AGEOD Forums

Egypt gives a grand total of 2 money to the British, so holding it for the resources is pretty pointless. Not holding land provinces doesn't prevent you from traveling through canals, AFAIK. Even if it did, going around Africa is shorter than going through the Suez if you want to reach anywhere other than the east Mediterranean provinces. Losing 2NM for having the two strategic cities there surrender is incredibly insignificant in the long scheme of things. Devoting any forces at all to Egypt for the sake of holding Egypt, even just the ones that are already there, seems like a bad idea.

But you can get at the Turks and take Palestine easier if you hold Egypt.

ringhloth wrote:Egypt gives a grand total of 2 money to the British, so holding it for the resources is pretty pointless. Not holding land provinces doesn't prevent you from traveling through canals, AFAIK. Even if it did, going around Africa is shorter than going through the Suez if you want to reach anywhere other than the east Mediterranean provinces. Losing 2NM for having the two strategic cities there surrender is incredibly insignificant in the long scheme of things. Devoting any forces at all to Egypt for the sake of holding Egypt, even just the ones that are already there, seems like a bad idea.

I agree that Egypt and the Suez Canal don't have nearly the strategic importance in the game that they had in real life. Part of the problem is the hyper-speed at which naval units can travel across the oceans in the game - not much need for the Suez Canal when you can simply steam around Africa in a couple of turns.

This can be easily rectified in a future patch. Make sure the Suez Canal does something important through an explicit action. Perhaps giving extra WSU to the WE and some NM.

Kensai wrote:This can be easily rectified in a future patch. Make sure the Suez Canal does something important through an explicit action. Perhaps giving extra WSU to the WE and some NM.

Perhaps do the same for Basra, put an oil refinery structure there that gives WS......

+1 to both the above ideas!

Yes. I rather like both of those.

Cairo is an objective either to take or to hold, though.

I agree. Holding Egypt should also be much more heavily defended by the AI Entente. Currently it is way too easy to conquer Egypt in a couple of turns.