I feel you, but problem is that you can’t measure this because “is more or less funny”. Because for someone can be funny a thing and for someone can be the opposite.
Having villager population limit will make the game more fun, you will see more army and army combinations… Like it should be
Maybe you will see only more siege, and then peopoe will claim to siege limits.
Fun is relative.
not really, because the siege is very weak, even the men-at-arms who do not have the bonus of the horsemen defeat them
Siege units already cost a lot of population and resources.
I think that’s a good balance.
AoE always had limits. Like only 1 Town Centre until the 3rd Age in AoE1-3.
Both AoM and AoE3 had villager/settler limits. So not a new idea either.
AoE3 had naval limits instead of ships costing population. I kinda wish there was a separate naval population limit for AoE4 sometimes.
Well, the naval population would be another theme to discuss, they are reworking the whole sea units and a lot of changes are expected to happen within the next months.
I still thinking that limiting villagers will just limit the way the game can be played.
For example, I’ve played with my team mates a few times to the person who spawns at the center of the three (we play 3v3), will role as a provider to the others, making just villagers and giving the resources to the other players, and building walls and castles around the map to protect the bases and gain map control, while the other players centers on making big army since feudal.
This could be solved by making the villager limit team based.
But also this tactic is heavily limited because of the taxes you pay on sending resources for a good reason. Pushing one play is a broken strategy.
but this meta is already limited to playing defensively making many villagers and farms, for example Vortix lost for having more army and being aggressive, the meta hurt him, the game lasted 40 minutes
Evidence of recent games with more than 150 villagers
Recent games with around 140 villagers or more
40 minute game because the meta is to make a lot of villagers and a lot of farms
Yeah I know, is not a competitive tactic, we just try these things for fun.
Or you could just make a mode for that if you want it so much
For me, 200 is enough, I do not need more population,
If I want lead big armies, I play total war
+1, and what people seems to not understand is that AoE4 is an RTS, not a strategy game like total war or civilization.
Total war is a different game tho, no base building etc.
Nothing wrong with preferring 200 population but 300 is not even remotely close to Total War.
There are a lot of RTS games that have a lot more units then AoE.
Total Annihilation/Supreme Commander/Planetary Annihilation are in a completely different league but are also definitely full RTS games with resources, base building and technological progression.
Don’t unnecessarily compare AoE with Total War please.
We had to many people post screenshots of Total War claiming it looks better then AoE4 before release.
I do not compare AoE with Total War, these are 2 different game genres
The point is, that AoE is not designated to play with 800 units more like mentioned Total Annihilation/Supreme Commander/Planetary Annihilation
or Ashes of Singularity
- these RTS games are directly designated to play with “many” units, these games work different than AoE
I simple do not need more than 200 population in AoE
If I want “many units” ,I will go play Total War, but I do not compare it with AoE
But what is wrong with the option for a pop cap of 500 for example😂
If some wants 200 they go 200, if some want 500 they go 500, everyone happy🤷♂️
Plus total war has no base building so its not the same
edit:(already said that before )
The problem is team games where the 1v1 population is multiplied by the number of players
I feel like the 200 pop limit originated as a cap from a time where PCs were all potatoes and internet connections were slow. Now everyone is so used to it they will defend it. I don’t see any reason why it couldn’t go up now.