This “leg” is the same kid who had the cheeseburger as avatar.
He probably started playing on EE so he just doesn’t realize that EE was the worst “upgraded” version of a game ever released…
Your reaction reminded me of this meme pic I found it think it’s pretty on point nonetheless. Laughed so hard maybe you get it too (if you watched the boys you‘ll understand it)
100 Villagers worth of pop + 50 Fishing Boats + 60 Caravans 210 population is the biggest you can get your economy in a game but obviously in a normal game no one will ever have that much economy population because you need military. Maybe people should sacrifice some of their economy for more military in games because you don’t need 100 villagers and a bunch of Caravans.
If you have a large amount of economy units and they give a increase in pop then games could possibly reach the point that no one will ever drain from constant fighting and training replacement military units.
The problem with a low population but high villager limit is that it’s technically the most optimal to have as many villagers as possible and then super quickly replace losses. One of the issues of AoE2 is that there is no villager limit so it’s optimal to have >100 villagers and just keep instantly replacing a stream of dying units.
It doesn’t feel very rewording to defeat an army that is rebuild in 30 seconds.
It’s not fun to have late games with constant fighting of small waves of units.
If the population limit is a lot higher then the villager limit then people are more likely to build up larger armies and attack less frequently. That’s a lot more interesting in my opinion.
Also I remember the numbers being different in the closed beta.
The Caravans had a limit of 50 and they only cost food.
They did they changed some numbers in a small fix during the stress test.
So it’s not unlikely that it’ll changed again before release.
1 Like
I remember in The Titans Expansion in team games I would sacrifice economy size compared to most players for military size and it would cause problems for the other teams in games especially when I played as Thor and used fully upgraded Huskarl to do building raids.
In AoE III you have a villager limit of 99 on land maps and a population of 200 and even there you have some people wanting more pop. Getting the right balance for military and economy is important and I have no idea what that is for AoMR. It would be easier if they had population cost for units more like the other games.
As an extreme case, what would happen if there was no population limit and just a villager limit?
Then how would that impact the game (this question also applies to AoE)?
Would people just build up massive armies and never attack?
Other RTS have no or almost no population limit and they work too.
Especially if you add mechanics like Titans or the Wonder Age that can brake most stalemates.
I haven’t personally played any RTS games win no population limits but I have played Empire Earth with a much higher limit then AoE games have and players usually later in a game wanted to have enough economy units to not have to worry about economy anymore and just pump out units resulting in a slog fest the same that I had seen in AoM.
Absolutely, in fact I expect a few numbers to have been tweaked between the stress test and launch build coming next week. I am very curious to see the full changelog. Right of the bat I hope some myth units were tweaked some of them felt surprisingly weak at times in spite of their increase in stats per age.
In terms of population limit I think the game overall was in a relatively good place.
Twice as much lol? Counting 3 TCs, the population has increased by 46% (far away from +100%), and the limit of villagers (that take up space in the new extra population) has also increased too.
I think many of you are casual players and aren’t aware of the population issue in competitive play. In the late-game matches I’ve seen, the army usually doesn’t exceed 25 units at max. pop. A tipical AoE late army numbers are between 60-80. That’s an absolute disaster
This game is going to lose a huge amount of potential if it can’t offer better battles similar to the standards of the genre.
The funniest thing is, I’m sure the developers are aware of this because, as I’ve already said, when they promote the game in trailers, podcasts, etc., they try to show us better battles than what the game actually provides in standard 1v1 matches
This is why I said it is in a relatively good place we’ll have to wait and see if they tweaked the numbers yet again for the launch build. Armies can always be bigger after all, and I can see the issue with a lower limit in Ranked. Hence why I said it is in a relatively good place overall. Easiest solution for this that I see is just increase the population gain from settlements in 1v1 slightly, this would allow map control to remain a big part of the mid-late game, while even giving more of an incentive to fight and keep control of the map. House limit could also be increased but I worry that touching that more would start to create scenarios where players feel less enticed to go for map control thus decreasing the average number of engagements on a per match basis.
