What's the most important thing: amount of men or graphics?

[aarons got funky fresh]

Until I can see 40,000 men vs. 40,000 men like a true battle used to be, I will never be entirely satisfied with a Total War game. Even if the graphics for the battles have to be more conservative than M2TW - I want realism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Gettysburg

93,921 vs. 71,699 (about 23,000 losses on each side)

Are you seriously going to tell me that in Empire: Total War, the largest army per side is 4,000 men or less? Should this be the case, my friends, it would be epic fail.

Kinda stupid, no offense.

Youd spend waaaaay too much time on pause, and there would be just too much micromanagement, I like being able to look at my units fighting, I dont want to spend the whole time on birds eye view under pressure.

[ComnenusTheOne]

Huge amount of men, very high graphics....i settle for nothing less.

[501st Legion]

How about the Battlefield A.I.? Frankly it wouldn't really bother me if ETW had M2TW graphics if I could lose on "very hard" in a custom battle due to the cunning computer.

[Valerius Tiberius]

Until I can see 40,000 men vs. 40,000 men like a true battle used to be, I will never be entirely satisfied with a Total War game. Even if the graphics for the battles have to be more conservative than M2TW - I want realism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Gettysburg

93,921 vs. 71,699 (about 23,000 losses on each side)

Are you seriously going to tell me that in Empire: Total War, the largest army per side is 4,000 men or less? Should this be the case, my friends, it would be epic fail.

but, will you sit 4 days staring at your PC and arranging one battle?

Huge amount of men, very high graphics....i settle for nothing less.

and what about your PC? you work at NASA?

[The Big Red 1]

I'd have to say Graphics. As people on the Gamespot forums say, I'm a Graphics Whore. (Unless the game is Resident Evil, or the Original Tomb Raider.)

[bodkin]

I'd be happy to keep the current limit of 20 units, anymore and the game would not be enjoyable, you'd just be zooming from one side of the battlefield to the other never enjoying the action.

I can't understand why having 40000 troops on a field makes for a better gaming experience unless you're impressed by the superficial wow factor over the quality of the gameplay.

[Hunter Makoy]

obviously many people r. lol

[LordCochrane]

Battle of Borodino with 250,000 men, 1,227 guns and 70,000 casualties.


Jusssst kidding, but that would be insane to have that as a historical battle ^^

I'd rather have better graphics.

[The Noble Lord]

I guess both would be the best option.
Good graphics and reasonable amount of men.


CHEERS

[Carl von Döbeln]

I Great mix of both

[roy34543]

I think that graphics is better, Do you rememebr those days where men were just blobs? Now imagine having to command 100 units of 1000 men blobs, Your barely going to see anything but a sea of red dots crash into a sea of blue dots! If you downgrade graphics to the point where you can have 100,000 men , youd probably have to reduce it to that point.. So why do it?

[Yojimbo]

Its depressing how many people are graphics nuts here.

[Reiver]

Its depressing how many people are graphics nuts here.

And this is, you would imagine, the slightly more hardcore fans. Extended to the wider TW fan base and I think it'd be even more dispiriting. Yet, amusingly, similar numbers seem to moan about system requirements. I wonder how many "graphics whores" are the same ones asking "will my pentium 2 333Mhz voodoo2 run the game?"

[1{H][NA]

AI. AI. AI.


its no wonder CA keeps churning out crap. good looking crap, but still crap. here we have people asking for monster unit sizes and dynamic grass! i mean all the new features sound cool on paper, but its all for naught if the AI is just as dumb as RTW/MTW2.

[Krupp]

8000-10,000 men would do just great for me,and the graphics already look amazing.

[sud commander]

10.000 unit are great for me but with a good AI.

[Admiral Nelson]

AI. AI. AI.

its no wonder CA keeps churning out crap. good looking crap, but still crap. here we have people asking for monster unit sizes and dynamic grass! i mean all the new features sound cool on paper, but its all for naught if the AI is just as dumb as RTW/MTW2.

CA doesn't hire AI programmers to work on graphics and increase unit sizes... it's not one or the other.

[sparty]

I demand perfection...tons of tiny digital minions who look "maaahhhhvulis" to quote Billy Crystal.

Seriously though. There is no reason we cannot have it both ways with the power of available hardware.

[Braindead Colonel]

More men, graphics be damned.

[magpie]

Hi all. In my opinion we should have at least 400 men per unit and 30 units or more to give the illusion of a grand army.If the AI is a bit more smart than its ancestors then let it control a part of your army.Left or Right wing,it would all add to the uncertainty of war.In real life could a commander fully rely on his surbordinates to carry out their task,or would he be let down to cause a crisis in the middle of the battle.adds to the excitement.Graphics I like them good, modern computer setups should handle these with ease.again have options for different settings to cater for most needs. regards magpie.