PDA

View Full Version : Unit Limit?


Feweh
04-20-2008, 10:51 AM
Hey i'm just curious as to how large the unit limit will be.


What im concerned is the fact that you need a large attacking force, and at the same time you need to defend your base..

So it must be quite large which is very very good!

Anyways i'm just curious and wanting to bring up a discussion on how unit limit effects you?

I personally found that in BFME 1 and 2 that you couldn't attack and defend at the same time, same vice versa.

Thats just my general take.

The Witch King of Angmar
04-20-2008, 05:04 PM
What do you mean by affect?

Feweh
04-20-2008, 08:20 PM
What do you mean by affect?


Oh sorry, i men't how do you feel about having a small limit for units in DoF if it was to be like that, or high?

If that makes any sense.

Neotyguy40
04-20-2008, 10:50 PM
I don't think there will be a limit on how many troops you can maximum hold, just how many you can hold at a time, such as if you have like hundreds of barracks, you can hold 1000s of troops, but only 10 barracks... Only a few dozen.

Ryan Zelazny
04-20-2008, 10:55 PM
We haven't set a pop limit yet, this wont be set until we have all factions playable in our build and we can experiment on how the pop limit affects the system performance and game play.

I can say that the engine at it's current state does support over 1000 units on screen, which is pretty much as many as you can actually fit on the screen. So needless to say your pop limit should be quite high, it's not going to be 200 like WC3.

Neotyguy40
04-20-2008, 11:01 PM
I hope it's very high, like 100,000...

Darvin
04-20-2008, 11:13 PM
So needless to say your pop limit should be quite high, it's not going to be 200 like WC3.

Uh, WC3's pop limit was 100, and most units cost 2-3 pop points, so the actual unit limit was closer to 30 depending on what kind you were making.


Anyways, I'm glad to hear the population cap will be sufficiently large. Naturally the exact number should be subject to change based on what works best for gameplay and for the majority of systems so they can actually run in smoothly.

Jean=A=Luc
04-21-2008, 07:40 AM
I hope it's very high, like 100,000...

No, no, I have it, how about one GILLION units! You could use half a gillion to defend your stronghold and the other half to attack and harass.

Konstantin Fomenko
04-21-2008, 09:08 AM
:) As of now we are aiming for 1000 unit limit on average. It will vary a bit between races - Orcs might have 1,200 limit, while Elves something like 800. Nothing is set in stone but this should give you a fair estimates.

And no worries - you won`t always have to fight this epic battle. You can always leave most of your units home, and just send 100 troops to attack other players or do quests - we`ll automatically find gameplay content (player`s to attack or quests to do) depending on how many units you are willing to send out.

Also, early mmorts game, as in good deal of single-player campaign, skirmish, you`ll be fighting with 100-200 units only.

Neotyguy40
04-21-2008, 12:21 PM
:) As of now we are aiming for 1000 unit limit on average. It will vary a bit between races - Orcs might have 1,200 limit, while Elves something like 800. Nothing is set in stone but this should give you a fair estimates.

And no worries - you won`t always have to fight this epic battle. You can always leave most of your units home, and just send 100 troops to attack other players or do quests - we`ll automatically find gameplay content (player`s to attack or quests to do) depending on how many units you are willing to send out.

Also, early mmorts game, as in good deal of single-player campaign, skirmish, you`ll be fighting with 100-200 units only.

Aww man, I wanted at least 10,000 units... I wonder how many will be for dragons.

Jean=A=Luc
04-21-2008, 12:59 PM
Seriously 10.000? I don't think even Cossacks goes that high (per player), provided there are actually battles going on.

LordSlayer
04-21-2008, 03:21 PM
Aww man, I wanted at least 10,000 units... I wonder how many will be for dragons.

I hope to be atleast able to get a full flight of royal dragons to spearhead an assault :D

cherbui
04-21-2008, 03:35 PM
i wonder if there's an option to edit troops amount like 1000 to 10,000 for solo/skimirsh games since i like to play with large numbers ^^

Neotyguy40
04-21-2008, 09:17 PM
I like to just train up my troops, build big defenses, and then defend and not attack... Although that is probally why I lose almost every MMORTS game I play...

Puppeteer
04-22-2008, 11:02 AM
*agrees with Neotyguy40*

Axal01
04-22-2008, 12:38 PM
I like to just train up my troops, build big defenses, and then defend and not attack... Although that is probally why I lose almost every MMORTS game I play...

