels enemies into certain areas. (Sort of allows for some level of autonomy in creating national defense, rather than having to micromanage armies moving around to defend potential holes)

That said - I also think that armies should be able to hole up inside of cities and random fortresses as some of you have added! It'd make certainly for more interesting warfare.

 

[Vlad3fr]

A part of me actually doesn't mind the zone of control. I like the idea that you can actually create a defensive strategy that funnels enemies into certain areas. (Sort of allows for some level of autonomy in creating national defense, rather than having to micromanage armies moving around to defend potential holes)

The zoc don't work that way, you can't funnel them.
Everything is a hole, you can pass throught almost every fort with a good warfare.
You just need 1 stack of Cavalry to capture adjacent territories to a fort and then you walk in with your big stack.

Just put forts on provincial capital to avoid free capture.

 

[Nostalgium]

I'd honestly be happy just having walls graphically represented on the map. They should encircle a fair area around the "core" of any city (and open towards the coast in case of coastal cities for maximum beauty), and wouldn't really need to expand with the city (though they should become graphically more impressive with each tier from 1-3). Cities spreading beyond the original fortifications did happen, after all. Systems distinguishing walled cities from forts would be neat, but it's not something I feel a pressing need for. They could also serve to make certain city tiles *cough* Ktesiphon *cough* look a bit less cramped.

 

[Talib123]

AI would dismantle all of them wich is stupid in its own right
But I would really like to see city walls and truely good fort mechanics.

 

[goodcigar]

Yes I had the same thought a while ago. Fort is too generic and vague. Walls are better. You can distinguish between Wood Walls. Stone Walls. Different levels of Stone Walls. And then you could even have customization of the city defenses like Earthworks, custom garrison size, custom supply storage, moat (not sure if historically accurate tho), catapults, mangonels, ballista, onager, scorpio, etc.

And so the enemy would need to bring serious Siege Equipment to attack a highly defended City. Siege Equipment that has to be researched (or discovered) and built. Siege towers, battering rams, sapping, etc. Demetrius (Antigonus son) was known as Demetrius The Besieger.

Syracuse had crazy defenses because of the inventor Archimedes for example. Hannibal could never siege Rome because he didn't have the manpower or siege equipment necessary I think.

You could distinguish the City Walls from the City Citadel (Acropolis). You could even have multiple City Walls. Though I'm not sure if that is historically accurate until Constantinople.

Roman siege engines - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Roman military engineering - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Siege engine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Helepolis - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[omega20056]

This is a good point. Cities could often hold out against much larger armies if they were defended correctly. When Constantinople was attacked in 717 - 718, it had a garrison of no more than 15,000 men. The city's extensive fortifications and professional garrison allowed it to survive a siege by an Arab force of over 100,000 men.

 

[Pshek]

Great idea! I see it like this: cities have new walls mechanics and biggest feature will be ability to harbour armies (yeah, assault my 2000 little polis army, good luck). It will make city states gameplay much better. Granaries will become very-very useful...
Should only "forts" built in settlements then have ZoC? They'll become expensive and even more strategic buildings

 

[Chehabian]

Glad that so many people agree. Crossing my fingers that the devs pick up on this idea and can turn it into something!