Poll: What unit scale you use?

[dedmoroz]

It would be nice to know what unit scales people use the most.
I always use huge units because it makes battles much more exciting with 6000-7000 thousand men on the field :charge:

[Silver Rusher]

I use normal, but only cos my comp can't handle anything bigger.

[Maltz]

After learning that Roman units are 80-men sized historically, I switched from normal to large to give a little more reality feeling. ~:) Haven't tried "huge" yet... might be quite fun except I guess the timer will always run out during city assaults?

[YAKOBU]

I'm also on large as it best fits my system spec, whatever that may be :dizzy2:

[CrusaderMan]

With my old pentium 1600 normal.


With my new athlon 64? Huge... ~D

[*Ringo*]

I'm on Huge at the moment but i think next campaign i might switch down, just for a bit more maneuverability.

*Ringo*

[aluenser]

I'm using normal at the moment but can't vote.
I think about switching to large, though.

[aw89]

I use large, I want to set it to huge but I dont want to set down the unit details... (all is on lowest exept unit detail and unit scale... can't wait for my new graphics card, 1 month and 4 days to go!)

[Basileus]

i always use the default option in mtw stw and now rtw so large for me

[The_678]

I use normal cuz I can't go higher. If I had a choice I would use large.

[Sin Qua Non]

Large for me. I'd love to use huge but it's just a bit over the envelope at times. Ho ho, when I build my next computer though... ho ho! :charge:

[Lord Ovaat]

My rig works fine on huge setting, so that's what I use. It does slow a bit when I increase speed to 2X or 3X, but that's to be expected.

[Szun]

Huge all the way...
what is unitdetails?:D I dont need details if I run a 20 unitarmy, wich gives me enough to think about in max overview camera setting. Only thing bothers me is the AI cheating...moveing troops outside the boundery of the map because it thinks it must form them in a single line no matter what :P

[The_Emperor]

large.

On normal your units are so tiny you just can't put up a decent fight with em... Unless you have a Pike Phalanx type-Unit with extra men, your not going to have much fun and your men do not fight well in long battles.

[ranpiz]

on the campaign map it seems that the AI cannot deal with huge unit sizes.

it will deplete the population of virtually all of its cities down to 400

[BDC]

Huge.

I love to see the bodies piling up in the streets. Well would be piling up, but they don't have any sort of physics on them, so sort of carpeting the street at any rate.

Plays well considering it's on a P4 2.4ghz. Only time I had a problem was 4 armies, all with big units and elephants and stuff, around a huge city in a custom battle. 4 fps rocks!

[NicSO]

I use large unit scale but modified so my unit has 100 soldiers, warbands 152 etc.

I tryed t play with huge unit scale but its hard to control them in cities, even 100 soldiers in unit is almost to much.

BDC, I think your problem is not in the Processor, It is in your GPU. Which one do u have?

[Oaty]

I'm using normal at the moment but can't vote.
I think about switching to large, though.

Maybe a different username would help get you promoted quicker.

I use huge. What I wonder is what was CA's original plan for unit sizes. It was 60 for STW and 60 for MTW with varying sizes for spears and cavalry and a few specialty units.

I'm thinking they were shooting for large unit sizes due to the fact that Roman units are 80 men in size but due to the fact of the need for higher processing power and appealing to the market as whole they went with 40 so that it would work on most systems.

After a quite a few battles on the campaign map I have to close the game and restart it. After that it will sart laggin with just 1000 men on the field. No big deal now that I know where the problem comes from and it seems to be related to battles with lots of missile troops.

Also for those of you that want to see how many men your system can handle. Go into custom battles and keep selecting peasants until the game gives you a message that says you have gone above the reccomended limit.The game looks at your hardware and makes an estimation of where your cutoff is at. For me it is 6000 I believe.

For me the real cutoff is 4500 men. It can handle 4500 to 5500 men with a slight lag and above that it gets a bit annoying.

[hoom]

26 units at huge (240)
My flatmates' inferior PC also gives the warning there.

I generally play at large.
Huge has too many side effects like horde formation charriots not fitting in cities...