Im a great turtle type person. I'll attack when I know I can defend myself at home when it's time to attack. That way people who say "Defenders always lose" are corrected. Im a mixed type of player. I do both :)

Jean=A=Luc
04-22-2008, 01:15 PM
The reason defenders generally lose is because they relinquish map control and practically give almost all the resources to the other player. And I kinda agree with that because stalemates should be avoided imo.

cherbui
04-22-2008, 02:24 PM
i would think the attacker would lose more troops than she/he intend we're talking about scaling a wall breaking down gates ... its not just 1 or 2 but maybe 3 walls & gates just to get the middle of the castle while the defending side just hide behind the wall shooting arrows at you.
unless its 3 vs 1 i can see a clear victor there

Axal01
04-22-2008, 03:31 PM
The reason defenders generally lose is because they relinquish map control and practically give almost all the resources to the other player. And I kinda agree with that because stalemates should be avoided imo.

It should be avoided, but lets not forget that a stalemate also gives eachother a chance for a trick up their sleeves for something new. Hopefully there will be many strategies within Dawn of fantasy if that kind of scenario happens.

borbask
04-23-2008, 02:02 AM
:) 1000 units per capita:)
Good to hear guys!
Come on Reverie Entertainment!

frankein_fish
04-23-2008, 02:10 AM
Meh id rather like 10,000 :D :D

LordSlayer
04-23-2008, 06:12 PM
Meh id rather like 10,000 :D :D

Get ShC extreme if that is what you really want :cool:

Neotyguy40
04-23-2008, 07:36 PM
Get ShC extreme if that is what you really want :cool:

That game stinks, it's boring because you can't do much in it...

LordSlayer
04-24-2008, 04:27 PM
That game stinks, it's boring because you can't do much in it...

Yea I know, but some people just like to get the biggest army they can possibly make and not make their computer lag like hell while doing it.

Neotyguy40
04-24-2008, 11:33 PM
Yea I know, but some people just like to get the biggest army they can possibly make and not make their computer lag like hell while doing it.

Yea, the army is basically the only thing that makes that game worthwhile.

LordSlayer
04-25-2008, 04:03 PM
Yea, the army is basically the only thing that makes that game worthwhile.

And even then, the graphics are way outdated.

Neotyguy40
04-25-2008, 04:12 PM
And even then, the graphics are way outdated.

Idc about graphics, as long as gameplay = awesome...

LordSlayer
04-26-2008, 06:56 AM
Idc about graphics, as long as gameplay = awesome...

Gameplay sucks, the fact that units are stackable destroys any kind of strategic thinking. People will just break 1 wall and swarm your base with crazy flame throwing guys.

The Witch King of Angmar
04-26-2008, 09:24 AM
That doesn't mean it will happen in DoF.

aVeron
07-16-2008, 02:09 PM
Hmm. why even limit it? have i missed something, or arnt you able to expand throughout the world? "master of all you have conquered"? as said in the trailer.

Limited to build 1.000 troops in your first settlement, but throughtout the your conquest you'll able to build larger and larger armies..

ash12181987
07-16-2008, 02:16 PM
1,000 sounds like a good round number. I don't think I've played many games where you can create that many guys, guy for guy. Sounds like plenty.

nickson104
07-17-2008, 07:24 AM
1000 troops is plenty guys, any more and you would be sure to lag.

What is the point in having 10000 troops guys? I mean if so then there wont be all too much strategy in it, it would just be carnage.

And yeah i may be a bit of a turtle myself but i still agree that there must be ways of preventing this such as turtles being disavantaged by not having as much resources as attackers.

That was a bit of a downfall in Stronghold, you could turtle so easily and it wouldnt matter because all your resources were safe in your base.

While having players who mainly attack or mainly defend does add a lot of fun to the game it can also make it drag on a bit

aVeron
07-17-2008, 07:50 AM
Ehm.. i understand you, 10.000 of troops in one battle is abit extreme.. But to have 10.000 in your kingdom totally.. i wouldnt say is pointless.. If your a superior power then you dont just have 1 000 troops..

As i said in another thread, when you conquer others you should gain a high unit limitation.. and in one battle there could be a limitation of units, instead..

Because your gonna end up with atleast 5-6 000 in a battle when you got friends fighting with you.

ash12181987
07-17-2008, 08:20 AM
Wouldn't matter if you had 10,000 when we get dwarves... the dwarves are like... the spartans dude.

