Population Fix

[Professor Frink]

I always thought that was the rule until the server merger. This would be a be a good idea because tactics & leadership strength should win the battle not overwhelming numbers. This might also prolong the really good fights...

[infinite loop]

Originally Posted by Hamma

Supposedly there are equal spots for empires on continents, but sometimes it sure as hell doesent seem that way.

Yeah definitely not the case. I can't remember where atm, but there was a dev post recently about the pop percentages on a continent. It basically boils down to this: if 2 empires have empire population lock, there is a much less than 33% free space for the 3rd empire. My guess is about 20% tops. So if VS and TR both have locked a cont, they both have 40% of the pop, while the NC would only be able to hold 20%. So basically, the third empire would most likely be better off fighting elsewhere, or hope that one of the other two empire's population drops on the cont. I think the only practical reason that 2 empires can't lock a cont, is because it's plausible there wouldn't be a fight anywhere else for the third empire. But I think an equal split would not be a better answer. Reward the 2 empires for getting their troops there first.

[BadAsh]

Originally Posted by Veteran

NC has the advantage in numbers. It's just fact. I play at different times around the clock and when NC doesn't have a 10%+ advantage, they usually have at least a few percent advantage, and when they do, each of those percentage points is dozens of players.

With the strongest (by far) main battle tank and (by far) the best Heavy Assault weapon in the game, it's little wonder. Add the second best MAX units, arguably the best empire heavy buggy, arguably the best empire AV weapon and it starts to fall into place why NC crushes its opponents on a fairly regular basis.

I'm not trying to threadjack this into an empire balance debate. I'm just saying what I feel is pretty obvious.

Thread Jacker!!! I don't agree 100% with your assessment.

I can�t speak for other servers but IMHO the main difference between the TR and the NC on Joharkov is CR5 leadership and organization. I play both TR and NC about the same, so I can see the differences pretty clearly.

When playing TR the leadership plays a basic �zerg control� role and that�s about it. You get commands like �everyone go here� or �repair that generator� etc. When I switch to NC I see a bit more structure. The CR5�s organize a few squads asking for volunteers for a few critical missions. They send troops to back hack and sabotage generators, they send troops to secure modules, organize GAL drops, and there is always a full ANT ready when a base turns blue. Also, the TR top brass have a nasty habit of breaking off offensives to �defend a home continent� when one of the continents linked to the sanctuary starts getting back hacked. Great, now you just split your troops again and are setting the stage for the next major TR defeat.

The other night was a perfect example of, IMO, poor TR leadership. The TR got shoved all the way back to their sanctuary WG. The NC had about 7 vanguards, 12 max units, the WG tower, and about 40 or so infantry� the TR began massing troops in the WG� at one point I counted 16 prowlers and 9 reavers with marauders, AMS, and other vehicles thrown into the mix.

My outfit squad realized we were outgunned and braced for an ALAMO style fight to the death. But instead what happens? The TR troops got no leadership past �everyone mass here� and they just sat there coming out 1, 2, or 3 at a time and got spanked. This went on for a bout 30 minutes and when I left the TR had only 2 prowlers and a few stragglers remaining. How hard would it have been for someone to say �hold on until we are ready� and give some kind of count down so everyone knows what to expect and when to go? If those guys would have come at us together the NC would have been smashed� but the leadership void again yielded predictable results.

Another leadership debacle was on a battle where the TR had �massive enemy forces� at two or our bases. Our leadership realized, to some amusement, that the TR only had a link to one of the bases they were attacking. So the NC just organized and brought the bulk of their forces to the base with the link. We crushed the half of the TR force that was there and then smashed them at the other base. Despite swarming a base they could not hack the TR even failed to kill the generator or take down the spawn tubes. So you have attackers swarming from the outside, only 1 AMS for yourself on a blue locked continent, and attackers spawning behind you from within the base you are fighting from. Do I have to explain what eventually happened? Through individual effort the TR put up a good fight, but the leadership void had them at such a disadvantage it was an unwinable uphill battle.

Also, the NC leadership understands how to attack. As NC I�ve been a part of coordinated tank, MAX, and infantry rushes hitting the enemy all at once. You get this with the associated support (i.e. adv meds and engineers following the MAX units for revival and repair). Also the �distraction� of the main offensive is used to have a few support guys flood the area with AMS stations. This way if the main offensive is stopped the enemy will now be subjected to a flood of infantry and casualties are very quickly replaced with all of the local spawn points that were just set up. I�ve NEVER EVER seen the TR come close to any of this organizational effort.

Additionally, the TR as a whole don�t field anywhere near as much armor as the NC or VS. I�m not sure what the deal is, but it�s always a wave of 12 Vanguards against 2 Prowlers and 30 infantry. Now if it were 12 tanks vs. 12 tanks things would be about even. Prowlers OWN if used properly. In a Prowler I have little trouble taking out a Vanguard 1 on 1. The problem is that it�s never 1 on 1 because the NC are working as a TEAM. I see a disparity in MAX numbers as well and this is also critical. And please don�t give me the crap about the TR MAXs being useless. The TR had a tower behind out lines one day with an organized squad defending with engineers, infantry and 4 Pounders. The Pounders were spamming the front entrances making them virtually impenetrable. If you got past them you got MCGed and Boomered trying to navigate the stairs to the spawn room or CC. This went on for a LONG time with the Pounders racking up dozens of kills. It finally ended with a combined MAX push with a full GAL drop on the roof. When the TR decides to organize and fight they are TOUGH.

The TR have good numbers, they have good gear, they have great players� they just need someone to lead them. With the NC it�s only a small handful of the CR5s that are good� but that�s all it takes. Any new up and coming leader has a disadvantage in that the TR are pretty demoralized. They need some organization and a few good wins before they can �get back into the swing of things�.

[sPooT]

I'm pretty sure Spork explained it on the official boards somewhere not so long ago. If I remember correctly, the first empire to grow large caps out at 50-60% of total continent capacity, I have no clue why they did that however. So it's definately not at 33% as some people seem to think.

I'll try to find the thread for ya.

EDIT: Well that wasn't hard

--> Info about population Locks. (OB)

[Cyanide]

It's true that NC has the biggest population most of the time on emerald, but saying that they're always doing the best is just false. VS often controls several continents and more than contends with NC when we have our good CR5s on to keep the zerg from being uber stupid.

[infinite loop]

Thanks spoot for finding that post. So apparently 2 empires CAN lock a cont. Interesting.

[Indecisive]

They need to reserve a specific amount of equal spots for each empire. We are set up for a three way battle, and only 2 vanu can get on the continent.