Fort and Hero Building effect on territory root

[roscany]

Hey everyone,

Hoping you can clear up something that I'm unclear about. In a 4v4 TG the other day, my CC was destroyed and I lost my territory (shoutout @SaidRdz). I was surprised I lost my territory, as I thought that having a fort and a hero building nearby my CC would allow me to maintain my general territory root without losing all of my buildings. I know I've seen people (shoutout @SaidRdz) maintain their territory root with only a hero building , and I'm pretty sure I've seen forts keep territory and even capture a nearby weakened CC in TGs.

A player in the game mentioned that only some hero buildings (maur, maybe others?) have a feature which allows them to keep their root. This seems like a random addition for just one civ, and I do get that we want to differentiate civs, but seems a little silly. 

I've attached a screenshot of my base for reference. For what its worth, I thought my buildings were close enough to my pocket Ally to keep my root regardless, but I acknowledge it may have been just out of range. 

TL;DR... does a fort have any influence on territory root? Is Maur the only civ that's hero building has territory root, and is this cool or lame?

Thanks!

[chrstgtr]

Forts used to have territory root but that was taken out in a24–>a25 because it encouraged too much turtling. (I think fort only gave root in a24.) 

Maurya hero building gives territory root. (Maybe Persian hero buildings does too.) I don’t like that feature. Taking out territory root against Maurya is effectively “kill CC and find the hero building.” The Maurya building isn’t a last stand location. It’s easily captured as soon as it’s found but that might not be easy to do. 
 

It looks like your connection to your ally was just a little too short

[Atrik]

41 minutes ago, roscany said:

I know I've seen people (shoutout @SaidRdz) maintain their territory root with only a hero building

I think only 2 buildings have territory root now : CCs and Ministry (Hans). If a territory is directly connected to an allied territory (meaning your borders touch the allied one directly) with one of those building, the territory hold.

This can be usefull to understand because your goal when attacking could be to "disconnect" and enemy territory to turn him Gaia. Most often, if 1-2 buildings are making the connection, you should capture or destroy them.

[Player of 0AD]

Mauryan and Persian palaces have a territory root.

If a fortress is very close to a hostile CC, it will attack its loyalty, but the fort has no root.

[roscany]

I see in the description of the Maurya hero building, the Harmya, it says "Territory Root." I agree with @chrstgtr, this seems like a random addition to the civ. I'm curious why it only applies to Maurya and Persia. If there is a historical justification, I'd understand I guess. 

I did a quick test and it looks like the Persian hero building, the Apadana, also has this feature of maintaining root without a CC, but there is no mention of it in the building's description. Maybe one of the developers/ BAs can add it in if this feature is to continue?

Thanks for answering my question.

[hyperion]

1 hour ago, chrstgtr said:

Forts used to have territory root but that was taken out in a24–>a25

A24 was the only release with that feature and was just reverted right back.

 

1 hour ago, Atrik said:

I think only 2 buildings have territory root now : CCs and Ministry (Hans).

There are more, grep for Root in simulation templates.

[roscany]

1 hour ago, Player of 0AD said:

If a fortress is very close to a hostile CC, it will attack its loyalty, but the fort has no root.

I don't really understand the rationale behind this. If a sole fort has no root attached to it, why should it affect the loyalty of a building that does have a root? 

[chrstgtr]

23 minutes ago, roscany said:

I don't really understand the rationale behind this. If a sole fort has no root attached to it, why should it affect the loyalty of a building that does have a root? 

I think it is a bug. Forts have a lot of territory influence, so when they are placed close by they  begin to take over nearby structures.

Functionally, this basically never happens unless you're trolling. You have to build so close to the CC that your builders are under constant fire.  

[roscany]

17 hours ago, chrstgtr said:

I think it is a bug. Forts have a lot of territory influence, so when they are placed close by they  begin to take over nearby structures.

Functionally, this basically never happens unless you're trolling. You have to build so close to the CC that your builders are under constant fire.  

I've seen it once. Player A build a forward CC and Fort close enough to join root with their Ally. Player B on the opposite team captured the CC of Player A, but left the fort standing. Player A's fort was close enough to their Ally to keep the its loyalty and started to attack the loyalty of the damaged CC until Player B garrisoned the CC. 

Yeah, in all the games I spec'd I've maybe noticed this once. 

Big enough territory influence to take over nearby structures, but not enough to keep its own................

[chrstgtr]

4 hours ago, roscany said:

I've seen it once. Player A build a forward CC and Fort close enough to join root with their Ally. Player B on the opposite team captured the CC of Player A, but left the fort standing. Player A's fort was close enough to their Ally to keep the its loyalty and started to attack the loyalty of the damaged CC until Player B garrisoned the CC. 

Yeah, in all the games I spec'd I've maybe noticed this once. 

Big enough territory influence to take over nearby structures, but not enough to keep its own...............

yeah, I think I’ve seen it one or two times for real and it was in the context of an ally fort being accidentally too close to an ally CC. It is easy to imagine if you are building a new CC in unsettled area. 
 

but most of the time, it was trolling by an enemy or ally