I created this separate POST with the aim of trying to discuss viable solutions. You can take a look at the ‘Possible Solutions’ section if you want.
Settlements have three functions: population, villager creation, and fortification.
- Of course, TCs have been affected by the unfair nerf to defensive buildings. The nerf should have rightly been to increase the number of units
I believe that with the villager production capacity of the village centers nerfed (and the possibility to nerf it more if required) and some of the nerfs made to urban centers were reverted, it would be possible to maintain the fortification and villager creation functions in such a way that settlements would remain a point of interest even if more houses were added.
Higher IQ than you though, clearly & that’s what matters. I do have above-average IQ and tend to excel at things.
They auto assign the avatar to the user and also the name. so it’s irrelevant, literally random. from what you describe there’s like 1000 people like that anyway and it’s irrelevant who is who?
Who cares ‘when you start playing’? In context like higher IQ, less time played, and still winning more = better.
But no, I did originally play the retail versions. I had pc access early back in the like ‘2000’ years, so I played the original AoK and AoM back then; even tho I barely understood it.
I would say, at this point… subjective… even if it’s true many will be fooled like “hurr durr DX12 is the latest rendering engine and it duzz look betterr”… I don’t think so really. I think the 3d artstyle was ‘better’ before. This one is just like, too cartoony. ‘details’ don’t matter at that rate.
It’s alienating like a small chunk of the audience too, because DX12 requires a ‘newer GPU’, which many people do have by now. But some do not. But realy ‘this graphics’ is like a ‘style’, it is not ‘extreme’ rendering graphics… It doesn’t require to be run on DX11 or DX12. So running onDX9 for ‘compatibility’ and just ‘do it properly/better’… would havebeen better too. An example of inferior mindsets working on something that was originally a big hit and they just sorta … don’t have what made the original good.
A lot of it is piggybacked off AoE3 style buildings and such, so I can see the resemblance, but again AoE3 was meant to be a different game.
I didn’t want “the same” exactly, but, I do think the beauty of seeing like the original game’s art, firegiants, myth units, walls, buildings, etc… actually ‘is prettier’ overall and more detailed even with that aged rendering of DX8/DX9 or whatever it was rendering it… (it clearly didn’t justify the need to update renderer and restrict who plays it, with such underwhelming non-graphics anyway)
I’d very much like to post the pathetic looking FireGiant and Cartoonified Battleboar side-by-side with the old ones but it’s much effort… it’s like a preference and the old ones ‘looked better’.
No one would know enough about it, nor care to write such a preference. If they had done that though, they [devs and people] would be similarly ‘ok’ with it, and they’d all probably be happier/in a better state overall.
All I think was needed was take the original, you can make it 64bit, fix the ‘crashes’, make mods load sort of like they do on AoE2DE (dynamically), and enhancements like that. Then can add to it more. There would have also been ‘less work overall’.
Now you are ‘stuck with what is there’, a generic and uninspiring thing.
I actually liked the original graphics. EE was just a steam version update, it made it so people keep playing. It just ‘had flaws’, needed updates and fixes. Especially due to the crashes. Mods were ‘barely working’. Now it’s like eh.
The ew beta at least, was horrible… it will go down as a ‘generic rts flop’. I don’t believe it will change all too much from now until release. Not sure if you need more details to ‘see why it’s so’.
As an example here is one old screenshot, it’s not even in full 4k, and it’s like a ‘standard town’ like in a real game that you would build:
Here is new screenshot, that adds in artwork intended to make it look grand and special, doing things that won’t be done in a real game… (soo much better… not):
There’s tons of other examples too. Blurring out details, AA and smoothness, to change the look or style to be cartoony, but the details really aren’t better.
The new one just looks cartoonified. like they didn’t “really” change much, it’s just like looking like aoe3 a bit. If they ‘redid things’, it was really low quality, smudgy with anti-aliasing, or not worth it (as if anyone wants to really ‘look at the little details’ too of that colossus right there, which is cartoony af).
