Are Settlers fans the only target audience?

[frank327]

I like medieval city builders and was also a fan of the early Settlers games. I played #3 a ridiculous amount. So when I saw this game pop up I was interested and with the very positive reviews I decided to get it.

What a huge disappointment. Can anyone clarify what the idea of the game is beyond looking and feeling like a Settlers game? It has a very very long way to go to reach the quality of base Settlers 3 because the strategy aspect is non existant. Combat is horrible and you don't face any real opponents.

But it is also not a good pioneering/survival medieval city builder. It's 2024 already, Banished was released 10 years ago (!!) and Farthest Frontier has put down a new benchmark since then. It even has way better combat than Pioneers of Pagonia.

There doesn't seem to be a single aspect of this game that is promising enough to be engaging. The developers really should go back to the drawing board and think about what direction they want this game to go.

[Stefan1200]

Originally posted by frank327:

Can anyone clarify what the idea of the game is beyond looking and feeling like a Settlers game?

Well, for me PoP is great, I already played it for around 30 hours. And I don't like Banished (one of my bad purchases in the last 10 years).
And I really like the combat in PoP. Of course some smaller adjustments regarding to "quality of life improvements" would be good, but I really like it.

[frank327]

What do you specifically really like about the combat in PoP? Because to me it looks like the worst combat system you could possibly implement in a strategy game. It's just dudes running in a direction and when two guys meet they start hitting each other and one falls over. There are no defensive structures, no range advantage, no numbers advantage, nothing.

The only thing it has is that some dudes have a rock/paper/scissors like advantage over certain enemies. Even games from before the year 2000 would be ashamed to have a combat system this simplistic.

[Stefan1200]

Originally posted by frank327:

Even games from before the year 2000 would be ashamed to have a combat system this simplistic.

Well, sometimes I like it simple. In fact I like this simple way, but that you can set the patrol position of your group. That is something which was not possible in Settlers 2.

[galadon3]

"strategy aspect" in settlers 3? We are speaking of the same "build an army death blob and then carpet move them over the enemy" game, right?

[Vanakalion]

PoP is largely a clone of Volker Wertich's original "The Settlers" with more complex economic cycles and influences from #2. With #3, the fan community was already divided. In fact, #3 began to disrupt the lightness of the original concept, which is close to an interactive aquarium. The removal of the path system and the multiplayer capability with RTS-like battle mode paved the way for the most hated #5. PoP is the 30th anniversary present to the fan community of the first hour. I hope that it retains Anno elements similar to #6 and builds on #7. Active military management would only poison the original idea again (see "New Allies").

If you're looking for an RTS urbanizer, you're in the wrong place.

[VeryAngryKitten]

PoP is a spiritual reboot of Settler I, not Settlers 3. In Settlers I, you did not control combat units directly, you just had a few settings to direct what they did (the closest to micromanagement was that you picked military buildings to attack). Settlers 3 turned the franchise into a RTS - but it could not compete against dedicated RTS. The latest Ubisoft Settlers game was PvP oriented, and it has largely disappeared without a trace.

You can play PoP with little micromanagement of troops (outside of the werewolf level, which requires intervention at the start). The enemy game balance in the current build is off - but we are still missing an enemy. I would be happy if they just get the game balance better (we need an endgame threat) and have high level military UI commands so that we can get a sensible defence with even less micromanagement.

(Update: Vanakalion made roughly the same points as me when I was typing my response...)

[frank327]

So basically it's like an aquarium where you just watch your little settlers running around doing their daily tasks while building the same series of buildings every time?

Because there's no real "complex economy" in PoP as far as I saw. It's just a few hidden pieces of info you need (for example that you need cabbage to make the meals if you don't have meat) and otherwise you're building one of almost every building to clear the map. It simply takes a while to get all the resources you need to build all the buildings. The only difficult part of the game is that there's constantly enemies running into your base and 1v1 murdering your guards constantly. And you cannot defend with walls or archer towers.

[galadon3]

Originally posted by frank327:

So basically it's like an aquarium where you just watch your little settlers running around doing their daily tasks while building the same series of buildings every time?

Because there's no real "complex economy" in PoP as far as I saw. It's just a few hidden pieces of info you need (for example that you need cabbage to make the meals if you don't have meat) and otherwise you're building one of almost every building to clear the map. It simply takes a while to get all the resources you need to build all the buildings. The only difficult part of the game is that there's constantly enemies running into your base and 1v1 murdering your guards constantly. And you cannot defend with walls or archer towers.

yes correct, you haven't figured out how defense against attacks works and apparently never tried higher difficulties.

[Werty_mk]

The combat is fine in my opinion, at least you have more control than in Settlers 2 by setting the patrol point. I just wish there were enemy villages to conquer in addition to the npc camps.

[frank327]

Originally posted by galadon3:

yes correct, you haven't figured out how defense against attacks works and apparently never tried higher difficulties.

Oh I have tried higher difficulty and know how defense against attacks works. You just gotta have more units and of higher quality than the dudes attacking you. And you need rangers to detect thieves.

But when on high difficulty maps my start doesn't have wildlife or iron nearby, what am I supposed to do when tier 3 Bandits are raiding my base? Any soldiers that happened to be near the guard post (that were supposed to, you know, guard against bandits) just got stabbed.

[Vanakalion]

I am currently working on an alternative solution that should offer more variety and reflect economic cycles more realistically without touching the core mechanisms of the classic game. An optional multiplayer mode is not ruled out. This solution should also include a global mode and the best approaches from #6 and #7. On military level, passive management will remain. However, I cannot rule out the possibility that the final result will require a high-end computer.

[wasti_s]

Originally posted by frank327:

But when on high difficulty maps my start doesn't have wildlife or iron nearby, what am I supposed to do when tier 3 Bandits are raiding my base? Any soldiers that happened to be near the guard post (that were supposed to, you know, guard against bandits) just got stabbed.

See, there is more behind the game one would think. One way is to ignore the bandits at the beginning and grow the land to a reasonable size, maybe until you have all the resources you need. After that start to grow economy. But sometimes there is more, you will see.

[Wasted]

Originally posted by frank327:

But when on high difficulty maps my start doesn't have wildlife or iron nearby, what am I supposed to do when tier 3 Bandits are raiding my base? Any soldiers that happened to be near the guard post (that were supposed to, you know, guard against bandits) just got stabbed.

This is where the strategy part comes into play. Deciding with the given space on what to build, in what order to build and how much production you need, so that you can beat the map.

[galadon3]

Originally posted by wasti_s:

See, there is more behind the game one would think. One way is to ignore the bandits at the beginning and grow the land to a reasonable size, maybe until you have all the resources you need. After that start to grow economy. But sometimes there is more, you will see.

Could you please correct your quoting? I don't really like to have words put under my name, I never wrote.

[galadon3]

And to answer said question I did NOT ask:

Originally posted by frank327:

But when on high difficulty maps my start doesn't have wildlife or iron nearby, what am I supposed to do when tier 3 Bandits are raiding my base? Any soldiers that happened to be near the guard post (that were supposed to, you know, guard against bandits) just got stabbed.

Mass produce guards (not tier 1 soldiers, they are more ressource-heavy especially needing copper you need for tools if you dont have iron nearby, and they have just 1 more point fighting capability) and make it a war of attrition.
Then build up 2 flax farms, 2 weavers and start recruiting rangers.

Kinda funny how you claim the game was just "Build 1 of each building and the map is easily cleaned" but apparently declare anything impossible that doesn't work with that "strategy".