I don't see why you can't have both. It could all depend on what you build on it. You build mines, houses and a market..its a "trading outpost". You build barracks, towers and other military builings...its a "fort".

Throughout the classical, darkage and medieval times many forts turned into into towns, and towns turned into forts. The distinction on what was thought of as a fort or a town was often blurry.

I'd much rather have one unified system, where you have the freedom to make whatever you wish, instead of being constrained by what the game considers a  "FORT" or "OUTPOST" or "TOWN".

One is civilian economical development. The other is military structure. There is a big difference.

But there will be civilian and vulnerable distant ressource-gatherings. Draginol confirmed it in the Housing thread. They will be called "pioneers" (or something like that) and will have the opportunity to develop ressources like food or Ore far away from city.

They are both settlements, just one focuses on military the other on economy. Many times they were one and the same. Hadrians wall is actually a perfect example of both a military and economic center. It had both civilans and military living at these forts.

I was under the impression that the 'pioneer' was simply a unit that could go gather resouces on its own, and not a permanent structure that can be walled or futher improved with other structures.

Seeing as how Elemental is a fantasy game, I surely hope there will be very customizable forts. From lowly wooden castles, to glorious citadels such as Helm's Deep. For me, a great amount of enjoyment in the Fantasy genre is these mighty castles. There are a dozen memorable and cool forts in LOTR, as well as in A Song of Fire And Ice, and pretty much every fantasy world there is.

What I would want, is that you could indeed customize them greatly, depending in your need. Perhaps you just need a simple river-fort to guard that bridge that might sometimes be in danger of an enemy attack? A normal castle made of stone with a few towers should be enough. What about that terrible mountain pass to the enemy lands, from which countless armies have already poured through from? Nothing less shall do except the mightiest of defensive structures, made from sorcerous marble, guarded by gargoyles that spit death, manned by an eternal vigil of the undead, surrounded by a moat of acid where demon-crocodiles swim.

Of course, forts shouldn't be too cheap either, especially glorious ones. A limit based on the number of cities, or even a permanent essence cost might be necessary. These forts need not produce anything, so long as they provide meaningful defense. Many games have castles, forts or the like, but almost none of them have any meaning. Usually they can simply be bypassed by the army, since they see no meaning in assaulting it. But if a fort is mostly economic, then the point of having a majestic citadel goes to waste. I wish to see armies clash against the walls like waves from the sea, again and again and again, till the end of time!

Another way to limit fort spam or otherwise limit a resource collection point that stays within the premise of the game is to have them cost 1 essence.   Basically, you still have to create living land to make the fort or resource collector, but its cheaper than a city.  Obviously, once the restored land expands, you can place these outposts without essence.

You can only collect Metals/ Inorganic resources in Wasteland, and only at 50% efficiency because of the dangerous creatures living in the wasteland that harass your workers.

I think that fort spam could be limited, in part, by making forts costly.  A fort is like a settlement that has to be subsidized in order to prosper.  A fort MIGHT be built to enable you to harness an economic (e.g. marble), but another might be built only to harness a military resource (e.g. shards).  I think the former should only ever break even, at best, and the latter should gouge you.  You'd have to REALLY WANT the shard to claim it with a fort, or at least you'd just really want to keep it from someone else.

The problem with that is towards the end game a big chunk of the land will be revived allowing players to spam forts. City spam (or fort spam in this case) is a problem primarily because it bogs down the late game. So it really wouldn't address the spam issues.

I think instead (or in addition) have forts tied into the upkeep cost of cities. As you have more cities and higher city upkeep, forts also cost more and more to maintain (but a new fort still drains your coffers less than a new city).

City upkeep right now is suppose to be additive. Owning 1 city costs 0 "gold/rigma" per turn. Owning 2 city costs 0+1=1. Owning 3 cities costs 0+1+2=3. 4 cities; 0+1+2+3=6...and so on.

Forts could could have the following equation; upkeep cost per fort = 1 +[(current city upkeep)/(number of cities)]

So if you own 1 fort and 3 cities, it costs 3 "gold/rigma" for the cities' upkeep and costs 2 for the fort [1+(3/3)=2], for a total of 5. If instead you own 4 cities and 0 forts, it costs 6. So owning a fort is still less expensive than a city, and with this equation the difference only widens as you get more cities. Owning 3 forts and 7 cities would cost 21 for the cities, and 12 for the forts [(1+(21/7))x3=12], for a total of 33. But it is still a lot less than if you owned 10 cities ... which would cost 45.

It limits having a ton of forts, but is still cheaper than a city. And it acuatlly encourages players to have less cities, since the upkeep of the fort is tied to the cities, and not to other forts. So if you owned 1 city and 7 forts, the total up keep would only be 7. It would cost 21 ( 3 times more) if you owned 8 cities.

have multiple forts being inneficient. And have administrative tech improving the organisation.

Or create a mini-faction with one of your heroes are its leader, so the fort is administrated by him rather than your nation. They are supposed to be loyal to you. But who knows how opportunistic he might become...

Forts to control choke points and cliam territory and resources are a must in good strategy games. Even if only walls and towers built in outposts.