Personal thought on the future of the game (discussion)

I’ve been wanting to write this down for the past few days but this killer heat has stopped me time and time again lol. figured I might as well write it down now.

as the game is right now, we start off with a few hearthlings who have nowhere to stay, nothing to live off of, a couple tools, a campfire and a few blocks of wood. should they do nothing, they don’t move back to where they were before, they die. so survival is important for the hearthlings, more important that silly ideas like “private property” or “working for money”. as the settlement is small, we also only get 1 hearthling every day immigrating to our new town, which is not so much a town as it is a few stockpiles and beds out in the open. eventually, we get the stone mason, the farmer, the shepherd, the blacksmith, and so on. our town defends itself with footmen, archers, horsemen, crossbowmen (maybe) and the like. and that’s fine, as our tiny settlement is now able to sustain itself. Eventually we construct mighty buildings and erect enormous walls and towers to keep the wilderness out and to make clear once and for all who owns this patch of land. and that’s fine. but, as was made clear before, we’ll eventually want to make multiple of these towns, not just one. the fact that people who are not at risk of dying are still working for free doing slave labour is odd. the fact that only 1 hearthling wants to move into your mighty fortress is odd. constructing walls is not end-game, it’s early-game. there will be more than controlling a single small population. but in order to be able to do this, we’ll also have to move away from micro-managing and towards macromanaging. we can’t keep telling our hearthlings to tear down THIS tree and to construct THAT building RIGHT THERE. when having 3-4 settlements, that’s too much to keep track of, especially when they are biomes apart. and at this point, we should not be getting 1 hearthling a day between all 4 of our settlements, nor should we be getting 4 hearthlings, 1 for each settlement. there needs to be a steady but large change somewhere in the middle of the game where gameplay shifts from keeping a few people alive to making your kingdom thrive. and here are a few suggestions of mine to suggest how to do this.

first of all, our only indicator of city strength is “net worth”, and buildings are worth a lot more than manufactured goods. however, I feel that some of my suggested ideas should be locked to “city sizes” - basically, combining the size of nearby houses with the number of those houses - if I build 50 small huts, then my city would be a “village”, but I could get the same from building 20 large 2-3 story houses, complete with 3 rooms, a bathroom, attic, basement, living room, front room, and kitchen. building 50 of those houses would upgrade it to “town”, and even more would upgrade it to “small city”. at certain city sizes, we get an increase in immigration. upon reaching the status of town, we should be getting a good 10 hearthlings coming every day, with a random variation. also, many jobs would be limited to the town size - a blacksmith would not want to move into a settlement, but would gladly move into a budding town (I know it’s promoted, but still). of course I’m thinking it might be better to keep the base-class locking down to a minimum, and so blacksmith might only be locked to small village, whereas weaponsmith and armoursmith would require a larger town in order to be promoted. the town size can be determined by looking at “buildings” (walls surrounding an area with a roof covering it) and seeing how close they are to each other - too far apart and they won’t be considered as being part of the same town. basically, each building would gain an “area of influence”, and the more buildings you pack together, the stronger that “area of influence” becomes. basically, if I build 1 hut, the area of influence is, what, 3 tiles away? a large house’s area of influence would be 6 tiles away. however, 4 huts close by (taking the same x-z area as a large house) would have an area of influence of 5 tiles away (this is from each house, so the total area “claimed” by the 4 houses would be only slightly smaller than the area a single large house would “claim”). this way, with a large enough city, you can build across rivers without splitting your city, as the area of influence that spreads from each building increases as the density of buildings increases. the effect increases greatly by surrounding your town with “town walls”, with large stone walls having a greater effect than pallisades. pallisades are temporary, though, and can be torn down easily, while stone walls are rather permanent, and take a lot of work to tear down. walls and wall-types will also be limited to city size, so no huge stone walls surrounding your settlement! only villages and up may construct walls, and villages can only construct pallisades. this also brings in the factor of multiple cities, but I’ll touch on that in a bit.