Joseph Visscher
07-17-2008, 10:42 AM
Wouldn't matter if you had 10,000 when we get dwarves... the dwarves are like... the spartans dude.


Well, the red capes and round shields,, yea,, but they are still short and hairy.

jk lol.

Esculas the Mighty
07-18-2008, 07:04 PM
Well, the red capes and round shields,, yea,, but they are still short and hairy.

jk lol.

omg i imagined a drawf on 300 3ft huge 8pack shield bigger than he
kicking a elf into a well xD

yea but if your a super power you may need alot more troop considering even if your peacefull or not as bad as the last superpower your gonna be hated and challenged by like 8 different nations at the same time

wou129
07-20-2008, 04:51 AM
just do like you have a map limit of 50000 or so and a tactical batlle limit of 1000-500
so u have more troops to defend but cant let them attack al at the same time on the same posion

Esculas the Mighty
07-22-2008, 07:00 PM
Ehm.. i understand you, 10.000 of troops in one battle is abit extreme.. But to have 10.000 in your kingdom totally.. i wouldnt say is pointless.. If your a superior power then you dont just have 1 000 troops..

As i said in another thread, when you conquer others you should gain a high unit limitation.. and in one battle there could be a limitation of units, instead..

Because your gonna end up with atleast 5-6 000 in a battle when you got friends fighting with you.

there should be a defenders pop cap so it wont count towards yours offensive army
alot people are aggresive and would prob have some dream to control everyone in the region your gonna need lots of defenders

Mikey
07-23-2008, 01:58 AM
I think that 1000 is is fine its a good middle number but it would be nice if we could have like say for each town or level or how ever you guys are planing on doing it you get say an extra army slot and army's are 1000 troops max so if you a super power like someone said you wouldint have 1000 troops guarding over 10 citys and ever more forts and the troops at 10k per army seems a little extreme like the total war series its kinda chaotic there is alot of lag and not enuf strategy there are a few things you can do but mostly its a blood bath and on the other hand 100 seems to low like in war craft 3 its mostly a few small battles and your done both good games but both ideas don't seem to work for this

and quick question if you have the max troops from your last battle and attack a smaller nation wont it be unfair because you'll have a thousand troops and he will have what 100 wont that cause some rushing to happen and make the battles to easy

Mrdash
07-23-2008, 02:07 AM
To the second part.... Its been said in another post (or 2) that new players wont be able to be attacked (newbie protection=D). And based on some of those screenshots it doesnt seem like it would be long till you yourself have a nice size army.
EDIT* Grammar=s

Mikey
07-23-2008, 02:15 AM
ok thanks :)

aVeron
07-23-2008, 05:37 AM
10k per army seems a little extreme like the total war series its kinda chaotic there is alot of lag and not enuf strategy there are a few things you can do but mostly its a blood bath

Not enought strategy you say? well.. abit offtopic, but the totalwar series is the most strategy game there has ever been.. It's supose to be chaotic, its supose to be bloody..

Eitherhow.. like i've stated before, i dont expect to fight battles with thousends and thousends of troops, in this game.. But I would sure as hell want to have the option to overwhelm my opponent in some situation.. Hmm.. The game will defently go on when the limit stops in 1.000.. I got several arguments why the game should have more..

I read somewhere on the homepage, that the game will allow players to buy new units, with some sort of premium account.. If that still is the case..
Then lets say you have limited your amount of units(1.000) and you've desided to buy new units to the roster.. hm.. well then you unfortuntly need to sacrifice some of your current units just to get those new ones.. and as you want several of those new units, you need to sacrifice tons of units..
Hmm well.. then its back to age of empires game play habits and warcraft3..

cherbui
07-23-2008, 02:56 PM
like real troops does it mean food consumption would play a roll ? i mean having a limit of 1000 or increasing that amount makes it harder to feed more troops.. wouldnt it be possibe to wining a fight by just starving ur enemies ? lol if food were to play a roll ? hehe:D

aVeron
07-23-2008, 03:45 PM
like real troops does it mean food consumption would play a roll ? i mean having a limit of 1000 or increasing that amount makes it harder to feed more troops.. wouldnt it be possibe to wining a fight by just starving ur enemies ? lol if food were to play a roll ? hehe:D

Hmm. thats a nice idea in my opinion.. better then limiting the amount of troops.. if you have a large army.. you better have a large amount of food or else they starv.. probobly hard to implement, but would be cool

Esculas the Mighty
07-23-2008, 11:35 PM
Hmm. thats a nice idea in my opinion.. better then limiting the amount of troops.. if you have a large army.. you better have a large amount of food or else they starv.. probobly hard to implement, but would be cool

that would be amazing be cool to starve them out they walls. although it wouldnt work on a costal city tho prob have food being shiped in
if thats even possible

Esculas the Mighty
07-23-2008, 11:38 PM
Not enought strategy you say? well.. abit offtopic, but the totalwar series is the most strategy game there has ever been.. It's supose to be chaotic, its supose to be bloody..

