Your unit size

[Darth Nihilus]

What unit size are playing on (or going to play on)? For my first campaign I'm playing on normal. In RTW I played on large however, and I probably will in my next campaign.

[GeWee]

Always Huge. It doesn't matter if I have to put everything else on minimum but I want the units to be as big as possible. Which is why it's kind of disappointing that MTW2's unit size (on huge) is smaller than Rome's..

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Really? What are the sizes in M2?

[Merlin's Apprentice]

Huge
nothing else is satisfying
Massive deaths

[GeWee]

Really? What are the sizes in M2?

150/112/75/60 compared to Rome's 240/120/60/40

[Lord Dazed & Confused]

my computer still has to recover from my attempt to play on huge..... so its large with medium to low setting for me.

[Dooz]

Is it just me or is the title of this thread and the accompanying "poll" kind of amusing? *snickers like a 6th grader at the 7th grade level humour of it*

150/112/75/60 compared to Rome's 240/120/60/40

Seems the only part really downsized is the biggest units. The next is relatively the same, and the other two are actually larger. I'll be going with Large units when I get the game tomorrow, and do some test runs in custom battles to see what settings will be able to handle Huge best for future reference.

[Darth Nihilus]

Lol, Wonderland that's pretty funny. I guess thats what I get when I try to make a poll at 1 somthing in the morning.

[Bob the Insane]

I am on huge out of habit from RTW...

But I am not sure if I am having a better game or not... I used to play on Normal in MTW and found the units far more manouverable. Though I will say the fighthing does take a statisfyingly long time to resolve on this unit size...

What is a realistic unit size for the medieval period? I mean I have seen history books reference longbow men being gathered in numbers like 60 or 70 so that would encourage normal unit sizes but I am not sure...

[Faenaris]

I voted Huge. Nothing beats lots a men and lots a fightin' .

[Bob the Insane]

I have to say that for my restarted campaign (as the English with the Timescale set to 0.5) I selected Norml units...

I did this because of trying to setup my archers in Huge Units. It was plain awkward.

I mean in RTW seen the huge units looked appropriate and there was not much on the battle field to get in the way so the big individual units worked real nice. (Plus Normal was almost pathetically small)

But as in MTW the battlefields in M2TW are a bit more crowed now and the smaller units feel more authentic to me. They fit with the environments. It does not take a small lifetime to get them on and off the walls of a settlement. So the more crowded battlefields along with the slightly larger Normal unit sizes have me playing with Normal for now.

[nameless]

The thing with the smaller units is probably because of the graphics overhaul. In RTW the computer always said, "your computer may lag" at over 6300 troops.

Now the computer says, "Your computer may lag" at over 3500 troops but I can play up to 5000 no problem.

[BigTex]

The thing with the smaller units is probably because of the graphics overhaul. In RTW the computer always said, "your computer may lag" at over 6300 troops.

Now the computer says, "Your computer may lag" at over 3500 troops but I can play up to 5000 no problem.

Heh yeah the graphics are something awsome. I'd compare them to Oblivion but its hard to compare the two. Was kind of hoping they'd have HDR lighting also and not just bloom. M2TW's graphics have done something few games could do, they make you feel the game. The field battles I've yet to expierence any lag on, even with everything at max and huge settings. But the castles are laggy alot of times, beautiful as they are they lag. Though I'm wondering how much of it could be related to the ladder pathing issue. Now if people can just figure out how to edit the graphic files EB2 will be jaw droppinger.

[hoof]

I tried huge once in RTW, and wondered why noone (esp. the AI) had any advanced troops. Then I found out that huge depleted town population by 2x vs large, meaning no-one was ever able to get a city to grow due to wartime demands (on large, you can train a 120 man unit every turn and still grow the towns, unless they were under about 3000 people). After I found that out, I stopped playing huge so that I could see (and use) the more advanced troops in the game and not have a map full of 400-people towns.