apart from normal labour jobs, there should be another class of jobs called the “management” class. jobs relating to micromanaging and macromanaging would be located here. there would also be a few labour classes in here as well (the mint, the stockpiler, etc), but those labour classes would focus on management (stockpiler organizes and moves goods from one stockpile to another, important for something another management job does. the minter creates coins, and upon promotion of a minter, hearthlings will demand pay). the first management class would be something like the secretary, who would pretty much stay at a desk for the most part, writing on papers. the secretary is required for every other management class (not upgrading from secretary to other classes, but you need to have a secretary in your town to be able to make the other classes, this continues higher up the management tree). the secretary would actually add more micromanaging options to the player, instead of less. it would add “private property” - you can set an area to be “owned” by certain individuals, entire groups, and entire jobs. by setting each plot of land to be “owned” by a different farmer, the farmers will all work on their own plots of land and not their neighbors (optionally it could be that if farmers have completed all of their own tasks and have nothing to do yet, they can help neighboring plots of land as well, but that’s entirely optional). this would have the added benefit of making it so they will only look for stuff inside of stockpiles/containers within their “private property” - farmers will drop their crops off in crates near their farms, carpenters will grab wood from their wood chest, etc. the stockpiler will move stuff around from one place to another based on priority of items, but as this has already been discussed in other threads I’ll leave that be for now. another neat feature of private property would be military-wise - by setting a militant group’s “private property” to being a path on the wall, those troops will patrol those areas. this would fulfill the need for a better patrol system, and allowing for there to be guard posts without setting attack flags which ignore a hearthlings hunger and sleepiness. in addition, we would be able to mark certain public properties - a stockpile (anything located in a chest with a lower priority than, say, 5 gets moved from that chest to the stockpile by the stockpiler), a diner (hearthlings will go here looking for food and places to sit), a barracks (as militant groups have a different public property setting, they can’t use private property to claim a place to sleep, as militant groups default to using private property as a patrol route. they need a separate option for sleeping and, in the case of troops outside town in a camp or outpost, food storage. also, this only pertains to militant groups, such as “all archers” and “all footmen” or “archer group 1” and “footman group b”, and not for regular groups or certain individuals which just so happen to be soldiers), and maybe even things like markets and whatnot.

as you go higher up the management tree, you’ll gain other abilities, such as the ability to found multiple towns. If you set up several buildings close to each other, an unclassified, unnamed “town” will automatically be created, with its area being the area of influence. you can later reclassify that “town”, so that if your buildings are actually a lookout tower, you can reclassify it to “outpost” (no population gain), or if they’re defenses you can reclassify it to “castle”. you can also manually set up an area as a new town, classify what kind of territory it is, and name it, but until you place several buildings within that “territory”, it will remain invisible to everyone else and not actually be claimed by you. so in MP, if I “claim” territory manually, but don’t build anything there, player 2 will not see that that territory is claimed, and can build in that territory or even claim it him/herself. once someone builds several buildings in that area, it is claimed by that person, and your manual claim is removed. also, if both you AND the other player build buildings in close proximity to each other, neither of you claim it, and neither of you lose your claim - instead, the claim will turn red and it will be “disputed territory”. this can be resolved either militarily (defeat the other players forces, destroy his buildings, etc) or peacefully (build a ton of buildings so that your area of influence far overpowers their area of influence, and you absorb their buildings into your own town). each town will keep track of its own population, net worth, etc. the higher up the management tree you go (IN EACH TOWN, the management in your huge town has no effect on the small settlement you just created, you will need to build up the other settlement into a town and hire management positions as well in order to receive management bonuses), the more jobs are handles autonomously - houses within the area of influence will be handled by the town automatically (you can set up certain areas to be only housing and the AI will select houses that you’ve saved that fit within that area as best as possible), although houses will not be set up outside town walls (if you want to expand your city further, you will need to do it manually and build ANOTHER wall further out so that the AI may take over again and construct your town automatically). positions will either be hired based off of demand or (in case of troops) a ratio that is set by the player (ex. 10% of citizens become troops, 20% of those are archers, 30% are footmen, etc). while jobs requested by the player in these large towns will require money, all automatic jobs are done by the hearthlings themselves without money coming from your pocket (except for management jobs, those you pay for every day/week/month). that also means that if you want to expand your town, there needs to be a demand for houses - if there is no demand for houses, no houses will be built unless you specifically order them to be built. this will also be dependent upon your town’s economy - a poor economy means a slower automatic progression, and a crashed economy means no progression at all. if you want your town to construct something but they have a crashed economy (and you will want to construct with the economy being crashed, in order to revive the economy), you will need to pay from pocket. that said, by this point you should also have a tax collector anyway, and should be earning money based on the economy and the number of hearthlings within a given town. this means if one town is thriving but another town is struggling, the money earned from the one town can be spent in the other town to make that town thriving as well, giving you 2 towns that are now providing you a large amount of capital.

