More Units in each group .

[Mithridates II the Great]

why always 60 - 75 - 90 - 120 and at most 150 units in each group ?

I just shuffled Parthia history and came across that roman army were more than 40 000 legions and Parthia had around 10 000 cavalry .

Isn't it better to see more units like 250 - 300 - 400 in each group ? in this case we'll have more troops in the war and they'll be more similar to the history than what we've seen in total war games .

[ObiWan86]

I'm quite agree..

[PROMETHEUS ts]

why always 60 - 75 - 90 - 120 and at most 150 units in each group ?

I just shuffled Parthia history and came across that roman army were more than 40 000 legions and Parthia had around 10 000 cavalry .

Isn't it better to see more units like 250 - 300 - 400 in each group ? in this case we'll have more troops in the war and they'll be more similar to the history than what we've seen in total war games .

U understand that 40000 legions is like 160 000 000 soldiers? Wich is almoust three times the whole mediterranean population of the time ?

Lol

[Mithridates II the Great]

U understand that 40000 legions is like 160 000 000 soldiers? Wich is almoust three times the whole mediterranean population of the time ?

Lol

well . I think you didn't get what I meant . I said 40 000 roman soldiers against 10 000 cavalry . ( you can see this war in Rome 1 )

You can see the number of the armies in history books too.

[Colonel Dax]

well . I think you didn't get what I meant . I said 40 000 roman soldiers against 10 000 cavalry . ( you can see this war in Rome 1 )

You can see the number of the armies in history books too.

Actually, you said 40,000 Legions.

[PROMETHEUS ts]

well . I think you didn't get what I meant . I said 40 000 roman soldiers against 10 000 cavalry . ( you can see this war in Rome 1 )

You can see the number of the armies in history books too.

Was a joke on your 40000 legions lol...

[Dowie]

i agree more soldiers to a unit would be nice but i think it has more to do with the limitations on the engine and on the actual computer. For me i would need it at the smaller level for because my computer isnt the best. I will upgrade though!!

Usually this is modded quickly. I know with empire a harder to mod game the standard was 120 but darthmod increased this to like 300 per unit or higher.

[ironbrigade]

why always 60 - 75 - 90 - 120 and at most 150 units in each group ?

I just shuffled Parthia history and came across that roman army were more than 40 000 legions and Parthia had around 10 000 cavalry .

Isn't it better to see more units like 250 - 300 - 400 in each group ? in this case we'll have more troops in the war and they'll be more similar to the history than what we've seen in total war games .

agreed, I would love to to have units sizes of 500-600.

[The Useless Member]

It'll rape my computer.

Although I do agree.

[Slipz]

Let's all use a small percentage of our brains to try to understand that he meant legionaries not legions.

[Davidicus II]

Let's all use a small percentage of our brains to try to understand that he meant legionaries not legions.

Normally, I'd say something too, but it's really obvious English isn't the native tongue of most of the people on these boards. Assumption is necessary for proper interpretation and understanding, unless the person seems capable of expressing themselves accurately.

As for the author of the thread, well, larger unit sizes means degraded performance, so they're not really an option CA likes to consider when they build the game. Think about it: they have to make the game as accessible to as many people as possible. CA has (generally) done a good job of balancing graphical quality with performance, but they base this balance on the standard unit sizes. As others have already mentioned, mods usually buff up the scale for people whose computers can handle 10,000+ men fighting at once.

[Colonel Dax]

Let's all use a small percentage of our brains to try to understand that he meant legionaries not legions.

I will certainly try, but no guarantees shall be made.

[a tw player]

In the last game we already had up to 200...Which evidently isn't 150 at most

However, nitpicking aside, in terms of this game:

We know that a cohort had ~400 men.
There are 20 units per army/legion in TW.
Therefore we can assume it is logical to keep the max at 200 men (for Rome) so that you end up with the equivalent of 10 cohorts, or 1 legion, per stack.

The number of men per unit shouldn't be increased, just the number of units which can fight at once. This has already been happening though since the last game where we can now expect 80 units on the field at once, perhaps even greater in the future. One other thing that might make this even better is some sort of improved grouping system so that those who don't like to micromanage 40 different units (or more in the future) can create sub groups and let AI do the work, perhaps

[Master.Mind]

In the last game we already had up to 200...Which evidently isn't 150 at most

However, nitpicking aside, in terms of this game:

We know that a cohort had ~400 men.
There are 20 units per army/legion in TW.
Therefore we can assume it is logical to keep the max at 200 men (for Rome) so that you end up with the equivalent of 10 cohorts, or 1 legion, per stack.

The number of men per unit shouldn't be increased, just the number of units which can fight at once. This has already been happening though since the last game where we can now expect 80 units on the field at once, perhaps even greater in the future. One other thing that might make this even better is some sort of improved grouping system so that those who don't like to micromanage 40 different units (or more in the future) can create sub groups and let AI do the work, perhaps

In Rome II you can again give the AI the command of subgroups of your army (never was a fan of the the artificial "intelligence" commanding my armies XD)