PDA

View Full Version : pop system


wills370
08-28-2009, 12:10 PM
how does the pop system work in game?

I was just thinking about it wheather the troops would be drawn from a peasant rescource. E.g. Have to wait and keep them happy to create lots of little peasants and future warriors :P

Or if its like another standered game and they are just produced from a limitless pool of men. (and women)

And will there be a upper limit to the pop cap?

and is the economic pop cap seperate to the warrior. Or all in one?

Just a few questions if anyone knows the answer and thought it would make a intresting point for discussion.

sneaky_squirrel
08-28-2009, 02:09 PM
You have awaken my curiosity, let's see what other people have to say ;p.

wills370
08-28-2009, 02:11 PM
You have awaken my curiosity, let's see what other people have to say ;p.

glad to hear it and yep! Only time will tell. Lets hope this thread takes off so we can get some answers.

Darathor
08-28-2009, 03:31 PM
Units take up population and you build more houses to raise the population cap.
The cap is around 1000 in skirmish, but I believe (and hope) that it is larger in mmorts mode.

wills370
08-28-2009, 03:46 PM
Units take up population and you build more houses to raise the population cap.
The cap is around 1000 in skirmish, but I believe (and hope) that it is larger in mmorts mode.

Cool, is the economic (gathers) governed by that pop cap (the houses) or another?

And do the houses have inhabitants which you have to wait to mature etc? Or is it just build a house and the cap raises instantly?

and yeah hopefully the 1000 cap will be alot bigger on the MMORTS

Konstantin Fomenko
08-28-2009, 06:28 PM
I was just thinking about it wheather the troops would be drawn from a peasant rescource

This is sort of how Orcs work in-game. Orc player get a slow income of free Orc units. You can choose for these free Orc units to wield a bow and knife and be a hunter/food gathering unit, or a laborer unit - for gathering other resources, and building.

And majority of Orcish troops (not counting Ogres, Goblins or various beast units) will be drawn from these free Orc "peasants."

For example you select a bunch of these free Orcs, task them into one of the Orc War buildings - and they`ll be given right weapons there to become a certain type of military units (depending on the building you task them in). After you give them weapons and turn them into soldiers, you can choose to task them into one of the beast building - to get them to become mounted units, or task them into the temple, to further train them to a 2nd level military units.

So you can say that with Orcs - these free Orc peasants are a resource.

Darvin
08-28-2009, 07:18 PM
Sounds cool; I'm starting to get an idea for the wildly diverging economies of the three races.

The Witch King of Angmar
08-28-2009, 07:34 PM
I would love to see an example of how much of the pop cap, say a regular orc soldier would take up to get an example of how many units could be created in your army. Also, how are units such as ogres created since they aren't made from these "peasant" orcs? Is a building just built where they are created?

Thanks

Darvin
08-28-2009, 07:43 PM
My guess is that ogres don't take up these population points, but probably cost a huge amount of food.

The Witch King of Angmar
08-28-2009, 07:46 PM
Honestly, I could see them costing both food and pop. points.

Josh Warner
08-28-2009, 08:05 PM
My guess is that ogres don't take up these population points, but probably cost a huge amount of food.

If a real 'cap' is part of the system, it has to cost population. I don't recall them saying one way or the other, though. A hard cap that is, where no matter what you can't get more.

Darvin
08-28-2009, 10:36 PM
I do believe they have talked about a hard "population" cap, but that would be separate from orc peasant populations... which means we probably need some proper terminology to distinguish these two concepts.

Once the beta starts I'm sure we'll quickly establish a lexicon specific to this game, but until then these terms will be somewhat ambiguous.

wills370
08-29-2009, 12:55 AM
they could get round the ogres being drwan not from the free peasant etc as putting them in as mercinary units available only to the orcs. Therefore they would remain exclusive but also realistic. Im guessing they would proably take some gold,food and some pop to govern. But that is just my take

And wow sounds great does that mean you have to wait to gain more and more men, or do the peasant orcs appear once you build a house?

love the variety this game is going to have in the ecomony in by the way.

And what do a kid orc and a flower have in common?

There both called orchids :P


Sorry bad joke but i just thought of it.

wills370
08-29-2009, 10:20 AM
Another thought would be how much is the starting pop without houses. or do you auto get some houses when you start?

Andy Joslin
08-29-2009, 10:40 AM
The orcs have a couple of huts at the start, which give population cap. All orc units (ogres, beasts, goblins, orcs) fall under this population cap. Build more huts for more population.

wills370
08-29-2009, 10:53 AM
The orcs have a couple of huts at the start, which give population cap. All orc units (ogres, beasts, goblins, orcs) fall under this population cap. Build more huts for more population.

Cool, what happens if all houses are destroyed? does your pop cap go to 0?

And what about the other races?

DDERME
12-16-2009, 02:32 PM
how about making a game mode witch theres no pop limitit at all,
and can call it "no pop skirmish" and just do what ever u
do to get pop and it just goes on and on forever (the limit not the game)
cus i hate pop limits :mad:
and there needs to be a mode with no pop limit cus nobody likes small
armies:(
so people who have good rigs,by rigs i mean pc's use the no pop mode to play
and the people with bad pc's use the normal skirmish mode
so there will be no lag online cus the two skirmish modes cus there will be an order of playing
or there can be a auto match making thing that matches the players and gives
infinte pop if they both have good pc's but the first idea is better:D

Henry Martin
12-16-2009, 02:46 PM
how about making a game mode witch theres no pop limitit at all,
and can call it "no pop skirmish" and just do what ever u
do to get pop and it just goes on and on forever (the limit not the game)
cus i hate pop limits :mad:
and there needs to be a mode with no pop limit cus nobody likes small
armies:(
so people who have good rigs,by rigs i mean pc's use the no pop mode to play
and the people with bad pc's use the normal skirmish mode
so there will be no lag online cus the two skirmish modes cus there will be an order of playing
or there can be a auto match making thing that matches the players and gives
infinte pop if they both have good pc's but the first idea is better:D

I know what you mean I not a fan of pop limits my self, but not only does the person computer come into to play, but also the engine as it to can only handle so much. The more stuff in the game the more the engine has to calculate which causes the engine to slow down. Look at the total war series, even though they have a power full engine that supports a lot of units on screen it still has a limit to how many can be in a screen.

There are other reason developers do these thing don't just think they are doing it to **** you off or because some poor gamer can't afford a decent PC.

JDmino
12-17-2009, 03:31 PM
I know what you mean I not a fan of pop limits my self, but not only does the person computer come into to play, but also the engine as it to can only handle so much. The more stuff in the game the more the engine has to calculate which causes the engine to slow down. Look at the total war series, even though they have a power full engine that supports a lot of units on screen it still has a limit to how many can be in a screen.

There are other reason developers do these thing don't just think they are doing it to **** you off or because some poor gamer can't afford a decent PC.

Not to mention how annoying it would be when your computer lags because you have 500 units and your enemy has 6000. Pop limits add strategy to the game. You need to spread out your military and economy in a way that is efficient and allows room for your empire to expand. So pop limits are pretty important in this sort of game.

Jean=A=Luc
12-17-2009, 03:43 PM
What's this about a poop system?

Henry Martin
12-17-2009, 03:55 PM
Not to mention how annoying it would be when your computer lags because you have 500 units and your enemy has 6000. Pop limits add strategy to the game. You need to spread out your military and economy in a way that is efficient and allows room for your empire to expand. So pop limits are pretty important in this sort of game.

Good point thanks for adding that. It is a "strategy game" after all.

DDERME
12-17-2009, 04:04 PM
Well at least make the workers,gatherers,snon-combat units whatever theyre called not cost pop cus that what i hate bout strategy i buişld a ton of workers
but then i cant build soldiers and etc can the non combat units not cost pop
or have a diffirent limit plz

Kaznafein
12-17-2009, 05:42 PM
I like the idea of having to diffrent pop limits for your non-combatants and combative units.

JDmino
12-17-2009, 08:27 PM
Well at least make the workers,gatherers,snon-combat units whatever theyre called not cost pop cus that what i hate bout strategy i buişld a ton of workers
but then i cant build soldiers and etc can the non combat units not cost pop
or have a diffirent limit plz


But that would ruin the strategy, if you don't need to worry about spreading out your population to keep your empire running then it is no fun. It would just be boring and people would just build way to many gatherers(etc.) and make the game lag. They would think along the lines of, "I don't need to worry about population for economy, so I will just build way too many so I can get more resources." But that would ruin the game for those people with bad computers who could not run the game at those standards. Population is an important part of the RTS genre, without it game can be unbalanced and too many units will be on the screen.

DDERME
12-18-2009, 01:33 AM
But that would ruin the strategy, if you don't need to worry about spreading out your population to keep your empire running then it is no fun. It would just be boring and people would just build way to many gatherers(etc.) and make the game lag. They would think along the lines of, "I don't need to worry about population for economy, so I will just build way too many so I can get more resources." But that would ruin the game for those people with bad computers who could not run the game at those standards. Population is an important part of the RTS genre, without it game can be unbalanced and too many units will be on the screen.

well theres still can be a limit for the workers

DDERME
12-18-2009, 01:39 AM
anyway i had the worst computer on earth and now i have a better one
so i know how it is when u hack the limit and make a load of troops
it lags but only if u make an amount of one million hoplites from
age of mythology and still one million troops didnt lag that bad it just laged
for bout 10 seconds then it was back to normal and age of mythology
is an old game and i think game engines are better so i dont think there
will be a problem for a seperate limit on workers

and with the pop limit that on now still bad computers would lag
i know this cus with that many troops with the best graphics on
nearly every bad pc would lag so i dont see the posibility for bad
pcs to play this game often.

Kire
12-18-2009, 04:33 AM
What about, since humans and elves can only build on presetup locations that there is limited farms/lumbermills/mines...... that you can build. And each support x number of workers.

So for example that you can build just 1 farm 2 lumber mills and 1 mine and in farm max gatherers are 10, lumbermill 2x6 and mine 15. So here (in this land with this much resourses) the peasnt limit cap is 37 and you cant build more since there is no place they can work on. And since there is limit to buildings (that support specific number of workers), there is also limit for x workers. Beside there can be upgrades that increase worker limit or increase speed of production there....
And so this economic buildings would increase hidden worker pop cap and houses would increase normal pop cap (for units duh).

In my opinion this is better since when this game goes live there will be guides/expert ppl that would say/x....... whats the perfect number of workers (for mmo) so you would still have imba army and at same time good economy and so everyone that would want to be competitive would use this combo (since it would be the best). And my suggestion gives everyone same chance since there is worker limit in different way. The strategy part here would be if you would from start fill those spots, would you spend money first on upgrading economics, but i agree that if there is pop cap for workers same as units it gives you some more strategy feeling like you have more choices (which is very good) and at same time it worries you if you would have too few army to be competitive to others because of many workers.

I like both, my idea and the normal one (freedom is important !!) that pop cap is same and you can build as much workers you want.

Supreme
12-18-2009, 04:37 AM
Lets just wait to see what they come up with and -then- complain.. :p

Kaznafein
12-18-2009, 01:26 PM
But that would ruin the strategy, if you don't need to worry about spreading out your population to keep your empire running then it is no fun. It would just be boring and people would just build way to many gatherers(etc.) and make the game lag. They would think along the lines of, "I don't need to worry about population for economy, so I will just build way too many so I can get more resources." But that would ruin the game for those people with bad computers who could not run the game at those standards. Population is an important part of the RTS genre, without it game can be unbalanced and too many units will be on the screen.

Ya was thinking about that and I agree it would ruin the strategy of balancing the two.

But who knows maybe they'll have a new system we shall see.

willrockyo1
02-23-2010, 09:15 PM
This is sort of how Orcs work in-game. Orc player get a slow income of free Orc units. You can choose for these free Orc units to wield a bow and knife and be a hunter/food gathering unit, or a laborer unit - for gathering other resources, and building.

And majority of Orcish troops (not counting Ogres, Goblins or various beast units) will be drawn from these free Orc "peasants."

For example you select a bunch of these free Orcs, task them into one of the Orc War buildings - and they`ll be given right weapons there to become a certain type of military units (depending on the building you task them in). After you give them weapons and turn them into soldiers, you can choose to task them into one of the beast building - to get them to become mounted units, or task them into the temple, to further train them to a 2nd level military units.

So you can say that with Orcs - these free Orc peasants are a resource.

This sounds like a huge advantage to Orcs. That and I think I read somewhere that orcs have more pop than other races. The ability to transform workers to military at will is pretty huge. This will be exciting to witness.

DarkMaster
02-23-2010, 11:51 PM
Bear in mind that the orcs' units are the weakest in the game (at least in general terms)

blackfang
02-23-2010, 11:53 PM
however they can attack wave after wave, so don't think you have won after the first few k soldiers dead.

welshie
02-24-2010, 03:12 AM
orcs will have to be the most tactical, forcing the opponant to strech his forces to the brink that one orc manages to get through where as humans (to a point) and elves can just go pew pew.

HolyPollo
02-24-2010, 06:28 AM
This sounds like a huge advantage to Orcs. That and I think I read somewhere that orcs have more pop than other races. The ability to transform workers to military at will is pretty huge. This will be exciting to witness.

I have to agree. They might not always have the military advantage in a one to one fight, but they will have the most versatile military/economy. So while humans/elves will have to split their resources and guard their precious expensive weapons, orcs will be massing wave after wave and still have resources left to maintain defenses.

blackfang
02-24-2010, 06:35 AM
Btw earlier i saw a post on tw series have a problem with the amount of soldiers on screen. I played a game with 18 k troops on screen fighting at once:D So it was really awesome, max unit size, max money, max opponents (online) and filling up with those pwn legionaries and marching on. It lagged a bit tough, it was my most awesome game ever. It ended in total defeat for the other team, we took the greeks in straight on charge. We crushed the horse charges with a few triariis here and there. (we played 3 romans and one of those cavalry nations.) The enemies were greeks romans gauls and egypt. Our team worked like one unit while the enemy was scattered. No wonder we won. Just sending the legionnaires charging was enough. However we conserved them with just walking into battle. Also that last battle of those were the most awesome. It looked like one of those Black and white 2 battles. Where soldiers run into each other... here
http://images.apple.com/games/articles/2009/01/blackandwhite2/images/shot1.jpg
You know those soldiers? They run in full melee and fight chaotically. Thats what it looked like. Anyways there is only a limit as to good your computer is.:D So NO pop Please if possible:cool:

BrogaGlas
02-24-2010, 11:10 AM
Btw earlier i saw a post on tw series have a problem with the amount of soldiers on screen. I played a game with 18 k troops on screen fighting at once:D So it was really awesome, max unit size, max money, max opponents (online) and filling up with those pwn legionaries and marching on. It lagged a bit tough, it was my most awesome game ever. It ended in total defeat for the other team, we took the greeks in straight on charge. We crushed the horse charges with a few triariis here and there. (we played 3 romans and one of those cavalry nations.) The enemies were greeks romans gauls and egypt. Our team worked like one unit while the enemy was scattered. No wonder we won. Just sending the legionnaires charging was enough. However we conserved them with just walking into battle. Also that last battle of those were the most awesome. It looked like one of those Black and white 2 battles. Where soldiers run into each other... here
http://images.apple.com/games/articles/2009/01/blackandwhite2/images/shot1.jpg
You know those soldiers? They run in full melee and fight chaotically. Thats what it looked like. Anyways there is only a limit as to good your computer is.:D So NO pop Please if possible:cool:

You can't have a MMORTS with limitless pop. It just ain't friggin' possible. The servers would capsize under the weight. Plus the true test of a player's skill is how much he can do with how little.

blackfang
02-24-2010, 12:29 PM
The great thing about numbers is that they dwindle faster then a skilled army...

Zeluk
03-09-2010, 11:50 PM
I think a population cap is not only necessary but inevitable. I mean I like huge armies, don't get me wrong but allowing everyone to have a limitless population would cause the game to stagnate. It's basic economics, there are no resources that are infinite. Population is just another resource that requires management.

I'm sure that this game will have a very hefty population cap. Of course not large enough to please everyone, but let's face it, they're never pleased...

Negthareas
03-10-2010, 10:22 AM
Unlimited population would cause a massive block against new players in the MMORTS. New players would have to compete against unlimited enemies that the older players could provide.

Darathor
03-11-2010, 06:24 PM
Unlimited population would cause a massive block against new players in the MMORTS. New players would have to compete against unlimited enemies that the older players could provide.

You would be limited as to who you could fight but yes, the older players with the huge armies would be able to fight constantly and hammer at other players.

Aametherar
03-12-2010, 07:50 AM
I actually prefer mid sized rather than large pop caps. If you have a healthy mix of strategy and units it shouldn't matter how many you have in numbers, but how you use them. Anything past a point is just less skill and more throwing your units into each other.

welshie
03-12-2010, 11:11 AM
I actually prefer mid sized rather than large pop caps. If you have a healthy mix of strategy and units it shouldn't matter how many you have in numbers, but how you use them. Anything past a point is just less skill and more throwing your units into each other.

Yeh but lower caps mean you cnt intimadate lower lvl people :O and make you feel all big and power full just before they band together and kick yoo ass :)

Zeluk
03-12-2010, 12:11 PM
As it should be, in games like this a group of players should always beat a single player. Now in other games its not always the case, like FPS's for instance.

OrcSlayer
03-13-2010, 02:04 PM
I thought that higher level player could only fight players of about the same level? But i suppose that if some players of level 10 band together to fight a level 11-12 the lvl 10s probably would win
Offtopic: Aametherar your back!

Zeluk
03-13-2010, 02:47 PM
You can fight other players within a certain level-range. Within 3-5 levels of you. So yes, you are correct.

Darathor
03-13-2010, 07:25 PM
I thought that higher level player could only fight players of about the same level? But i suppose that if some players of level 10 band together to fight a level 11-12 the lvl 10s probably would win
Offtopic: Aametherar your back!

You can only fight people around your level, but I think Reverie said a while back that you might be able to attack people who are higher(whether with several other lower-levels or not, but you would also have to specifically choose them to attack them).

This was a while ago that I think that they said this so not sure about whether or not it's true.

And I could say the same thing to you about being back, haven't seen you in a while.

wills370
03-14-2010, 05:58 AM
You can only fight people around your level, but I think Reverie said a while back that you might be able to attack people who are higher(whether with several other lower-levels or not, but you would also have to specifically choose them to attack them).

This was a while ago that I think that they said this so not sure about whether or not it's true.

And I could say the same thing to you about being back, haven't seen you in a while.

As far as i know its still the same its the best way of handling things also they put in a quest etc where lower level players will have to band together to take out a higher one etc. So i tink this will probably stay cant see another way of them balancing it out online.