troops can still be controlled manually, and so with your thriving towns surviving on their own, you now have the free time to wage war. select the troops from the population panel and move them into your new offensive group, and make them gather in a location. these troops will then leave the towns while still leaving your towns protected by the rest of the troops, and gather in the location specified awaiting further orders. your troops will require food and, while in an offensive group, will have a higher cost to maintain. they will also require a sort of mobile shelter in order to sleep at night, although there will still be patrols, so your entire army won’t be caught with their pants down when being attacked by the undead. offensive groups will also have their own area of influence, and will automatically embargo anything within their area of influence (more troops means greater area). this means that, if you surround an enemy town and station troops at all of their gates, that town is shut off from the world and cannot trade. the economy will start to suffer in towns that rely on trade, the food gained from farms will decrease as access to farmland located outside the town walls is now inaccessible, and in towns located within unfavourable terrains (such as bases stationed in wasteland biomes) will suffer major attrition maluses. that said, offensive troops stationed outside of such wasteland towns will ALSO suffer major attrition maluses - in arctic biomes, defenders have the home advantage and can deal with the cold because, as they were stationed there to begin wtih, they are equipped to deal with the cold. an ill-prepared army will face total annihilation even against the smallest armed forces in such a terrain, often long before the two armies even meet. general winter is a fearsome foe, after all. likewise, in the desert, your troops will become dehydrated standing vigilant out in the sun, and will begin to freeze as soon as the sun sets. if you don’t provide methods of staving off both the heat and the cold, your army will lose morale at a hefty rate, and may even suffer casualties from hypothermia, hyperthermia, and dehydration. even though it is hard to survive in such unfavourable terrains, the home advantage of such terrains makes them very easy to defend - once you manage to survive the problems yourself. the issues with such terrible terrains will make it so you may end up marching your army a long ways away simply to avoid these terrains, as the penalties of making your army march through the sun and the cold are huge, and can often be too much for one to handle. as such, a town may not need to place defenses in areas that are facing terrible terrain simply because the enemy will most likely not attack from that direction - it acts as a natural barrier, and the resources may be better spent elsewhere. this will also make it so an army that is well-prepared may want to strike from terrible terrain simply because your enemies defenses are weak in that area due to depending on the natural barrier. after all, mountains may keep humans from walking into your town, but a dwarf will be able to easily waltz right into your town through a mountain. a natural barrier to one person is a weak spot to another. what’s more, with sieging, any town that has trade blocked off also cannot provide taxes (unless it is the ONLY town that person owns. if you own more than 1 town, only the towns that are not embargoed may provide taxes. if all towns are embargoed, you may only receive taxes from a single town, most likely your largest town).

I also think there should be research in this game in multiple fields, and that researchers would also be located within the management classes. research will be conducted as a whole, regardless of towns, much like your taxes (and will be blocked if any of your towns have all exits embargoed by sieges, just like taxes). certain research fields will provide new jobs/classes, as well. for example, if guns/cannons are added to the game, they would be very late-gate techs, but would allow you to hire arquebusiers, brass cannons, and the like. while inaccurate, these are very powerful and can be trained at a very low level in the military tree (effectively they would be at the same level as footman, whereas crossbowman would be a tier 2 troop). now, based on this game’s time period, there won’t be much use for guns, and someone who bases their entire forces on guns will NOT overpower a civilization that uses entirely medieval weapons or magic (or both). in fact, early renaissance weapons would suffer from a lack of specialization/improvement. a diverse late-game army made up of mages, crossbowmen, longbowmen, knights, trebuchets, and the like, may be more powerful than the equivalent in arquebusiers and cannons. the downside is that it takes a lot of training for mages, crossbowmen, longbowmen and knights to be made, and trebuchets are expensive and take a long time to craft/prepare. arquebusiers and cannons can be made from the get-go (once researched) and require base materials, unlike knights who would require steel. powerful, yet simple vs strong yet complex.

other non-militant research can be related to magic (which could be militant), economy, agriculture, construction, etc. you may need to research the ability to make specialized classes, such as the bowyer, weaponsmith, armoursmith and leatherworker, jobs that craft better weapons and armour than the carpenter, blacksmith, or clothier. of course that is still military. sorry, I’m more knowledgeable about military than most other aspects, so if others could add to this, it’d help a lot.

