Adorbs

UNIT SIZE: Medium vs Large ?

HaZE7HaZE7 Senior MemberPosts: 431Registered Users
What is your opinion?
What do you like/dislike about medium/large unit size?

To start:
-Missile units are at a disadvantage in large size. example: matchlocks cannot fit as many men in the front row.
Post edited by HaZE7 on

Comments

  • (Darkelf) Temper(Darkelf) Temper Senior Member Posts: 541Registered Users
    edited January 2012
    Hi HaZE7 !

    No Ultra setting option...I'm saddened =(

    Anyway,large is my preference between these two settings.I'm a fan of large scale engagements,the larger the better.

    What I like about the larger settings is units will stay in the fight longer (mostly),giving more tactical options rather than just relying on uber damage wether it be ranged/cavalry or melee.


    Temper
  • SecuterSecuter Senior Member Posts: 1,693Registered Users
    edited January 2012
    I'll vote for large unit size. Your units are more durable. Ranged and cav are not as strong in Large as in medium and I like that (:
    Make a Medieval 3!
    More units.
    More interested in European history.
    Different cultures.
    More factions.
    Not that many gun powder troops, it's not a new Empire I want.
  • st3nm4nst3nm4n Senior Member Posts: 180Registered Users
    edited January 2012
    ultra bow units do better in ultra like in medium everything does its thing better lines hold longer much more tactical and much more epic when i play ultra i always think that the game was made for this setting and not for large so why mm is large seems stupid to me gr st3n
  • Chris lolChris lol Senior Member Posts: 1,436Registered Users
    edited January 2012
  • JihadJoeJihadJoe Senior Member Posts: 166Registered Users
    edited January 2012
    Large without a doubt.
  • RATTUE1RATTUE1 Senior Member Posts: 122Registered Users
    edited January 2012
    i dont mind aslong as i look to notice in MM which it is as i often get a nasty shock.
  • HaZE7HaZE7 Senior Member Posts: 431Registered Users
    edited January 2012
    Secuter wrote: »
    I'll vote for large unit size. Your units are more durable. Ranged and cav are not as strong in Large as in medium and I like that (:

    funny, these are the same reasons why I prefer medium.
    Large is 'easy mode' for melee rushers.

    --

    This is not a poll people, this is a discussion. Discuss.
  • Valkyria BloodlineValkyria Bloodline Senior Member Posts: 215Registered Users
    edited January 2012
    I prefer small so I can win the game with matchlocks.


















    jk, I prefer large settings because it is the most balance setting their is, no unit is stronger.
  • HaZE7HaZE7 Senior Member Posts: 431Registered Users
    edited January 2012
    I prefer large settings because it is the most balance setting their is, no unit is stronger.

    Please substantiate your claim.
    I would argue that large size favors melee infantry.

    Paraphrasing goldilocks; medium is just right.
    Rush or skirmish are viable.
  • AMPAMP Senior Member Posts: 1,225Registered Users
    edited January 2012
    Inbetween large and medium with units being balanced around that unit size.

    Matchlocks being able to fire 2 ranks deep without rank fire and any more ranks deep create rotating lines to shoot and matchlocks never being able to reach such high reload speeds faster than a bow...

    Bows with avg range of 175 that cost cheaper, but can't be vetted to the point where they can incinerate units in no time even on the move.

    The removal of cavalry 1st strike where no matter what cav unit charges a sword unit the cav always gets almost 0 kills on the charge.
  • Julius_CaesarJulius_Caesar Senior Member Posts: 330Registered Users
    edited January 2012
    Whenever i play Spammers it always happens to be on medium settings so i have a hatred towards it, that brings me to the next point as well. Why on earth does the lowest size win on MM?why do they get their preference?

    The game is also just more awesome on higher settings. with medium and small the units just look stupid and it doesnt show the massive scale battles that the total war series is really known for. I played a MM game on ultra once and it was one of the best battles i have played.
  • spicykoreanspicykorean Senior Member Posts: 1,632Registered Users
    edited January 2012
    Others have mentioned it, but the main benefit that I see about Large or even Ultra is that every unit has more staying power.

    Longer missile skirmishes, more cav micro opportunities, longer melee, etc.
  • JihadJoeJihadJoe Senior Member Posts: 166Registered Users
    edited January 2012
    Alright... So to clarify why I prefer large unit size.

    Aesthetics. It looks better.
    Staying power. Longer battles tend to have far more tactical opportunities arising. This makes them more interesting.

    Reasons medium doesn't seem to be so excellent.

    Battles seem to be won in an instant, and there is not much opportunity for the tide of a fight to be turned, or the balance to change. Shorter battles remove tactical opportunites from the game.


    Although I do think that if medium and small unit size battles from the game were removed from the game, bows should be made more effective for their cost.
  • Billy RuffianBilly Ruffian Moderator UKPosts: 25,569Registered Users, Moderators
    edited January 2012
    I'm sure I read somewhere that the smaller sizes are there for people whose machines are not able to cope with the full sized units. So, if you play someone whose machine can barely run the game, you will be in small unit size automatically.

