• Dear forum visitor,

    It looks as though you have not registered for a forum account, or are not signed in. In order to participate in current discussions or create new threads, you will need to register for a forum account by clicking on the link below.

    Click here to register for a forum account!

    If you already have a forum account, you can simply click on the 'Log in' button at the top right of your forum screen.

    Your Elvenar Team

Decrease in Population for Orc Housing

maeter75

Well-Known Member
This bug is for the Upgrade of Housing to Orc Housing (Orc Residences) from Level 19 to Level 20 (and also level 21).

At Level 19 Housing is 68.75 people per square when you upgrade to level 20 (Orc Residences) it goes down to 62.5 per square. In all the other levels of housing there is always an increase in the people per square a building
is able to hold per upgrade.

Level 21 goes back up to 70.83 but that is only slightly more people per square than level 19, again not in line with all the other upgrades.

An Example: A person was to update many of their buildings to level 20 and remove 19 housing to make room for the houses, they would end up with a negative population.


Note: The coins produced works just fine and looks to be in line with every other update.
 

DeletedUser1603

Guest
Thanks for your report. We have checked this with our game designers, and this is intended. With level 20 you indeed go back a little bit on the citizens/square value, but you will still get more in absolute numbers. At level 21, the citizens/square value is already higher than it was at level 19 again, and this level is available within the Orcs and Goblins chapter too. :)
 

maeter75

Well-Known Member
Its still a bit off from the rest of the housing but I guess if they meant it. One issue though is if people delete housing to make room for the upgrade thinking they will get more people per square like all the other upgrades.
 

DeletedUser2753

Guest
One suggestion made was to double upgrade each residence to avoid pop loss. The space issue is another mater
 

maeter75

Well-Known Member
One suggestion made was to double upgrade each residence to avoid pop loss. The space issue is another mater
Yes that is an option but this still seems like a bug/mistake to me as it does not follow how the other housing has worked.
As I mentioned, I can see a lot of people assuming they will get more population when upgrading to Orc housing and deleting a house or two to make space then suddenly they are at negative population till they upgrade again.
 

DeletedUser2753

Guest
Yes that is an option but this still seems like a bug/mistake to me

I think they have corrected a mistake with upgrades in fairy housing that were smaller with greater population. For Humans it went from 3x4 down to 2x5 so not only could you add pop, you also could add residences. So now back to 3x4 and no gain,actually a loss/square. This solution is like putting a sign that says 50 MPH, the later deciding it was to fast, so instead of reducing the speed by going back and changing the sign, they add a speed bump. Ever hit a speed bump at 50... Broken car... LOL
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser61

Guest
I have not run the analysis myself, but folks were complaining, over in Beta, that Goldmines and visits were no longer paying the normal 1% of Main Hall capacity, and we then discovered that the capacity of the Main Hall had jumped more than anybody anticipated.

Similarly, if you look at the Orcish housing, the upgraded residences are pretty generous with coins, even though they are very stingy about additional workers. One could speculate that the lower yield from the Goldmines has been compensated for by higher yields from the base housing.
 

DeletedUser3580

Guest
In the Orc chapter there are tech upgrades for workshops, Barracks, Main hall and T3 goods, how did the game designers invision the pop increase to actually use these upgrades? Deleting a workshop to upgrade the others gives a net loss of supply output. I havnt done the math but I'm sure this would be the same for T3 goods
 
Top