I also mentioned trade. some towns, no matter how much you work on them, just will not survive on their own (wastelands). in order for these towns to survive, they must act in trade, which provides some resource in exchange for basic materials such as food, clothes, wood, or even water. bases such as those in the arctic (in the case of research) may not be able to provide any resources at all, and thus survive solely on player-enforced trade. players pay from pocket to have trade caravans provide necessities to hearthlings stationed in important areas that don’t provide physical materials. some towns will thrive on trade, and will provide you a huge amount of money. these will be based on position and resources available, as well as number of other civilizations. even if it’s something like a desert, setting up a trade town in the desert will allow your city to thrive more than a town located in fertile plains, solely because of the number of goods going in and out, raising the wealth of hearthlings in such places such cities are a good idea to classify as “city-states”, autonomous cities that you relinquish any and all control over - you can no longer manually construct anything, you cannot control the troops stationed and trained there, you cannot control the production of the cities, the only thing you gain from city-states is money (and trade goods, of course, but only if they trade it out to you). everything else is entirely controlled by AI. the reason you would want to turn it into a city-state? it will provide you with far more money than a normal town would, and the lack of control over the economics of the city would mean that trade would drastically increase as well. city-states are your money-makers and goods-providers when you don’t have certain goods. if you don’t have silk, and another empire does, the city state may be able to trade something you have for the silk, and then trade the silk to you, giving you access to these new resources. of course, city-states cannot trade for resources that do not exist. if no one that you know of has silk, there’s no way for them to get silk. if you place them too far away from the kingdom that has silk, once again you will likely not gain any silk. as towns that thrive off of trade, it is important that you place them in such a location that they will see a lot of traffic, and it is important you keep them from being conquered by any hostile neighbors.

if anyone could build on this in a discussion, I’d be happy. for now, I’m gonna go sit in front of an AC, I’m dying here. curse san diegan weather.


Genius I hope some of these ideas get into the actual game or become a mod!

1 Like

10 Hearthlings / day is probably a bit more than planned. I think I heard of a possible 70-ish total villager cap a long time ago. Anyways, the populations are still going to be more Sims-sized than Sim City-sized unless plans have changed drastically.

With that out of the way, I’d definitely love to see trade become more complex, Hearthlings get personal property after a while, and some of the other things to make the end-game feel better. Even with just double the population, the current Stonehearth gets micro-managey quick. Mostly automation wouldn’t be Stonehearth’s style, I don’t think. But a bit more of it as your city/ies grow(s) couldn’t hurt.


the problem I had was that looking at what they had planned for the final outcome of the game, it just wouldn’t be possible by keeping everything small-scale. with 70 villagers, quite a few of them are going to be stuck as farmers and hunters just to keep the rest from starving. you would need several cooks in order to cook the food. workers would be constructing, so you need a large number of workers at all times. you would also need a significant defense force, and as MP is planned, you ALSO need an offensive force. with more and more of the things needed to be done, locking it at small-scale is just impossible, unless you make it so 5 soldiers can easily defend your town against satan, and all you need to defeat an enemy empire is 5 soldiers. and that would be just silly. in order to participate in many of the planned mid/end-game activities, there would have to be automation. otherwise, there’s just no way you would have enough time to be able to participate. there isn’t even enough time to do all the micromanaging as it is, and the game’s nowhere near complete, and that’s just with 12 people. that’s why I brought up that for small settlements, it would be sim-sized, while once you get to the large towns, your game would be more sim-city-sized. micromanaging is still there, but in order to participate kingdom-wise, the micromanaging would have to be cut out. many empire games I’ve played do this, but they implement it in a terrible way - they have an options menu where you can enable/disable automation for certain tasks. I say this is terrible because even at the very, very beginning, you can just set everything to automate and you’ll be set for quite a while. that takes all the fun out of the game. but once you start conquering lands, you don’t have the time nor the ability to manage all of your land, and so you have to set it to automate. by setting it up in the way I described, where certain jobs would increase/decrease micromanaging and change the gameplay of that town, we make it so the early-game gameplay is still fun and busy, and the late-game isn’t clogged with telling your workers to pick up a piece of wood. and it’s not like there aren’t disadvantages to this - for starters, your people start demanding money, and you lose some control of them. you do not want that to happen without being prepared. but at the same time, you don’t want to try facing other kingdoms without it due to the penalties of NOT switching, and not just because of automation. maybe there’s a population limit for the small-scale side of the game. there’s also job limits, and you don’t gain access to key features without switching (not like you could even use them even if they weren’t locked out due to micromanaging).

