beside all these nice ideas I want to add:
Improve gather rate of villagers so that you don’t have to built around 40-80 villagers
2 Likes
I hope that devs increase population count. We going to see soon.
3 Likes
The thing about more pop space is that it encourages more people to camp while building up to max pop. If the max pop is reached earlier, there is more action and fun. Besides, the AoM fortress buildings are way weaker to AoE II castles.
Only inexperienced/casual players wait until they have max population, that’s the case in every AoE game.
It’s pretty common for people to not attack until they research all technologies.
I don’t think that a low population would make people play more aggressive then a higher population.
The population in AoM is much lower then any AoE game because it was the first 3D game, not because they thought super small armies were better.
3 Likes
Hmmm… the original AoM had 12 player maximum. Everyone could also then have a max of 300 pop. If everyone had 10 houses and 3 fortified town centers that equates to 1920 total pop across the map. Even if all the units cost 5 pop, that’s 384 units being animated at once not including the buildings.
I guess the idea is that they can guarantee that 1v1 runs well on the minimal spec.
You can voluntarily increase the player number if you think your hardware can handle it.
It’s like AoE1 and AoE2 letting you choose the population limit. AoMs system makes it hard to make the population limit a lobby setting.
btw. I really hope they keep the 12 player limit. I hate being restricted to 8 players in AoE1-4.
So many nice scenarios I can’t make because I need like 9-12 players for it. (I wonder how often I would run into the 12 player limit and get annoyed by that), unfortunately AoM is the one game in the series that has lowest need for so many players since there are only 5 civilisations.
It would be fine to me if only 8 human players were allowed and 9-12 were limited to AI. I just want to be able to have all the real factions of a conflict being represented.
2 Likes
I dont said that. Imagine for example reduce in 1 population each military unit.
You still need to control the map to obtain more population, but the armies are bigger.
2 Likes
Of course, ultimately lowering the population by 1 for all units would mean there would be larger armies.
3 Likes
Well then buff forts and towers! (I mean towers already can be quit strong) why not? I like tough defensive buildings which even more satisfying if your trained myth creatures with crush dmg demolish them >:)
Of course, you have to make harder buildings, or have to use siege and mythical units to destroy them…
I believe this thread has been answered.
It has been confirmed that Retold will have increased population.
3 Likes
Ah well…maybe they’ll take it to 300 (alluding to “300”)…
in competitive I don´t think so.
Maybe each military unit with -1 population would be enough
Yes, that could be… something like AoE 3 DE, human units that occupy 1 population, cavalry like the centaur that occupy 2 population, siege weapons 3-5 population and mythical units 5-7 population…
1 Like
No, it’s been explained many times that reducing the pop cost of units the way you ask would break the balance. Increasing the pop cap is the best solution.
1 Like
Just double the build limit for houses, problem solved.
2 Likes
It is no so easy. This would make TCs useless
1 Like
My explanation is a simplification.
No matter what change you make, it will be necessary to tweak several things to balance the game
I jut hope they will improve the gather rate of villagers that you have to built less villagers and therefore have already more space for army units. A couple more houses maybe but not too many more I agree. Rather change the population number of units like @MatM1996 suggested. myth units ofc still should have more population especially when they are getting stronger and for the most part bigger now (which is a welcome change in my opinion)
Yes, any population balance will be fine…
1 Like