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

Large

Gives a better phalanx / infanttry feeling than normal setting, and is ok for my computer (I can handle huge in 1v1... but in 2v2 or 3v3 MP games, huge is too demanding)

Louis,

[Rosacrux redux]

No lagging problems here with huge (I only play huge - same in MTW). My little beauty (Athlon 3200+ and 5900 vidcard) can handle it perfectly, with only a little choppies when accelerating the clock.

Huge unit size gives a better feeling, a more realistic one I might say. The cavalry and especially chariots (chariot archer, at least) spread out a bit too much though...

[Owen]

on the campaign map it seems that the AI cannot deal with huge unit sizes.

it will deplete the population of virtually all of its cities down to 400
This is an issue on normal unit size for most of the barbarian cities as well. Only Patavia, Alesia and Corduba are definitely immune, though it's possible Londinium can also be added to that list.

I have seriously considered switching to small units to reduce this problem and to decrease pathfinding problems during city assaults. That I haven't done so is because I think combat will throw up some very strange results and because I am concerned that the city garrison effect will not scale with unit size, an effect that would make playing with small units impossible.

[SpencerH]

Normal size units. My PC can handle more, I just havent bothered to increase the unit size. Maybe I will do so when the patch comes out.

[Shaitan]

Played my first campaign with large units and now my second with huge. The battles give now a nice epic feeling. But if the AI has problems on the strategic map by depleting the population I will switch back to large.

Shaitan

[Praylak]

This is an issue on normal unit size for most of the barbarian cities as well. Only Patavia, Alesia and Corduba are definitely immune, though it's possible Londinium can also be added to that list.
Not just for Barbarians, but some Eastern nations as well. I rather like it, and gives a sense of realism unlike most other strategy games. The problem is with the AI. It tends to think of soldiers as a infinite resource and uses them as such. For example, it will send wave after waves of full stack armies against your well defended cities without changing it's tactics. It just figures the next stack of 1200 spearmen should break through, and if they don't another stack should do it next time. After 20 years, 10 attempts, and a lost of 10's of thousands, your now making your highest level troops but the AI isn't because its cities only have 1900 population. Some factions like Carthage don't have this problem because growth can keep up with the constant recruitment the AI policy uses.

[Tricky Lady]

Large. Just tried it first time I launched a campaign and haven't changed it since. Perhaps I should try to play on huge once too; I guess my pc could handle that too (though not sure).
TL

[Uesugi Kenshin]

I use large for campaign and huge for everything else, because if Rome is like the other 2 games the build times will increase if you up the unit size to huge, and I prefer to be able to build units faster.


Oaty how long does it take you to become a member?

[Razor1952]

Huge, first and foremost as it adds another strategic dimension to the campaign map, {that is getting your troops really depletes population early on and hence city growth, later on you can feed cities 240 unit peasants and release to more quickly attain those core big cities you need to get your advanced troops. Also you can deplete overpopulates cities etc.etc. . }

Also as above huge battles are great fun.

[parrrrk]

I use Large.
Huge setting is unmanagable( at least for me ), and have serious lagging problem. My system : P4 3.0c, Radeon 9600XT, 512MB RAM. It's ok unless two large armies start killing each other. When the battle is nearly over, fps was dropped to almost below 10( didn't measured exactly ). I don't want sacrifice any graphical settings, so I use Large.

[Owen]

Not just for Barbarians, but some Eastern nations as well. I rather like it, and gives a sense of realism unlike most other strategy games. The problem is with the AI.
Well, the small cities in the north and northeast represent the fact that people in those areas didn't live in large settled cities, not that no-one lived there at all. Obviously the overall population was still considerably lower than in Italy, Egypt and Greece, for example, but it is hard, perhaps impossible for the game to model well.

It tends to think of soldiers as a infinite resource and uses them as such. For example, it will send wave after waves of full stack armies against your well defended cities without changing it's tactics. It just figures the next stack of 1200 spearmen should break through, and if they don't another stack should do it next time. After 20 years, 10 attempts, and a lost of 10's of thousands, your now making your highest level troops but the AI isn't because its cities only have 1900 population. Some factions like Carthage don't have this problem because growth can keep up with the constant recruitment the AI policy uses.
This is true.