Will there be more than 20 units?

Anyone knows if we could have more than 20 units in the game? What annoys me in the game (ETW) it' s this limit because I have a good computer and I could play with more units at the same time. The good thing would be to let people choose the number of unit( 20, 30, 40).

Ever tried DarthMod for ETW? And it will probably be limited to 20ish units.

Yes, it's easy to change the number of soldiers per unit (500, 600, 1000 etc) but still being impossible to have more than 20 units.

Originally Posted by panzerschreck

Yes, it's easy to change the number of soldiers per unit (500, 600, 1000 etc) but still being impossible to have more than 20 units.

I would like to see CA raise the amount to atleast 40 units. Why not, if your computer can't handle it, just turn down the unit sizes.

But we won't see this in unmodded NTW, sigh.

Probably, look at this screenshot: on the first line there's only 10 units( so x2 it's 20). Perhaps it' s an old placeholder but...I doubt.

The problem it's that for Empire total war modders didn' t manage to change the number of units, must be hard or impossible to do. So, if CA doesn't think about it before the release it would be certainly the same.

I think that screenshot is said to be a placeholder, however, they don't have the time to change such major things now, the game is soon released. We can just hope that they don't do the same mistakes they did with ETW.
The best way to implement more than 20 units would be to incorporate another option under unit size, choosing from 20,30,40 unit slots.

We won't see battalions, thats for sure. Maybe modders will do something about that, but the historical battles will sure follow the ETW-road: Having really small groups fighting pitched battles. Boring.

I think CA uses this approach: "Nice graphics, less number of soldiers. People will understand."

I would love to see the unit numbers increased, afraid we will not see it again 10000 battlefield max same as RTW. They seem to stick to this formula with a nearly fanatical zeal! maybe the CA chief still uses his old faithful sinclair to test them out, Nope sorry lads won,t work on my machine

Originally Posted by magpie

I would love to see the unit numbers increased, afraid we will not see it again 10000 battlefield max same as RTW. They seem to stick to this formula with a nearly fanatical zeal! maybe the CA chief still uses his old faithful sinclair to test them out, Nope sorry lads won,t work on my machine

Spectrum maybe not, ZX81 then he could rule the world.

Got to love Trashman (spec game)

I think that the number of units can be implemented easily by adding an arrow at the unit select tab, which can show the other 20 units. I think that would certainly add a new layer of strategy to the game, because one could employ more diverse configurations of armies. And i don't think that any mod can do that, only CA can.

Originally Posted by Centurion Legio IX Hispana

I think that the number of units can be implemented easily by adding an arrow at the unit select tab, which can show the other 20 units. I think that would certainly add a new layer of strategy to the game, because one could employ more diverse configurations of armies. And i don't think that any mod can do that, only CA can.

Thats what Histwar: Les Grenades did, looks to be a pretty good idea.

this is what i truely hope for and i think everyone else is with me when i say more troops = greater battles

well more unit cards = greater flexibility.

If you want more units CA needs to adjust the gameplay. Create batallions, regiments, batallions and give the units a kinduva handicaped AI. Or else it'll be unmanegable.

There was an article I read that said the unit limit will be raised in NTW to accommodate the tactics of the period. Not really sure where I read that but if I come across it again I will post the link.

Originally Posted by Reiksmarshal

There was an article I read that said the unit limit will be raised in NTW to accommodate the tactics of the period...

That's interesting, but I don't think it is the whole answer. What is really needed is an extra level of AI to represent Corps or Division commanders.

If the player is going to represent an Army Commander, then they should have AI subordinates who can fight the major sub-units of their army in a sensible fashion, and in accordance with objectives set by the player. M2TW:Kingdoms started to move in this direction with its reinforcing armies system, but something a lot stronger is needed for Napoleonic battles.

I've heard nothing of such a system from CA, so I am forced to assume they will continue to use the same old battle system, which really isn't suitable for anything bigger than a skirmish.

I think it is absolutely rubbish that they still keep to the old 20 unit limit. I can understand their reasons, but the 20 unit limit was made during the times when computers were far from being as sophisticated as they are now. The interface surely has the capability to support more units, it is just a matter of adaptation. Besides many other strategy games don't even use the unit cards anymore and just have squads of units indicated on the map by a smart interface, often with adequate AI capable of making some decisions of their own.
So IMO the argument about any interface problems does no longer hold when taking notice of the developments made by others.

An argument that does still hold is that the battlefield would become a micromanage nightmare. Indeed this would be the case if the units you need to control increases, however again if a system in which the AI would control squads of your troops (let say the size of 4 units of the same type currently) and you give orders on a higher level than it would be okay with me. It certainly is feasible if they can make a fully AI controlled army than this should be more of the same.

If I were in control of these type of decisions I would go a bit more for the R.U.S.E. interface and design type of solution to these problems. This game has many more units and still reasonable to good graphics, besides a more than adequate level of control over both tactical and strategical decisions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrSYsqvkcAM

Originally Posted by Van Diemen

I think it is absolutely rubbish that they still keep to the old 20 unit limit. I can understand their reasons, but the 20 unit limit was made during the times when computers were far from being as sophisticated as they are now. The interface surely has the capability to support more units, it is just a matter of adaptation. Besides many other strategy games don't even use the unit cards anymore and just have squads of units indicated on the map by a smart interface, often with adequate AI capable of making some decisions of their own.
So IMO the argument about any interface problems does no longer hold when taking notice of the developments made by others.

An argument that does still hold is that the battlefield would become a micromanage nightmare. Indeed this would be the case if the units you need to control increases, however again if a system in which the AI would control squads of your troops (let say the size of 4 units of the same type currently) and you give orders on a higher level than it would be okay with me. It certainly is feasible if they can make a fully AI controlled army than this should be more of the same.

If I were in control of these type of decisions I would go a bit more for the R.U.S.E. interface and design type of solution to these problems. This game has many more units and still reasonable to good graphics, besides a more than adequate level of control over both tactical and strategical decisions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrSYsqvkcAM

I agree, but the ammount of polygons in R.U.S.E. is still laughable in comparison with a Total War game.

Jup, I hope they go for a new system for the next TW game. The old system was goon enough for Rome. Legions weren't that big. But for anything past M2TW you can better create a new system.