    What I'm saying is that it's not always a deliberate choice by the player - that's all he's got available sometimes.

    "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts - for support rather than illumination." (Andrew Lang)

    |Takeda| Yokota Takatoshi

    Forum Terms and Conditions

    "We wunt be druv". iot6pc7dn8qs.png
  • Valkyria BloodlineValkyria Bloodline Senior Member Posts: 215Registered Users
    edited January 2012
    I'm sure I read somewhere that the smaller sizes are there for people whose machines are not able to cope with the full sized units. So, if you play someone whose machine can barely run the game, you will be in small unit size automatically.

    What I'm saying is that it's not always a deliberate choice by the player - that's all he's got available sometimes.

    While it is true for some in the community, I believe that the graphic card stated when adjusting graphic settings should be scanned in multiplayer and locked on the unit size that the card is able to run in MP; therefore, unit size setting in the graphic setting menu should only applied to SP.
  • spicykoreanspicykorean Senior Member Posts: 1,632Registered Users
    edited January 2012
    I'm sure I read somewhere that the smaller sizes are there for people whose machines are not able to cope with the full sized units. So, if you play someone whose machine can barely run the game, you will be in small unit size automatically.

    What I'm saying is that it's not always a deliberate choice by the player - that's all he's got available sometimes.

    The game will automatically downgrade graphic settings if your machine can't handle it, but it will NOT automatically reduce unit size. That's something that the player has to set manually regardless of machine specs.
  • Billy RuffianBilly Ruffian Moderator UKPosts: 25,569Registered Users, Moderators
    edited January 2012
    That's what I mean - if your card is only able to run small or medium in MP, that is all the other guy can use as well even if he has full ultra settings.

    "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts - for support rather than illumination." (Andrew Lang)

    |Takeda| Yokota Takatoshi

    Forum Terms and Conditions

    "We wunt be druv". iot6pc7dn8qs.png
  • Chris lolChris lol Senior Member Posts: 1,436Registered Users
    edited January 2012
    Even if they dont grab one standardised size, at least fix the stupid bug where it says "unit size: large" when in reality its small or medium. Unit size matters a LOT for army selection, and it should be displayed correctly.


    Its not that i use fire by rank matchlocks, but everyone understands that a fire by rank matchlock will be decent in large size, and completely useless in small size. Same thing goes for many other things. In smaller sizes charge is a lot better for instance.
  • spicykoreanspicykorean Senior Member Posts: 1,632Registered Users
    edited January 2012
  • ViivrabeViivrabe Senior Member Posts: 434Registered Users
    edited January 2012
    Large, because i like the ability to still actually distinguished from combat and not loose 90% of my force (i still loose alot, but sometimes the the fighting gets them into a shape that allows me to pull a unit out of combat and 10 paces away into the rear of an enemy unit. i still loose a huge chunk of the unit, but its not the instant death of 80% of those troops {and the 100% garentee of routing before the first guy gets there})
    Point is, there is a reason that the ESRB does not rate online [play].

    A Knight in shining armor is a knight who has never had his metal truly tested.
  • LucullusLucullus Senior Member Posts: 156Registered Users
    edited January 2012
    Medium for the reasons Haze pointed out
  • Hidden GunmanHidden Gunman Moderator Posts: 4,606Moderators
    edited January 2012
    Large size.

    If I see someone has chosen medium size, it's because they are probably out to exploit something, so I drop. No point in wasting my time on that sort of player.
    Yes, it's me.

    Gungho |Takeda| Yamagato Masakage

    You have spoken with clarity of thought and rhetorical flourish...you have surely earned the favour of the mods.

    If you didn't, click here...
  • AresGodofWar1214AresGodofWar1214 Senior Member Posts: 138Registered Users
    edited January 2012
    Large, melee infantry is good, bows and matchlocks are good, harder to snipe generals, units can cover larger areas, and I'm just more comfortable with it.
  • vapera29vapera29 Member Posts: 73Registered Users
    edited January 2012
    Am i weird that i like small unit size?
    all my campaigns are on small and quite often the last man standing in my units are the unique ones. You know if you have a ashigaru unit you get like almost centurion style samurai.
    Quite often the only unit in my avatars bodyguard is the avatar. Also units dont route as quick because you dont get that concerned casualties because that is fixed number.
    I actually wish their was tiny unit size. PS winter attrition sucks in small unit sizes quite often i lose nearly half my army to it.
  • StrakerYriusStrakerYrius Senior Member Posts: 249Registered Users
    edited January 2012
    Small unit sizes make missile units too OP

    If two units concentrate shooting on one of yours the unit will be dead before you can react if the game is only just a little bit laggy.
Sign In or Register to comment.