Eitherhow.. like i've stated before, i dont expect to fight battles with thousends and thousends of troops, in this game.. But I would sure as hell want to have the option to overwhelm my opponent in some situation.. Hmm.. The game will defently go on when the limit stops in 1.000.. I got several arguments why the game should have more..

I read somewhere on the homepage, that the game will allow players to buy new units, with some sort of premium account.. If that still is the case..
Then lets say you have limited your amount of units(1.000) and you've desided to buy new units to the roster.. hm.. well then you unfortuntly need to sacrifice some of your current units just to get those new ones.. and as you want several of those new units, you need to sacrifice tons of units..
Hmm well.. then its back to age of empires game play habits and warcraft3..

no worries man its not aom
all units cost 1 pop so its not
make a myth unit it cost 6 pop and now u cant make 6 other 1 pop units

LordSlayer
07-25-2008, 06:06 AM
no worries man its not aom
all units cost 1 pop so its not
make a myth unit it cost 6 pop and now u cant make 6 other 1 pop units

Yes that's porbably true, but their probably will be some sort of hard unit cap for some units (royal dragons) and the different race don't have the some pop cap (dragons have the smallest and orcs the biggest).

Neotyguy40
07-25-2008, 03:43 PM
I don't want a unit limit :mad: I want to have a lot of royal dragons!

The Witch King of Angmar
07-25-2008, 05:10 PM
I think you will get a max of 3 or so.

Esculas the Mighty
07-25-2008, 08:51 PM
I think you will get a max of 3 or so.

i want u to come in with a army of royal dragons lol

Puppeteer
07-26-2008, 02:07 PM
I believe he's right, it is a low number to my knowledge

Neotyguy40
07-31-2008, 08:29 PM
Great...

But ohh well!

I can't wait for the beta release.

Erandur
09-23-2008, 12:17 PM
Awchie, 1000 units... How long does it take to make that? ^^ Just to see them all get killed in 30-45 (?) minutes... Me like! Especially if I'm the one who killed them all. :D

It would be nice if corpses remained on the battlefield for a while though... I love watching the battlefield after a huge battle, corpses all overthe place, heh.

Puppeteer
09-23-2008, 01:16 PM
They do, to my knowledge. And you can loot them for resources (I believe)

kronlc
09-28-2008, 05:24 PM
When you have 1000 units it should be you
thats doing the killing not your men getting killed :)

Joseph Visscher
09-28-2008, 11:12 PM
When you have 1000 units it should be you
thats doing the killing not your men getting killed :)

Depends what your enemy(s) have, if they have a full army ( also depends on their upgrades and skills ) the victor will be the better commander and how well you can control your units and their abilities.

aVeron
10-29-2008, 05:59 AM
My argument for the idea, of having more then 1 thousend as army limit:

Eventhought, i dont know if this is still discussable, as Reverie maybe already have made up their mind. But if it would be possible to change this, i think it should be possible to have as large army as you can handle, instead of limiting it. The game wont go on in the length.. because and some point of time, you will have total of everything, total of resources, total of soldiers, total upgraded fortress. And what point will it then be to do all these quests and stuff, where you get resources which you dont really need, as you already have everything. In the length it will just get boring. But if you're able to build more troops it will be a whole other concept.. Ofcourse it should be balanced and stuff, as for example a player should be able to turtle up and breed huge armies. You should only get access to build large armies trough expanding and conquering. This is ofc about the MMO part, the skirmish part should ofc be different. But as the mmo part is a extremly long game, you'll need to see how the gameplay will be after months of playing.

nickson104
10-29-2008, 07:33 AM
My argument for the idea, of having more then 1 thousend as army limit:

Eventhought, i dont know if this is still discussable, as Reverie maybe already have made up their mind. But if it would be possible to change this, i think it should be possible to have as large army as you can handle, instead of limiting it. The game wont go on in the length.. because and some point of time, you will have total of everything, total of resources, total of soldiers, total upgraded fortress. And what point will it then be to do all these quests and stuff, where you get resources which you dont really need, as you already have everything. In the length it will just get boring. But if you're able to build more troops it will be a whole other concept.. Ofcourse it should be balanced and stuff, as for example a player should be able to turtle up and breed huge armies. You should only get access to build large armies trough expanding and conquering. This is ofc about the MMO part, the skirmish part should ofc be different. But as the mmo part is a extremly long game, you'll need to see how the gameplay will be after months of playing.