Before:
Vs?
Beauty is in the ‘eye of the beholder’?
It seems almost like ‘clutterful’. Smudgy, you wouldn’t even see the projectiles thrown by the individual units, whereas before at least you could. Yes it’s a fake image, not real gameplay, designed to make it look more grand… but even in ‘real gameplay’ it looks shamefully cartoonish…
It almost looks like MMoRPG with a camera zoom, not an RTS. Harder to even see the individual projectiles and clutter because it’s blurred or gone entirely.
No one actually cares about ‘details’ tbh.
The game will flop.
Again I just don’t care to spend the 1hr finding better before-and-afters to see like how irrelevant it is that it’s now dx12 and some anti-aliasing, and looks abit more ilke aoe3.
In full HD I’ve seen some pretty cool yet defined stuff like walls, and full games, and if ‘the same situation’ happened in your new engine, it would just look like a cartoon smudge mess…
and all this in the end for users to say… “I want to ‘play’ the game, not to zoom in on 1/200 units and see the cartoony marks on it”…
You say that but it’s just marketing coverup at this point.
“everyone likes it now, it’s only good, pay 5/5 review”
It is what it is though.
I believe though ‘hype has died down’ and for a reason.
They saw it now, and its like ‘ohh… ok… bye’. same way I feel in a way. I don’t really want to buy it tbh.
(But, for all that, I think I can zoom in and do this sorta thing in AoE3DE, if I want to. Like look closer at the musketeers firing, and stuff like that. Actually the beta was still so undetailed. For example, it’s like you see the villagers waving their hands over a berry bush. do you want to see that more? nope)
And ofc the main thing. The population really is not changed. The sizes are similar but just more cartoony.
Will enjoy this peak 1000 player hit for like a day (if I decide to buy). And if I want to play this, I’d much rather hop into the EE variant than to play this beta thing right now (even if it’s free or not)/
It is what it is.
For me AoMR looks good.
You are allowed to disagree with that but old AoM is just so much less detailed in every way than you can’t say AoMR is more cartoony or something like that.
The old AoM just has so little detail that everything you see in it is just you imagination. Your mind fills out the details the game can’t offer.
For me AoMR looks pretty much exactly how I would have imagined it in modern graphics.
The overall reaction of people is orders of magnitude more positive than anything AoE4 got before release so I strongly doubt that AoMR will be a flop.
You are allowed to not like it but you can’t claim that it will flop because it doesn’t suit you tastes.
I personally hate Fortnight but guess what my dislike for it doesn’t stop it from being incredibly successful.
2 Likes
Regarding the population, we have to wait whether or not it is really a problem for the playerbase. There have already been improvements and we expect to see the pop increased in custom or even QM.
It is not good to deviate from the subject and less that there is no respect between users, but commenting briefly on the graphics, in the objective and, therefore, the measurable (Textures, models, etc…) AoM Retold is clearly superior to EE. Another thing is that the subjective (art style) is not liked by the nostalgia to the old.
I love the AoM Retold graphics.
No more disrespect will be allowed.
As I said. We’ll see if in the near future they decide to increase the pop in the houses a little more or not in competitive play. It’s going to depend on what the playerbase wants.
What do you mean by this? The peak so far has been 20,000.
You can’t expect a corporation like Microsoft to not at least try to market the failed projects, similar to aoe4, and so on. 
They couldn’t even cope with my own negative review that was censored.
- bots making false reviews
- fake peak players
- censoring valid critiques and using ideas that ‘the game being bad = hate speech’
- downplaying any numerous issues as ‘just a small thing & there always was some’ mentality
- pay2use
- making old code somehow run worse, or not on all comps anyway
Oh well they did try. It was just a flop. 
Another thing I am against is that I am a naturally skilled, quality type person. So if they think “let’s just try to sell this to kids and hope it works”. It’s very greedy, deceptive, and not realistic.
Granted it is marketing, if you spam that something kinda bad is good, it generally works, and most gaymers are like that though. 
Steam has control of this, not Microsoft