Higher unit cap for outnumbered games?

Hi there,

i’ am thinking about the opportunity to have a higher unit cap if i am playing a 1vs2 or 2vs3 and so forth vs KI. I think it would be an option to have the same unit cap as the sum of the enemies. For example if i am playing a 1vs2 it would be fair if have a unit cap of 400. With 200 unit cap it’s difficult to split the army against two oppenents and to build a strong eco.
Another option could be, if i am playing for example a 3vs3 and one player dies, that the rest of the players get the unit cap of the player who died. The last two players would then have a unit cap of 300 and can try to comeback the game.

What do you think? Does it make sense?

Best regards


Yea I agree. It is still possible to play 1v2 if you are not pop capped. You can scale your eco and play with larger army. It won’t compensate for the teammate because unit variation is very important in team games and teams with same civs are more likely to lose. So I think it would be great change. There will be a little hope after a teammate drops from match.


I would not agree. It would reduce the challenge. Just my 2 cents :grin:

What’s the challenge for the 4 facing the 3 after a player dropped at start?

1 Like

I’m not sure if it’s a good idea to implement that for competitive by default, but i think it would be great if i have the option before a game to de-/activate this option. For games with KI or with my friends it would be fun.

I meant actually it’s the challenge for that 3. I calculated 80 vils and 120 military units for each. That is for 4 players 480. For 3 players that is 360 but plus 200 it’s 560. Just my 2 cents as I said :grin:
But if it’s a privat game against KI I would like to adjust the pop cap higher depending what you pc can do. But that goes in the direction of another game.

Now i understand what you are mean. I don’t agree fully with this.
If you calculate 80 vils for every player in the team with four players, then you should calculate around 107 vils for every player in the team with three players. Otherwise the three 3 players have to less ressources and lose the game.

So much numbers … this is getting too complicated for me :grin:
So from another side : first I’m a noob until now and I am trying to improve. I can say that I beat hard 1v1 with 90 percent. To have a challenge I play now 4v4. I win and I loose. But it’s mainly my responsibility to beat the other side one by one. If I improve further on and it’s a high chance that I win that 4v4 I will go towards 3v4. So I mean the challenge is to win with the cap the game give to me.

I would say this would help fix the nagging issue of players dropping on load, immediately after load, or even being eliminated.

If any of you have played empire Earth 2 it has a similar mechanic called population redistribution, whereas instead of the 200 pop that the player who dropped from the game or is eliminated being permanently removed from the game with them, it is redistributed to ALL remaining players, while giving the pop to enemies wouldn’t be a good fit for this game in my opinion, splitting the 200 pop from your ally to teammates would make it so there’s a fighting chance 3v4, right now you may as well quit (most people do) after one team member goes down.

Competitive this is fine, but most people don’t play team matches for competitive play, and as this would have literally no way of affecting 1v1 I see no real issue with it.

At the end of the day it could always b implemented as a custom game option also

It would be so fun to do a last man stand against the 4 enemy players that wait for you to surrender. But hell it will be micro-intensive. Imagine managing all the bases but the longer the game stays the more army you’ll have and that will make it a mind-games type of battle. There’s no way the enemy will attack together someone that can spam 100 horses to replace the already dead horsemen. Units being overrun also will make it bad and the siege will be running for their lives. The swarming effect also will just make cavalry ultra deadly, aka rush to enemy bases, ignore units before they mass up together and walk over their landmarks one by one.

It won’t be balanced from my perspective, but fun? 100%

Yk this brings up a good point I didn’t think about, it inadvertently fixes if a player is far better than their teammates too, think about it, if your teammates are trash sometimes they’re better off out of the game completely, if you got their unit capacity and were able to macro/micro them as well as your initial unit capacity I just consider that more skill intensive and indictive of a better player, it’s well known that the ELO spread in team matches is pretty crazy currently.

Why wouldn’t they though? If they’re still 4 strong they have the capacity to spawn just as many units collectively.

They still have 4 different people controlling segments of the field, that one person has to do it all themselves.

Bad for the one player, if they loose production or eco that’s it for them, no teammates coming to save them.
10000% I hope this gets implemented at least in a custom match option format


Ooooh, that’s a very good point, I had a thought about the downsides to it, I wasn’t so sure about it, but this explained it thoroughly.

Was just thinking…because of the mass of power and the way units glue themselves to each-other, it is possible for the player who has the population cap increased to just run over them, forcing the enemy to defend. However now that I think about it better, the same is the case for that player as it’s still a difference in landmarks. So it’s pretty much about how the game goes, the circumstance of such a thing to happen and how would players deal with the situation like this. I’m sure now that if one possesses the skill to control all those units and manage everything at the same time, then it’s a feature worth having. Because for casuals it would be funny to have huge army battles and for pros it would be challenging and very satisfying to win a game like that. Plus, it boosts their popularity and maybe even their confidence.

1 Like


I know you guys have got a lot on your plate, but could we maybe get this on the list? :sweat_smile:

Thanks man!

I agree that this is really interesting to think about and could be a fun idea. I’ll make sure the team sees this suggestion. Thanks, y’all :heart:!


I’m happy to see that my idea is being taken seriously and gets a chance to come into play :+1:
I also think that this feature could be generate a lot of interesting videos on YouTube and give some new options to entertain people on twitch. A lot of clickbait titles for YouTube videos are coming up in my head right now :grin:
I really hope that the feature will be integrated. I keep my fingers crossed.

1 Like

I would like a population of 220, because I feel that 100 villagers is not enough

I think I should be able to jointly control my dropped allies units and get his resources split among the remaining allies.

1 Like

I think it’s difficult to get control over dropped allies units, because your mates played possibly other civs and what about the unit cap? What happens with units which bust your unit cap? Which player get the dropped allies if for example one of four players dropped the game? I think dropped allies should be simply removed. Splitting the resources of the dropped player among the remaining allies could work. I think that’s a good idea.

I like the idea, especially when your ally drops really early or at the first sign of trouble. However, how would you balance the coordination factor in team games? For example, if you have 400 pop limit, you can have twice the army without the need to coordinate with an ally.

id be in favor of this for bot matches if nothing else

1 Like