what I’m proposing is a merge of small- and large-scaled gameplay. and players do not need to ever switch to large-scaled gameplay if they don’t wish to. there can be MP servers that are solely small-scaled, and there’s also the possibility of making a game-mode where players start the game with an already developed town, so they can skip the initial grind and get right to the large-scaled gameplay. personally I think that’s skipping all the fun, but I’m not everyone.

if we keep it locked to small-scale gameplay, we cannot have large-scaled gameplay without it turning out super silly (5 soldiers wiping out a kingdom). but likewise, I don’t believe the game should be locked to large-scaled gameplay. we’re not playing stronghold, so there’s no need to stick purely to warfare and the like. and I feel this game has the potential to be a merging of the two styles of play

Edit: I can see why my proposal might not be very good though, as it takes the focus away from the hearthlings and puts it on the kingdom as a whole. I added the discuss bit in the title because I wanted to see what other people thought of my ideas, whether they had anything to add, or if there was anything they feel won’t fit or work for whatever reason in the game. I’d also like to see alternate ideas for how we can get from the point we’re at to the point that’s being planned, with players able to manage multiple cities and face other players/AI civs, even going so far as to besiege cities and castles. The things I’ve suggested would be hard to impliment, especially with the hearthlings and buildings/designs not being ignored like most large-scale games do. generally, small-scale is ignored altogether, and when it ISN’T ignored, it’s generally something that’s so hard that there’s no way you could get to something large-scale to begin with (like dwarf fortress and its “FUN”). similar city-buildings games like Gnomoria and Towns I’ve bought but never managed to really get into, as even though I love hand-crafting my cities, there was just very little to the gameplay element (and Towns especially flopped, and is no longer in development). when the game is released, I don’t want people to look at it and go “it’s another Towns”. This game has the potential to be much more than just “another Towns game”, and I’d love to see how it goes about doing this. and I’d like to see how other people think they could better handle that process. That’s why this discuss thread is here. it’s as much a suggestion to devs as it is a discussion thread to fellow gamers.

whenever I talk a lot, I get the feeling I’m being really rude n_n’ I’m just really blunt, so sorry if I come off as trying to shut anyone up or something like that, or that my opinion’s better than yours (except when it is lol). can you tell I’ve had issues with discussions before? lol

Long. Anyway, where was I? Oh yes, time to insert my opinions.

Although, as previously mentioned, automation just ain’t Stonehearth’s style, I agree a little automation couldn’t hurt. Perhaps you control one town and the rest you create/conquer are automated? I dunno.

The issue with this is just how straight-up taxing it would be on the AI. I’ve got to go, but for now, I’ll attempt to quote the end of a very recent stream.

“The hearthlings have a culture of sharing… otherwise the AI couldn’t handle it.”


I called it private property only because you could set individuals to that property. the private property doesn’t prevent others from using it, it makes it so a specific group only looks inside of their “private property”. for example, if I have 5 hearthlings, 1 of which is named “bob”, and I place down 5 beds and give “bob” 1 of the beds as “private property”. no matter which bed he’s closer to, he will run to the bed inside his “private property”. the other 4 hearthlings though? it depends on which bed they’re closest to. if they’re closest to bob’s bed, they’ll use bob’s bed, and bob will have to wait or sleep on the floor (or as suggested as optional in the parenthesis with the farmers example, if and only if there’s no suitable bed in his “private property” will he search the rest of the world to find a bed that is suitable). rather than a fence to keep everyone else out, I meant to use “private property” as a means to keeping a group in. I think limiting the pathfinder to “only within these areas” would be less taxing than “somewhere within the rendered world”. if looking for a chest, for example, they would only register 1 chest, and not the 50 you have in your town. this should simplify the pathfinder by limiting potential stockpiles to “only within this area”. could you make that area huge and complex? sure, but that’d be stupid and extremely inefficient, and if you break the system by doing so, you kinda deserve it. adding in the concept of “property” will also help in the event of multiple towns - if I have 2 towns, and 1 town has all of its stockpiles full, I don’t want my hearthling to march across thousands of blocks to the other town the place a block of wood on the floor. he should only look for places to place stuff within the town he’s a part of. and, if there’s no place, then don’t pick up the block of wood, because there’s nowhere to store it. instead of searching the world for a stockpile, he will search the city, and if he has “private property”, he will limit that even further to only within areas you designate.

obviously “private property” is a poor term for what I’m thinking of, but I can’t think of any other term that makes sense.

