What city would you say is best situated for war?

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
  3. What city would you say is best situated for war?

User Info: BigRobb2389

5 years ago#1
Which city do you feel has the best positioning and most advantages due to their surrounding terrain and whatever else?

User Info: menalaos1971

5 years ago#2
Solitude. It's on a natural stone arch over the sea and can only be approached from a steep uphill open and narrow path. Think Leonidas and the 300. You could defend that approach with a handful of soldiers and some good archers against a much larger attacker.
The secret to life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made.

User Info: Rampagingwalrus

5 years ago#3
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn.

User Info: Malzel

5 years ago#4
Solitude or Markarth

Windhelm would be better if they didn't have that door to the docks.

User Info: joe_danger

5 years ago#5
Malzel posted...
Solitude or Markarth

Windhelm would be better if they didn't have that door to the docks.

Agree, Solitude or Markarth. Frontal assult against either would be suicide as each has a single gate and a narrow access area to that gate.

Although, you could conceivibly enter Markarth from the top of the mountain and scale down to the city proper by rope.

User Info: DanOverboard

5 years ago#6
High Hrothgar.

User Info: howdyneighbor24

5 years ago#7
Markarth the city of stairs
Paladin of the Brotherhood of Toeh

User Info: CornHusk

5 years ago#8
Gotta go with Markarth for several reasons:

-Only one entrance
-Plenty of well-protected, underground places for women and children to hide
-All of the buildings are made of stone, which won't catch on fire
-All of the various levels provide tons of locations for archers, and it is far easier to defend higher terrain than overtake it

Solitude is definitely second, but, as many people forget, it has two entrances. That door past the docks that leads straight to the middle of the town is a huge liability.

User Info: MosebysRangers

5 years ago#9

It is a defenders heaven. Mountains outside of gate allow great height advantage on a sieging enemy but a nice open area out front if defenders decide to deploy in front to delay enemy from digging into much. In side it has fresh running water supply coming from a protected mountain source. If siegers do get past gate defenders still have height advantage all the way back to the main hall. Even if the siegers push the defenders back to the main hall they could retreat into the old Dwemer city. Best place to be situated in a for a war IMO.

User Info: Rethalwolf

5 years ago#10
Markarth would fare better against catapults. However, from a completely strategic standpoint, Solitude is highly favorable. Windhelm... well, that one's good weather-wise. Not against Nords or Khajit of course, but the majority of other races would be unlikely to be able to fight as well in the cold. Even Whiterun would be good, though; the majority of their entrance is a medium length winding road. This is lined with walls and guard stations, plus could likely prevent a catapult, siege tower, or heavy ram from moving into a good tactical position. In all, I think the capital of each hold was selected for its position; even if that's only the case because each city probably had to survive and win wars. Their selections to be capitals were probably results of that.
"The point of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the enemy die for his."
  1. Boards
  2. The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
  3. What city would you say is best situated for war?

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived