![]() Now also to ask what does more than 200 pop really give us? I am not too sure about AOE2, but it seems there is a balance needed of 50/50 for military and economy. POP caps just seem like a good safeguard to making civs more balanced ![]() In Aoe3 I can have a million resources and still fight in respective strengths to other civs because of that limiting factor, making it fun and counterable… unless that pikeman has a X20 multiplier VS cavalry I see problems with that system in AOE4. A couple wont do you much good but once you have 5-7 in a army to really wipe the enemy clean, almost no amount of kiting can save an army if not prepared right.īut there is also different types of games like TR game and FFA, and I hope those thrive in AOE4, but if they include those with 1 pop unit counts then ends of TR will be laming, and not just for too many elephants but cannons and other things as well. So in a competitive game, making them is a huge cost so not too many will be made so that they are not too OP similarly like aoe2 there is a huge cost that prevents too many from being made. A mahout there not only cost 7 pop (without card) but also around 700 resources. And not just for competitive modes but for all 1v1, team, TR, FFA. ![]() I think the AOE3 system really got it right. There are many ways and systems they can use to balance population. There are civs that France have 65% win ration for middle users. In my opinion, this is the reason Frances have the better overall statistics than every other civ in AoE2DE (I think it is near 57% wins/losses). For the middle user for example, a cavarly civ is more easy to go because the natural counter (pikemans) can be handled easily with archers. Example an archer civ has bonuses vs an infantry civ and disadvantage vs a cavalry civ. For sure there will be civs with bonuses than other civs. Obviously the second parameter can vary a lot between specific civs statistics. The overall gap wins/looses for each civ not to be very big.This gab of wins/looses not to be very big between early-middle-late game.So yeah, not totally uselessĮxactly, there are civs that have advantage in the early game and civs that have advantage in the late game. The Persian player will make tons of elephants and wreck you to death unless you have Mamleukes. In a late game situation when trade is possible, War Elephants would be a total nightmare as Population Efficiency begins to matter more than Cost Efficiency. I do hope the Developers added a population limit option to the game lobby, or else they will make more than 50% of the players sad/angry. I’m also not surprised that barely anyone voted for less than 200. I expected a few more votes for 200 and I assume in reality more lobbies will be at 200 or max population (what ever that number will be) than something inbetween. it’s the standard in AoE2 now and always has been in AoE3.it’s the standard limit the game is designed for.I guess most people that voted for 200 did so because I’d assume if the developers would have made 300 population the standard it would probably have won this survey. So having a bit more population seems to be very popular. Half of the people want to play with more than 200 population but half of those only with about 100 more population. Having more stable FPS is of course still an advantage but that’s true for basically every game. It was a lobby setting not a player setting. ![]() I’m just as surprised with the third most voted option being “unlimited”, though.ĭoesn’t that grant a significant advantage for a person having a better computer ? It’s just I’m kinda surprised that much people don’t think they will definitely go play usually with a higher pop cap, since AoE IV is a whole new game, and looks like a pretty different experience with more possibilities and a probable spectacular big scale. That’s why I think people thinking they will usually play with 200 (as almost always since AoE exists) it’s conservative, but of course I’m not saying it as some sort of attack or something. I would bet that now people would be used to 250 pop cap, and would feel comfortable with that. I always wonder what would have happened if the maximum pop cap for the Age of Kings would have been 250 instead of 200. So that’s about 13 years (AoE III included) with the same maximum available pop cap. It has nothing to do with the maximum pop cap available in the game, of course, but the max pop cap they are usually going to set for their games.Ģ00 has been the classic pop cap for a lot of years, since The Age of Kings in 1999 to The Forgotten Empires in 2012 (I think it came out that year as an unofficial expansion?). If people thinks that will usually play with 200 pop cap, it means they like it the most or they are comfortable with it, always based on prior AoE experiences (since at least most of us have not touched AoE IV yet). No more confused than myself with your answer.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |