Population depending on number of houses

[Squirrel5555]

So i was wondering, population is capped at 200 (i believe) and there a couple good house sprites in the game, so why not make population cap start at like 5 or 10, and each house you built would increase it by 5 or something. IDK how this would effect gameplay/meta and maybe there are some coding problems preventing this but i thought i would mention this just in case it hadnt already been brought up.

This seems like a bad idea to me but ill suggest it anyway

[godOfKings]

map is usually too small, houses cant b built in forests, age of empires used to have thousands of tiles big maps

[Stratego (dev)]

it would be a good mechanism
questions:
a) Endru: what do u think?
b) woulnt it make more "micromanagement" feel?

apart from that not a big coding and could be implemented.

[SirLuciano]

The "house" unit that is supppsed to be neutral would have a use now

[Stratego (dev)]

there can be new houses - not a big deal making a new one.

[SirLuciano]

there can be new houses - not a big deal making a new one.

you mean the design leaders or any people that makes an image could make a new image for the house?

[Endru1241]

it would be a good mechanism
questions:
a) Endru: what do u think?
b) woulnt it make more "micromanagement" feel?

apart from that not a big coding and could be implemented.

a) I think it would be total game-changer. Details have to be disscussed.
b) I don't know if it's micro or macro management. But the idea allows for more control over the game, so I am all in for implementation if made carefully.


1. Imagine the amount of campaign/scenario maps suddenly unwinnable in time, because You have to first build the houses. It also changes the balance of turncost-units. The idea (not the first time it came out) is fine, but proposed numbers - absurd. To lessen the impact basic population cap should be much higher 50, 100 or maybe even left alone. Or just let design leaders decide by defining constant on initialization.
2. Easiest for future balancing would be just introducing new unit stat, which by default is 0 for buildings, tech, prop changers, 1 for proper units (is such distinction doable?).
3. As summary window would have to read this variable, why not go all the way. Parametrize all these limits! Big factories, factories, units - all able to be set on initialization and modified by unit stats. E.g. rounded for checks and display floats could allow for 0.8 mega buildings, 1.2 factories by tc, maybe higher for upg. one.
4. Did I say all the way? We can go deeper. Additional possible, configurable limits! Just implement unified way to set limiting variables. It could be simply e.g. 8 configurable instances, so unit could take/give few different limits. This way endgame could be balanced by limiting workers, towers, siege machines. I can imagine the ideas for different age of versions.

[SirLuciano]

If this is gonna be implemented AoF will have more variations of houses due to having different races


Sounds good

[makazuwr32]

@Alexander82 please look onto this topic. I need your opinion.

[Alexander82]

Well... It was one of my proposals in the past.

I remember that a long time ago there was no population limit and the best strategy was to spam the cheapest ranged units and fill the map with those ones.

I would really like to have a more complex economy in game where we can have non-factory buildings and, maybe, resources.

I think that this would work a lot better than tcs-based factory limits and would probably make a simple rush for tcs useless without a proper economy

That would make having a good base much more important and that should come along with a proper rethinking of both sieges units and buildings health

Tcs might even become something you build instead of something you conquer (as you might need a tc to build houses around and to make a "city")

[Alexander82]

Btw at the beginning we might need to have this as a separate game mode and we may keep the current game mode as a fast game mode while this one can be the normal mode

[Alexander82]

btw that was my original topic

In my original proposal the food required for a unit was equal to its cost (with 50 food you can have 50 1 turn units or 5 10 turns units, and so on)

[Alexander82]

a) I think it would be total game-changer. Details have to be disscussed.
b) I don't know if it's micro or macro management. But the idea allows for more control over the game, so I am all in for implementation if made carefully.

I totally agree

1. Imagine the amount of campaign/scenario maps suddenly unwinnable in time, because You have to first build the houses. It also changes the balance of turncost-units. The idea (not the first time it came out) is fine, but proposed numbers - absurd. To lessen the impact basic population cap should be much higher 50, 100 or maybe even left alone. Or just let design leaders decide by defining constant on initialization.

I think that numbers can be adjusted, if anyone starts with a single TC, the TC alone might provide 100 pop limit and if that limit was scaled by unit cost it would mean a player can have 50 infantry/archers but less bigger units (like knights or sieges). About maps we should leave the chance to keep the old mode as default.

2. Easiest for future balancing would be just introducing new unit stat, which by default is 0 for buildings, tech, prop changers, 1 for proper units (is such distinction doable?).

do you mean the "weight" of these on population?

3. As summary window would have to read this variable, why not go all the way. Parametrize all these limits! Big factories, factories, units - all able to be set on initialization and modified by unit stats. E.g. rounded for checks and display floats could allow for 0.8 mega buildings, 1.2 factories by tc, maybe higher for upg. one.

That would be awesome as sometimes I found really difficult to play in small maps in AoF as you need a bunch of buildings to upgrade units in tech-based races and I wanted a 2xtcs factories option to allow races like elves to start the game with 2/3 craftsmen without a too big impact on unit's production

4. Did I say all the way? We can go deeper. Additional possible, configurable limits! Just implement unified way to set limiting variables. It could be simply e.g. 8 configurable instances, so unit could take/give few different limits. This way endgame could be balanced by limiting workers, towers, siege machines. I can imagine the ideas for different age of versions.

That would be good as well to make all games more unique

[SirLuciano]

I say have the TCs have the population limit of 15 to 20 then the houses with 5 to 20 depending on the upgrades

[Alexander82]

I think that a base value should still be present though (especially if population will be cost-dependant)

[DreJaDe]

I say have the TCs have the population limit of 15 to 20 then the houses with 5 to 20 depending on the upgrades

If this is going to be followed. Players with the best spot for TC placement will be the one with more good win chance.

Maps with the preset TC would be more popular then.

[Squirrel5555]

This is the case already, where some players start with easy access to their TCs, while others are blocked off by water and need to waste a couple turns building bridges/going around, which is quite a big disadvantage at the start of a game.

[Alexander82]

I say have the TCs have the population limit of 15 to 20 then the houses with 5 to 20 depending on the upgrades

If this is going to be followed. Players with the best spot for TC placement will be the one with more good win chance.

Maps with the preset TC would be more popular then.

I think that in a game mode with pop limitations and maybe resources tcs could actually be something you build instead than something you get from maps

I think that they might become more like town centers from Age of empire series where they are the center of your production and you build one where you want to establish a new base.

[Alexander82]

This is the case already, where some players start with easy access to their TCs, while others are blocked off by water and need to waste a couple turns building bridges/going around, which is quite a big disadvantage at the start of a game.

That would help a lot balancing starts in games with races like AoF as every player would have mostly the same options. So you don't just need to rush to get the most tcs you can.

When attacking a enemy tc you might have both the option of conquering it or sack it (and get some production bonus by doing that)

[Squirrel5555]

Right now rushing for TCs is literally the only way to play, as each extra TC gives you two more places where you can produce units or develop techs than your opponent has. So adding a housing system where TCs provide a large bonus to space makes TC rushes even more important, as you wont have to build any houses, therefore not losing any builder turns, while the player with less TCs already has less production AND needs to use up builder turns to make more houses.

Also I have barely played AoF, mainly I focus on AoS so I cant comment on that

[Endru1241]

I think starting limits should be declared in map setup - the best would be 4-6 options defined by constants.
One of them could be 0.

Unit limits boosts by buildings, including tcs could be too complex to be set in map setup (especially in case of many limits), but I think even 5-10 is ok, but base starting limits is a must. There is a ton of campaign maps, where player has barely any tc or none at all, while having some factories. So even if factories would also increase limits - default base should be at least 100 or more.

Buildable tcs or 0 unit limit with e.g. doubled tcs bonus should be left for special game mode imho.
They are just too game changing to introduce so suddenly as default.
Besides - both of these ideas would require extensive AI change. Right now it would weaken it too much.

[Alexander82]

Right now rushing for TCs is literally the only way to play, as each extra TC gives you two more places where you can produce units or develop techs than your opponent has. So adding a housing system where TCs provide a large bonus to space makes TC rushes even more important, as you wont have to build any houses, therefore not losing any builder turns, while the player with less TCs already has less production AND needs to use up builder turns to make more houses.

