Is Huge Unit Size the Default for a Reason?

[Green Warrior]

I've noticed that in TATW the default unit size is huge. Is there a reason for that? What unit size do most players prefer? What unit size gives the biggest challenge?

Thanks.

[Dava2710]

Well with HUGE you definetly get the best experience. It's much better when there is 3000 vs. 2000 then 900 vs. 600

[Pleiades]

I strongly disagree about epicness on huge settings. It is the matter of taste, really.

For me it is nothing worse than clumsy armies which collide with each other without space for maneuvering especially in forests and cities. Archer unit who can hit 1/7 of whole enemy unit just because that unit is in huge settings and behind some obstacle in city versus archer units on normal settings who can cover 1/3 of enemy unit with arrows behind same obstacle. Bugs with cavalry units on huge settings make me hit the monitor with both fists etc. Pathfinding issues of all units bring more headaches. 99 archers will not shoot because 100th archer play tennis with an Orc somewhere in the forest etc. Also, generals which should be heroes lose their individuality because they have less impact on course of battle on huge size. On normal settings pathfinding issues are much much reduced.

There are other things which may contribute to epicness like removing green arrows and banners, zooming in and out battlefield, hiding UI permanently or temporarily. Without green arrows and UI if you take casual screenshot of battlefield you will not even notice difference between normal and huge settings if units are mixed in the heat of battle.

On the other hand, small units size make generals as half-Gods, which is also no good and realistic. So, my point of view is normal size of units for epicness and playability.

[Mune]

I strongly disagree about epicness on huge settings. It is the matter of taste, really.

Well put (your whole post I mean, I just didn't want to waste space quoting the whole thing) and I wholeheartedly agree. Aside from the fact that my computer is only so-so, I tried Huge setting for a while when TA:TW first came out and came to the same conclusion. Smaller armies help minimize pathfinding issues, particularly with cavalry, particularly in settlements. I hear many people complain that cavalry are useless in sieges, but on small or normal setting, a good charge down an alley is more than doable. It makes it easier to control your individual units strategically when they take up less room as well, and it's not unfair because the enemy has the same benefit. I hadn't thought about how it effects archers but your right, it probably makes the most difference when it comes to them.

When you have the unit scale on small, the price for the units in the campaign remains the same right? It would then be harder to play with "small" than "huge".

Not really, since it effects all units by an equal percentage. Sure, your paying more per man than before, but so are all the other factions. Perhaps I'm misinterpreting what you mean?

[Caesar']

I've noticed that in TATW the default unit size is huge. Is there a reason for that? What unit size do most players prefer? What unit size gives the biggest challenge?


Thanks.

Huge is the best i personnaly use large as i use all setting maxed and wen i go 10k battle im lagging , but i would whantg to know why its he default setting and mostly why wen i change it it always revert back to huge wen i close the game .


i started over 10 campaign since this game started and only realized after 15 20 turn i was still on huge and my computer could not handle those super 10k+ fight and had to restart

[Warmaster Tibs]

Also the smaller the sizes it favors good more then evil. example. Most evil units get more men in a unit then good does as it should be. Now at small the difference is 30 men, at huge the difference is 100 men. I play on large myself with low settings. Getting a new graphics card soon so that should help.

[wyvernslayer]

it doesnt take that much to run this game really. even on my old gateway computer i could play with 10000 men with no lag. That thing was ANCIENT. but yes huge is definitely the most fun to play on, it is just beautiful to see huge armies charging at each other. i sometimes just take 2 armies and fill them with swordsmen then charge them in.

[Mune]

why wen i change it it always revert back to huge wen i close the game .

TATW.cfg is the culprit (Medieval 2/mods/Third_Age/) for this issue. Several options are set back to a standard every time you open and close the game. Beats me as to why they decided to do it that way.

To change it, do the following:

1) Open TATW.cfg using Notepad
2) Near the top, you'll see a list of options underneath the heading [game]
3) You'll see an option which says: unit_size = huge
4) Change 'Huge' to 'Large', or whatever size option you want

I recommend looking into any other options which can be altered in this same manner. For example, do you dislike the battle cutscenes such as smashed gates or dead generals? Then add a line saying 'event_cutscenes = 0' under [game] (note that this is already there by default but it's commented out with a ;, so remove the ; for the same effect). Do you usually start a campaign with unlimited battle time? Here's the command for that: no_campaign_battle_time_limit = 1 (under [game] again, you'll see it's set to 0 by default so you can just change it to 1).

[Caesar']

TATW.cfg is the culprit (Medieval 2/mods/Third_Age/) for this issue. Several options are set back to a standard every time you open and close the game. Beats me as to why they decided to do it that way.

