ESOCommunity

harcha wrote:you could give the wagon same hp as the actual fort so that it is just as viable to use it as a tank

Maybe add the same attack as the fort? Could be good.

LegalPenguin wrote:

harcha wrote:you could give the wagon same hp as the actual fort so that it is just as viable to use it as a tank

Maybe add the same attack as the fort? Could be good.

War Wagon?

How about instead of thinking about shipments at all, we just have it as an age up option to age 3, that sends a wagon and also adds it as a build option

You mean the campaign 1000 res industrial age-up option?

yes but to age 3

Too strong aging to III. It's 1k res value. Would need to be a IV option. Even that feels pretty strong.

dansil92 wrote:more euro buffs

-everyone, 19th century

You shouldn't be more than pr 16 if you are losing fort wagon. (Rarely if you lose that's acceptable)

princeofcarthage wrote:You shouldn't be more than pr 16 if you are losing fort wagon. (Rarely if you lose that's acceptable)

You shouldn't be more than pr26 if you (or your opponent) are building a fort in the middle of the map.

forts are good they way they are. super risky to put out on the map, but possibly worth it in some situations. much safer to drop it in your base, but only relevant for certain niche plays like revolution or FI. that's fine, that's just how some cards should be in AoE3. if every single card had the same flexibility and power as something like 9 uhlans, this would just be a different game

Fort is already a decent shipment and has been underused for years imo. There are a lot of situations where it's viable. Buffing it would probably be a mistake.

[Armag] diarouga wrote:

princeofcarthage wrote:You shouldn't be more than pr 16 if you are losing fort wagon. (Rarely if you lose that's acceptable)

You shouldn't be more than pr26 if you (or your opponent) are building a fort in the middle of the map.

That is not the point though?

[Armag] diarouga wrote:

princeofcarthage wrote:You shouldn't be more than pr 16 if you are losing fort wagon. (Rarely if you lose that's acceptable)

You shouldn't be more than pr26 if you (or your opponent) are building a fort in the middle of the map.

Stop gatekeeping forts lol

Goodspeed wrote:Fort is already a decent shipment and has been underused for years imo. There are a lot of situations where it's viable. Buffing it would probably be a mistake.

Well, just no

Ok

I agree buffing it isn't necessary though. But I think I explained ITT why forts aren't good atm in almost every case. I'm not sure what makes you think the opposite?

theres 3 major obstacles why forts are not viable.
1) it takes an age 3 card slot, in a std you basically dont wanna have a fort as an age 3 shipment.
2) it takes aproxximately 2 minutes after its arrived to give any form of value, while most other shipments have an immediate impact
3) I go into a game assuming im the better player and that i can outplay/ be in control of the game with my unit control and macro, so I dont need a fort to get map control, i can just use my army, which is even mobile and doesnt lock me into one place. When you have map control anyways a fort doesnt add much value

Of course theres niche situations when youd want to have a fort/ be able to send one but then see point 1) and 2). Id only conisder having a fort in deck with 2 civilisations really: Port and ottoman maybe spain too. All other civs either dont scale to well into the late game, so they dont want to prolong the game anyways or should have enough map presence just with the army so that they dont need to take the gamble of getting a fort up.
French doesnt wanna tc boom in 99 % of all cases and they have a strong midgame where they often get mapctrl anyways, same applies to germany+ ger doesnt even scale well into lategame ( i define lategame as being maxed out on vills) .
Dutch could want a fort in certain mus, but getting up a fort in a good position as dutch is kind of impossible, and having it inbase doesnt give you much in most mus,
Russia.. why would russia want a fort ? they have mapctrl anyways in most situations
THen theres brits, its kind of the same for them as it is for dutch+ they eat hunt even faster so a fort will only be good for a limited amount of time unless its in an insane spot.

Kaiserklein wrote:I agree buffing it isn't necessary though. But I think I explained ITT why forts aren't good atm in almost every case. I'm not sure what makes you think the opposite?

most likely not, but maybe it should unlock the ability to build one. if you lose a wagon or it gets sieged down at least you have somewhat of an compensation.

I think you could consider a change where buildings that are being built don't take so much damage that they get 1-hit by just a couple of pikes sieging it. I've always found that to be silly design, and it's probably one of the main reaons people don't send fort.

Raphael, I think you might only be looking at somewhat early uses of the fort. Except for specific strats, the most general usage of a fort is to secure the last hunts and mines on the map near the end of the game. If you can do that, the fort is arguably the single most effective shipment at that point of the game.

Its just a matter of getting the fort up and that is still pretty hard. There are scenarios where this would definitely seal the deal though. The problem might not even be the powerlevel, but that it is too niche; it only happens one in 20 games or so, and even then the situation where it is useful might not present itself. But when it does, the fort is game-winning.

The Fort never goes up, and especially not in the spot you want it to go up. It's useless.

I can see how a fort could be viable on a few select maps and MU’s.

RefluxSemantic wrote:Raphael, I think you might only be looking at somewhat early uses of the fort. Except for specific strats, the most general usage of a fort is to secure the last hunts and mines on the map near the end of the game. If you can do that, the fort is arguably the single most effective shipment at that point of the game.

Its just a matter of getting the fort up and that is still pretty hard. There are scenarios where this would definitely seal the deal though. The problem might not even be the powerlevel, but that it is too niche; it only happens one in 20 games or so, and even then the situation where it is useful might not present itself. But when it does, the fort is game-winning.

do i want to have a card taken in age 3 which could otherwise be a unit shipment or upgrade, just for the rare case that it comes down to having acces to the last natural ressources on the map ? Presuming it goes up in that spot where you want it to go up and not just get sniped down. Also that fort could be another unit shipment that help me control that spot anyways. Its a gamble and just not worth to have in your deck

Yea no reason to have fort in deck unless youre doing into game with a strat that revolves around it, like a fast revolt where you think youll need it in base to hold, otherwise its just bad for the aforementioned reasons.