Forts

[Smurfling]

When someone is running, say, 10% forts; if you do an SoT on them will their defense buff from forts be shown in the defense calculation?

Or do you need to Survey them and add it in yourself?

Was just curious if Forts work the same was as the Monarch defense buff in war (it doesn't show up in the SoT --- you have to calc for it yourself).

[titanwraith]

it shows up in SoT

[Backpack]

don't run forts. they stink and are not as effective as training grounds, imo

[Ethan]

Going from 0%->10% forts is better than going from 30%->40% TGs. (Take the "saved" def and make it offense) The first 10% should normally go into TGs. Where the break even point is depends a lot on the province setup. And then even after you know the static optimal point for a particular province people will still have arguments about which way to skew due to dynamic factors. (Important for other considerations, but I've yet to see an argument about TG/Forts that I thought mattered enough. IMO, of course.)

[E_Boko]

wow forts not as effective as TG despite them having the same bonus as a building. 1.5 and all. i think you sir are wrong. now if you are a suicider then yes TG is better but it doesnt mean forts suck.

making you have to send out more off means i have an easier time retalling you.

[titanwraith]

Suppose you have an offensive unit 8/ and a defensive unit /5 and 25% land to allocate between TG and Forts, and 2 population per acre to allocate between the offensive unit and the defensive unit.

So you put 1 offensive unit, 1 defensive unit and 25% tg (1.2815% OME) --> 10.33 off / 5 def

I put 1.12 offensive unit, 0.88 defensive unit 15% (1.19125% OME) tg and 10% (1.135% DME) forts --> 10.67 off / 5 def

herp derp

[Humanoize]

forts can mean the difference of being unbreakable or not for thieve/mages & turtles. if you play one of these roles in your kingdom and you have free building space in your strategy forts are highly recommanded. even if you run a small amount of forts on a large defence it can be worth it.

[Pestermenot]

Firstly , noone is unbreakable.
Secondly, you want to be as close to unbreakable as possible without sacrificing your ability to retal.

If I can 2xtap someone, but they can 4xtap me back, I need more forts/defspecs.
If I can only be conquested, but I can't 2xtap someone, I hope that I'm not calling myself an attacker.

[Humanoize]

Firstly , noone is unbreakable.
Secondly, you want to be as close to unbreakable as possible without sacrificing your ability to retal.

If I can 2xtap someone, but they can 4xtap me back, I need more forts/defspecs.
If I can only be conquested, but I can't 2xtap someone, I hope that I'm not calling myself an attacker.

Forts can help you to pretty much be unbreakable in your nw range, while turtling or not attacking at all. I agree that you are not much of an attacker when playing like this. Though it is a situation forts can help you reaching your goal

[Bishop]

A faery without forts is a bad faery.

[citadela01]

Forts are offensive buildings. You guys need to stop talkin about deff increase it provides and learn to use them properly. Titan explained it nicely up there.

[Bishop]

And what good are they when you get chained?

[Ethan]

What good is anything when you get chained? Your BE should be climbing when you first take a chain (can't get rid of the pes, right?), so forts should make your defense drop a smidgen *slower* because of that - however, your offense is larger due to the lower mod, so the desertions are slightly probably slightly higher. Whichever way it falls, a properly chained prov is just messed up either way, but it isn't significantly different either direction.

If your BE gets killed off... you have worse defense but better offense - which usually is a helpful trade. At worst you can train more of the cheaper def specs to even it back out. (Especially good for human with the bad o-spec.)

[DjTeddySpin]

A faery without forts is a bad faery.

Yes, DME for faeries are useful as their elites provides 7points of defense compared to their 5 points offense specs.

And what good are they when you get chained?

What he meant is that forts is a good addition to moderate the TG's diminishing returns by using forts to increase the DME and drafting dspecs over to elites for more offense(other than faeries ofc).

In fact, forts hold up the defense better than if you do not have them when getting chained. Having a DME multiplier means you need to run less dspecs to attain the same ModDef output, and you lose lesser dspecs every hit you received because you have lesser of them when you use forts. Replenishing your defense is also easier. Just saying, not that I recommend running forts just for this particular scenario. Nevertheless, this isn't the main point.

[Bishop]

What good is anything when you get chained? Your BE should be climbing when you first take a chain (can't get rid of the pes, right?), so forts should make your defense drop a smidgen *slower* because of that - however, your offense is larger due to the lower mod, so the desertions are slightly probably slightly higher. Whichever way it falls, a properly chained prov is just messed up either way, but it isn't significantly different either direction.

If your BE gets killed off... you have worse defense but better offense - which usually is a helpful trade. At worst you can train more of the cheaper def specs to even it back out. (Especially good for human with the bad o-spec.)

Libraries are good when you get chained, if you want a literal answer.

But to expand, forts are useless when you get chained as your defense dies and deserts - they mod next to nothing. TGs, GS and Rax will be usefull after the chain.