Also I have barely played AoF, mainly I focus on AoS so I cant comment on that

unless tcs are built like in AoE series

[Alexander82]

I think starting limits should be declared in map setup - the best would be 4-6 options defined by constants.
One of them could be 0.

Unit limits boosts by buildings, including tcs could be too complex to be set in map setup (especially in case of many limits), but I think even 5-10 is ok, but base starting limits is a must. There is a ton of campaign maps, where player has barely any tc or none at all, while having some factories. So even if factories would also increase limits - default base should be at least 100 or more.

I think that current maps should be left as they are without changes unless the map maker desire to change the settings by editing those maps

Buildable tcs or 0 unit limit with e.g. doubled tcs bonus should be left for special game mode imho.
They are just too game changing to introduce so suddenly as default.
Besides - both of these ideas would require extensive AI change. Right now it would weaken it too much.

At the moment I think this game mode should be an alternative mode, not necessarily default mode for the same reasons.

[Squirrel5555]

Right now rushing for TCs is literally the only way to play, as each extra TC gives you two more places where you can produce units or develop techs than your opponent has. So adding a housing system where TCs provide a large bonus to space makes TC rushes even more important, as you wont have to build any houses, therefore not losing any builder turns, while the player with less TCs already has less production AND needs to use up builder turns to make more houses.

Also I have barely played AoF, mainly I focus on AoS so I cant comment on that

unless tcs are built like in AoE series

Yes but im not sure thats where Stratego wants to go with this game

[DreJaDe]

I say have the TCs have the population limit of 15 to 20 then the houses with 5 to 20 depending on the upgrades

If this is going to be followed. Players with the best spot for TC placement will be the one with more good win chance.

Maps with the preset TC would be more popular then.

I think that in a game mode with pop limitations and maybe resources tcs could actually be something you build instead than something you get from maps

I think that they might become more like town centers from Age of empire series where they are the center of your production and you build one where you want to establish a new base.

Didn't AOE have resources and such. That would be so much different than this current discussion would bring. If I continue on this, I would suggest TCs occupied have their own resources they could make per turn. Since this will be a game mode and not the main mode, maps specifically for this game mode should be made instead of the current ones.

Building TC for me is kinda bad. Since this is already in the core of the game but if its for the betterment of this game then it would be good.

[Alexander82]

Right now rushing for TCs is literally the only way to play, as each extra TC gives you two more places where you can produce units or develop techs than your opponent has. So adding a housing system where TCs provide a large bonus to space makes TC rushes even more important, as you wont have to build any houses, therefore not losing any builder turns, while the player with less TCs already has less production AND needs to use up builder turns to make more houses.

Also I have barely played AoF, mainly I focus on AoS so I cant comment on that

unless tcs are built like in AoE series

Yes but im not sure thats where Stratego wants to go with this game

That was my suggestion in fact. If tcs are conquered they already give production and shouldn't also give population

[Alexander82]

If this is going to be followed. Players with the best spot for TC placement will be the one with more good win chance.

Maps with the preset TC would be more popular then.

I think that in a game mode with pop limitations and maybe resources tcs could actually be something you build instead than something you get from maps

I think that they might become more like town centers from Age of empire series where they are the center of your production and you build one where you want to establish a new base.

Didn't AOE have resources and such. That would be so much different than this current discussion would bring. If I continue on this, I would suggest TCs occupied have their own resources they could make per turn. Since this will be a game mode and not the main mode, maps specifically for this game mode should be made instead of the current ones.

Building TC for me is kinda bad. Since this is already in the core of the game but if its for the betterment of this game then it would be good.

I think that if productions becomes more tied to building a good base then in such game mode would be better if tcs were built. In normal games they could stay as they are though.

[SirPat]

Hey I have a concern wouldn't the AI have a problem with this cause they only build buildings adjacent to their TC's so it would limit the AI's population a lot and I Guess the AI would just build barracks and will loose because of the limitations of Pop. I suggest let's just work on the AI's behaviour first teach him to build walls and gates first before that so that AI won't become weak and Unbalanced

[L4cus]

Hi, i just wanna know if this is possible. Beside the ia development
I didnt know squirrel was the one who posted this topic
I supose he already knows the reason