You could just reduce the amount of wall of texts @____@ (or split them into smaller ones)

It’s hard to read really long paragraphs… Or at least uncomfortable with the Discourse formatting.


I’m sorry, I’m really prone to walls of text lol


I think you’ve got this backwards… the goal of Stonehearth has always been as little micromangement as the team could manage in the game. They’ve stated they’d like for you to be able to sit back and watch your town flourish without having to handle every little mundane detail.


most of the things I suggested being automated wouldn’t be anything major. aside from housing and workstations, most automation would simply be adding farm/grazeland and forester’s planting area, based purely on the demand for these things (farms will only be added if the town’s short on food, grazeland will only increase if we need more sheep, housing constructed to handle the immigrations, etc etc). anything that’s important or in any way damaging to the terrain would be under your command, even late game. mining is too touchy to leave it up to an AI, so ore collection would be up to the player. not to mention it’s too easy to completely ruin the terrain via mining, so it’s too likely the AI would mess up your favourite land formation, so that’s obviously a no-go. constructing any kind of major building or fortification would also be up to the player - while basic stuff like housing and workstations may be constructed automatically (albeit only within areas you’ve designated), stuff like town/castle walls, castle towers, and other such features would be made by the player. it’s not like I want the AI to play the game for me, I just don’t want to constantly pull away from the war I’m waging to tell my workers exactly where to place their 500th, 501st, and 502nd houses. I’m a little busy at the moment, so I’d rather not have to constantly go back to town to see what it is I need to do. unless it’s ore/stone and they’ve ran out of it, I don’t want to be dragged back for them to ask me “what do”. they have the resources, they should be able to take care of themselves while I’m gone.

urgh walls of text, I can’t help iiiittt

it’s ok, it’s ok :smile:


A major thing that will help is when the AI gets stable and optimized enough that you can just drag out one area and let your Hearthlings mine out a mountain or clear a whole forest without ignoring smaller more important things, lagging, or crashing. So much less manually selecting areas!


but who would want to eliminate an ENTIRE FOREST? or, even worse, tear down a mountain! we’re talking prime frosted castle territory, here! lol

I’m going to sleep for now. bleh. I’ll be back at around midnight. hopefully I’ll have a bunch of people posting ideas that I can bounce back and forth when I get back.

Some really interesting ideas here. This understanding of the need for micro to macro transition perfectly encapsulates the next stage of Stonehearth’s development as of March 2017. It’s time for the devs to seriously plan these features out, now that the early game experience has reached such perfection.

To the devs (who are doing such brilliant work): if you are already doing so (which I would probably expect), my apologies, but if not, then I question whether you are committed to allowing us to build large(ish) scale hearthling societies as opposed to forever villages. Perhaps, this was never promised, but it would still be extremely painful for Stonehearth to remain a small-scale experience. Pirates,ninjas and politicians seemed to suggest some form of governance, however. If our vision for this game does not align with yours, please tell us. You CANNOT lead us on. Will we ever have hearthling kingdoms (at the very least >300 hearthlings with little micromanagement, trading, economics and governance). If that is not a possibility then I will not be back to these forums ever again (unless circumstances change).

1 Like

Having some sort of research tree would be a good way to give a mid/late game gold sink, but I have no idea what they have planned for future classes and higher tiers of town development. So I’ll just wait and see lol.

Our maps would need to get waaaaay bigger for >300 hearthlings. Most of the time I don’t even like my crafters to have their homes in their shops. Those kind of numbers would mean no mobs could spawn because I’d be using the whole map as my kingdom.

To me that seems counter to the quaint storybook feeling this game evokes. A hundred hearthlings seems feasible, but when you’re talking hundreds with very little micro management we’re starting to sound like some sort of semi idle phone app kind of game (unless folks are expecting this to be a civilization type game). You no longer really care what stats and traits your hearthlings have anymore because it no longer matters. Your hearthlings are no longer “people” they’re just numbers. The devs wouldn’t put so much time into making hearthlings a little more unique if it didn’t matter. I think that very much goes against the concept and style. It seems quite impersonal and that’s not this game. Just my opinion.