Unless this has been changed for MTW2, I probably won't play on huge either. I really hope they fixed this, as it really pulled the game down (IMO), and I like fighting with 2000-3000 man armies!

[Scipio Africano]

Can't remember if you pay more for bigger units also.
Most units around the Archers 300 INf 500-600 Cav 900

I'm on large now and I can't imagine paying even more than that for a single HCav unit.

[Akka]

"huge", and it's damn too small.

I want the same unit size than in RTW, at least, damnit

[The Spartan (Returns)]

150/112/75/60 compared to Rome's 240/120/60/40

great! cant wait to play on normal. 75 is normal is right?

[Sir Robin]

I play on large setting but I might switch up or down. Defending during a siege can be a real pain with how little room you have to place units and no dismount option.

[Lusted]

Play on huge, i have an uber pc, and unit recruitment doesn't affect settlement populations like in RTW.

[Bijo]

Good I found a thread about this.


I usually play on Normal, because the units have an okay normal number, and it's easier to maneuver tactically, and it takes less performance. I've also tried Large and while I like this size setting, I already noticed worse unit handling barge in.

In Rome it was really out of control and chaotic to control (which is good maybe, arguably), but in M2TW the settings are better taken care of, and there's an overall good control whether you play Small, Normal, Large, or Huge.

The advantage of bigger units is also that you will have more men left after a battle. I think I'll try Large again.

[baron_Leo]

Yeah siege-s with huge unit size are quite a pain. Even on normal it is damned difficult to arrange the units properly (especially cav). I played on normal until now, now I have a stronger PC and playing on huge. The battles are way cooler, but much less handling. And I like to run around on the battlefield with my cav using every opportunity to flank (BTW a real succesful charge on hoge...it is just cool...it is...orgasmatic - okay maybe that was euphemical:-)). On huge it's just a pain:-)

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Playing on large right now. More than normal, which is too small for me.

[katank]

Playing with normal. Feels pretty good to me. With bigger sizes, I get more maneuverability issues with cav esp. in cities.

[Blackboots]

I want to start by saying how impressed I am at the lack of middle-school-level responses to this poll, given the title. This forum consistently proves itself to be one of the very few that rise above the squalor of most game forums. It must have a big health bonus from one of its improvements...

On topic, I use large units. The normal size just lacks any kind of epic feel to me, and my compy can't handle huge. I built it with components that were cutting-edge... when the original MTW came out. I've upped the video card and added a gig of ram since then, but that's it, and unfortunately that's all it's gonna be for a while to come.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

My unit size is Huge!

I want to start by saying how impressed I am at the lack of middle-school-level responses to this poll, given the title. This forum consistently proves itself to be one of the very few that rise above the squalor of most game forums. It must have a big health bonus from one of its improvements...

Har! And welcome to the Org, Blackboots.

[Somebody Else]

I play on normal, I'm not sure I trust my computer to cope with huge. As for the smaller unit sizes compared to RTW... well, is it not the case that armies didn't even approach the size of Roman armies &c. until, well, sometime in the XVIIth, or XVIIIth centuries?

Oh, and Alex... huge is all well and good, but if it huge ain't moving, and you don't get any play...

[Tuidjy]

I tried playing on huge and large, but I hated the way units
behaved in cities, dealt with obstructions, and lost cohesion.
My PC was doing fine, but I was tearing my hair out :-(
Now I am playing on normal, and even then, I keep a couple
of heavy cavalry units understrenght, because I enjoy the
mobility and quick maneuvers.

[IrishArmenian]

I have problems running normal on the lowest settings.

[Musashi]

What's your unit size preferance?

That's rather a personal question, don't you think?

[Von Nanega]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I tried playing on huge and large, but I hated the way units
behaved in cities, dealt with obstructions, and lost cohesion.
My PC was doing fine, but I was tearing my hair out :-(
Now I am playing on normal, and even then, I keep a couple
of heavy cavalry units understrenght, because I enjoy the
mobility and quick maneuvers.

Yah, but I found large units work fine!