To change it, do the following:

1) Open TATW.cfg using Notepad
2) Near the top, you'll see a list of options underneath the heading [game]
3) You'll see an option which says: unit_size = huge
4) Change 'Huge' to 'Large', or whatever size option you want

I recommend looking into any other options which can be altered in this same manner. For example, do you dislike the battle cutscenes such as smashed gates or dead generals? Then add a line saying 'event_cutscenes = 0' under [game] (note that this is already there by default but it's commented out with a ;, so remove the ; for the same effect). Do you usually start a campaign with unlimited battle time? Here's the command for that: no_campaign_battle_time_limit = 1 (under [game] again, you'll see it's set to 0 by default so you can just change it to 1).

thank u dude awesome reply +rep

[maxi90]

I've noticed that in TATW the default unit size is huge. Is there a reason for that?

epicnes

[Dea Paladin]

When you have the unit scale on small, the price for the units in the campaign remains the same right? It would then be harder to play with "small" than "huge".

[axnsan]

Unit size affects towers the most. no matter your size, towers will always do the same damage and be just as much. So if you're on small you'll loose 2 and a half units where you would've lost 1 on huge.

[ThorHa]

Unit size affects towers the most. no matter your size, towers will always do the same damage and be just as much. So if you're on small you'll loose 2 and a half units where you would've lost 1 on huge.

Which - to a certain extent - is countered by the fact that on the wooden or first stone wall level you´ll find half o your walls are NOT big enough to station just one unit on it. That for me was the biggest downside of "huge" units and one of the reasons I meanwhile only play aggressive (thus never endure a siege battle as a defender).

Regards,

Thorsten

[Danny_K_1]

Well its LotR right? It needs to be on huge for epic battles.

Also if you change it it could screw with the balance IE the OotMM they're advantage is thet're size if you change that they begin to suck even more.

[Mune]

Well its LotR right? It needs to be on huge for epic battles.

Also if you change it it could screw with the balance IE the OotMM they're advantage is thet're size if you change that they begin to suck even more.

'Huge' armies and 'Epic' aren't necessarily the same thing. I can see why the majority probably prefers Huge, but to make it a standard isn't necessary. If 'Huge' becomes the norm, then it's not really huge anymore it's just normal.

As for your second point, I'd say that's debatable (or rather, situational). Sure, the OotMM might have larger units, but so do all their enemies, by the same percentage. As in, "Yay, I have 4000 orcs in my stack! Oh no, now theres 1000+ elves/dwarves per stack."

[axnsan]

Yes but balance still differs from a unit size to the other. And all the balancing is done for huge.

[Mune]

Yes but balance still differs from a unit size to the other. And all the balancing is done for huge.

True, hence the 'situational' comment. In that case, why not take all the current numbers of men per unit for 'Huge', use that for 'Normal' or 'Medium' (I forget what it's called), then set it to default to that? It's like the whole 'you must play on VH/VH because it's balanced for that' debate, they should just make it so that it's exactly like 'VH/VH' on Medium then if they want that to be the standard. It all just boils down to semantics I suppose, I just think that a setting called 'Medium' or 'Normal' should be the most played, adjusting up or down according to your tastes.

By the way, your just following me from thread to thread aren't you?

[axnsan]

Because 125 is the max number of men on normal. And because the difficulty level differences are hardcoded.

[maxi90]

@pleiades: i agree with you specially in the siege part. but that doesn´t make the game more epic, it makes it more playable. but you are rigth it should be optional.

@ Mune: there is a diference in balance. you see, in huge normally the orcs have something beetwen 50 to 100 more soldiers per unit than the good guys. but in normal size (i think) the diference is of only 30 or so men. so the factions that relly in numbers will be greatly nerfed in normal size

[Mune]

Because 125 is the max number of men on normal. And because the difficulty level differences are hardcoded.

Good answer, I didn't know that. Silly CA.

@ Mune: there is a diference in balance. you see, in huge normally the orcs have something beetwen 50 to 100 more soldiers per unit than the good guys. but in normal size (i think) the diference is of only 30 or so men. so the factions that relly in numbers will be greatly nerfed in normal size

Using that logic one could argue the exact opposite. If one reduces the number of men per unit, then the factions which have less men per unit anyway suffer more greatly for the same amount of men lost. If I have 100 elves in a unit, losing 50 still leaves me with a useful unit. If I started with 60 and lose 50, not so much.

Anyway, it all balances out to an extent and the differences between Huge and Small armies is situational (meaning, each gets an advantage/disadvantage in different situations).