Extremely long? ongoing i would have said :p but your idea is probably good, except for you wouldnt still be doing quests if you had no need of them would you? that would be dull :p then it is time for total conquest!

aVeron
10-29-2008, 08:05 AM
Well, yeah but quests are gonna be updated all the time, as i recall reverie stated.. But doing conquering against other ppl, will demand alot more then just 1000 troops, and i bet you wont send all of them leaving ur home defendless.

The only problem with this.. is.. that it will contain some serious of lag for some battles, but then i would suggest, rather then lower the unit limit in general, instead limit the units in a battle.. I mean if its not limited how many units you can have by battle already.. the game will contain some serious of lag anyways. because you're gonna have allies fight side by side with you, i presume?

I'd say, make the units much more expensive then they're now, so ppl will be more careful about then and rather want to save the troops to fight another day then just send them to slaughter. The idea of having a massive army isnt really going well with only 1K as it is now.

The Witch King of Angmar
10-29-2008, 03:15 PM
I'd personally say that 500 is enough especially if it's 2 on 2. There will be more than enough units, though, regardless of what they decide.

Puppeteer
10-31-2008, 07:33 AM
I actually favour moderate Unit Limits, not huge lag fests of infinite quotas.

The Witch King of Angmar
10-31-2008, 07:48 AM
Same with me. It seems to make the game more fair.

Puppeteer
10-31-2008, 11:50 AM
Yes, but I suppose between players, not factions. I'm not in favour of a set unit limit for each faction, varying ones according to unit strength. The reason being that the unit limit corresponds not to the balance of the units or stats, but the training required and the equipment needed. Think of a unit limit not merely being how many people you can fit in a certain number of houses, but theappropriate training and weapons limit.

nickson104
11-03-2008, 11:05 AM
Definitely, after all a dragon does not dwell within a house does he? one would not need a house when your hide will protect you from all the elements...

But totally with you, not just in that way but also like the availability of the race to train, after all you dont see dragons breeding like rabbits now do you?

ShadowyMoon
11-30-2008, 06:43 AM
IMO, the unit limit is there to prevent lag. I recently bought a new computer, 2,8Ghz AMD dual core, 4GB ram and an Nvidia 9200 GT but consider me playing against an opponent with a mediocore computer. Bring on 10000 cannon fodder troops and I auto win due to my opponent lagging horribly.
It just isn't fair.

Esculas the Mighty
11-30-2008, 09:39 AM
well after seeing that screen shot they added 3000 to the pop cap lol

more then enough :D

Konstantin Fomenko
11-30-2008, 11:34 AM
Keep in mind that pop limit is a floating value.

Sure in 1vs1 skirmish mode limit could be up to 3000, but with several players in a match - be it mmorts or multiplayer - limit will be devided to something around 1000 per player.

Puppeteer
11-30-2008, 12:36 PM
Does it fluctuate between map size as well?

Esculas the Mighty
11-30-2008, 02:46 PM
Keep in mind that pop limit is a floating value.

Sure in 1vs1 skirmish mode limit could be up to 3000, but with several players in a match - be it mmorts or multiplayer - limit will be devided to something around 1000 per player.

that quite brilliant i must say

kronlc
12-06-2008, 10:36 AM
I don know if this question already been asked k
but will the peons be Counted as polulation
Cos I odnt wont to be Like peon lots an workers and
i cant build units because I got F loads of them I dont
like it is

Puppeteer
12-06-2008, 05:04 PM
I don't know what you're asking, so I'll say:
o Left
o Four
o Yes
o Blue
o Humans
o Sir Ian McKellan

Pick the right answer...

kronlc
12-06-2008, 07:26 PM
0 Sir Ian Mckellan ?

or

0 Blu?

SPARROW94
12-07-2008, 04:23 AM
0 Sir Ian Mckellan ?

or

0 Blu?

your mom




*kung FU WHIPPING*