Why some Civs has their heroes at Fortress?

[guerringuerrin]

Wouldn't it be better if all civilizations had their own building (or if some had it at the Civic Center and others had a dedicated building) instead of placing it in the Fortress? This forces you to construct a purely defensive building, except in rare cases.

[chrstgtr]

51 minutes ago, guerringuerrin said:

Wouldn't it be better if all civilizations had their own building (or if some had it at the Civic Center and others had a dedicated building) instead of placing it in the Fortress? This forces you to construct a purely defensive building, except in rare cases.

Balancing with how quickly/cheaply you can get a hero and wtf. 

I personally find hero-dedicated buildings annoying and cluttering of your mental space (i sometimes forget to make the building for civs I play less often, for example) and game maps (it takes up actual space in your base and basically never matters if captured/destroyed). I would rather heroes just train slower/more expensively from the CC than from a dedicated buildings. But I think others disagree and it’s not a hill I’ll die on. 

Already having a fort makes it easier to eventually get wtf. I don’t think that should be placed in a fort either but that’s a different issue and a relatively low priority one too. 

Edited 6 hours ago by chrstgtr

[real_tabasco_sauce]

I think this is one of those things that does not need to be universal/standard across civs.

[guerringuerrin]

36 minutes ago, chrstgtr said:

Balancing with how quickly/cheaply you can get a hero and wtf. 

yeah maybe thats the main reason. never liked WTF as it rewards ecoboting race and, as it's placed on fortress, somehow forcing defensive strat again 

22 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

I think this is one of those things that does not need to be universal/standard across civs.

Yeah might not need universal but feels like forcing a civ to build fortress for get the heroe feels somehow like just delaying full offensive strats.
 

[BreakfastBurrito_007]

18 minutes ago, guerringuerrin said:

Yeah might not need universal but feels like forcing a civ to build fortress for get the heroe feels somehow like just delaying full offensive strats.

It does delay the full offensive, but also the exploitation of some uniqueness of the civ. There are probably some civs that could stand to get their heroes earlier. Currently Seles are the only civ that get heroes from cc, which is a unique advantage. I think hero buildings could also include unique techs and some could be made available in p2 depending on civ balance considerations. Basically we have a wide spectrum of different options for how fast a civ should access its heroes and we can make those choices on a case by case basis.

[chrstgtr]

50 minutes ago, guerringuerrin said:

yeah maybe thats the main reason. never liked WTF as it rewards ecoboting race and, as it's placed on fortress, somehow forcing defensive strat again 

I never thought of it like that but you're right. I dislike it because it makes wtf much more unattainable--you have have resources to build a fort, you have actually build the fort, you lose eco time while building, then you have to research and wait for a very expensive tech. All my same complaints about wonders. Hoops just to have hoops to jump through. 
 

51 minutes ago, guerringuerrin said:

Yeah might not need universal but feels like forcing a civ to build fortress for get the heroe feels somehow like just delaying full offensive strats.

Agree. Although a lot of people just build a fort anywhere and it serves little strategic defensive purpose. This is especially true with current building AI/strength. 

 

30 minutes ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

I think hero buildings could also include unique techs and some could be made available in p2 depending on civ balance considerations. Basically we have a wide spectrum of different options for how fast a civ should access its heroes and we can make those choices on a case by case basis.

Yeah. But there is not real reason for any of this other than being "different." All this could just as easily be put in any other existing buildings or new buildings all together. 

A more cohesive framework would be something like iber, a defensive civ, is the only civ to get heroes from the fort , a defensive building, while Rome, an offensive civ, could only get heroes from an army camp, an offensive building. Something else could be Mace being able to train it's siege hero from the siege factory while other heroes are trainable from the CC with longer train times. 

Right now, it just seems that the building any particular civ uses to train their heroes is random and without any actual purpose (aside from Sele that get heroes from CC more quickly than other civs can). 

[Atrik]

Thanks @guerringuerrin, yes forts should be defensive structure and not though as medieval castles. It could make sens to let one general purpose tech like wtf in it, as it give turtling another small advantage.

4 hours ago, chrstgtr said:

Agree. Although a lot of people just build a fort anywhere and it serves little strategic defensive purpose. This is especially true with current building AI/strength. 

In com mod they got buffed, they can 3 shot eles and heros when garrisoned basicaly.

[chrstgtr]

4 minutes ago, Atrik said:

In com mod they got buffed, they can 3 shot eles and heros when garrisoned basicaly.

Sure. But we're talking vanilla. Com mod is also disliked for that reason, among others, so I don't see that being implemented. And, if it is then @guerringuerrin's complaints will be even more valid. 

8 minutes ago, Atrik said:

It could make sens to let one general purpose tech like wtf in it, as it give turtling another small advantage.

This just leads to booming and turtling. Makes more sense to make an offensive tech be some place else. No reason to give turtling offensive advantages in addition to defense ones.