FoG2 and Medieval NEED some major improvements.

[chubbyninja89 (TNB)]

This is just something that's bugged me about the FoG2 games for quite a while now, and one of the biggest reasons I don't really bother playing FoG2: Medieval pretty much at all.

I've talked about a lot of the issues with both FoG2 games, but I think that the biggest issue with Medieval for me is the freaking small scale of numbers per units and all that.

I mean, in FoG2, the battles actually felt like they had a massive scale to them.

And I don't know why the devs of these games changed the numbers per unit, but it really is a stupid decision that just sucks the scale out of the battles. But it's utterly ridiculous for the devs to lessen the numbers to such a degree. As FoG2's latest armies were set in the early medieval period, which just makes it kind of ridiculously ironic.

I wouldn't mind this sort of thing if there were actual options to change the overall scale to the numbers of the units. That's something these games really need.

If anything, the devs should add in such options in the next DLC's patch for this game, it might actually get more people to play it.

[quark]

I agree that it would be nice to be able to customize the army size further. I checked the smallest and largest army for English 1066 and it was around 3900 and 11,000. Wikipedia has 12,500 Saxons at Stanford bridge which roughly fits the scale and I assume is one of the largest battles in Medieval England. But there were certainly smaller battles with less than 3900 men per side which I'd like to see represented.

This hardly makes the game unplayable though.

If you play singleplayer, you can easily adjust the units sizes by manipulating the STRENGTHMULTIPLIER in ArmyList.txt. I assume setting this to 100 for all armies will result in roughly the same sizes as Ancients.

edit: I had the numbers wrong first.

[chubbyninja89 (TNB)]

Originally posted by quark:

I agree that it would be nice to be able to customize the army size further. I checked the smallest and largest army for English 1066 and it was around 3900 and 6800. Wikipedia has 12,500 Saxons at Stanford bridge and there were certainly smaller battles.

This hardly makes the game unplayable though.

If you play singleplayer, you can easily adjust the units sizes by manipulating the STRENGTHMULTIPLIER in ArmyList.txt. I assume setting this to 100 for all armies will give you the same sizes as Ancients.

Well, the devs should just make the option with in the menus and all instead of making the players have to fix their mistake.

It's just so deflating to go from the battles of many thousands and all of FoG2 to what feels like nothing but "large" skirmishes in Medieval.

The devs just really need to give the option to change the numbers up in the menus and such.

[Mitth'raw'nuruodo]

The army sizes should match historical battles, but the game has much bigger problems than this. Stuff that make a lot more difference to the battle experience like meaningless leaders, lack of army organization and formation etc,

[chubbyninja89 (TNB)]

Originally posted by Mitth'raw'nuruodo:

The army sizes should match historical battles, but the game has much bigger problems than this. Stuff that make a lot more difference to the battle experience like meaningless leaders, lack of army organization and formation etc,

Cool name dude. Or should I call you Thrawn?


But yeah, those are certainly issues I've seen from these games, but the whole army numbers and such just bugs me because the FoG2 battles had such a sense of scale to them, but then they go and pretty much cut the numbers in half and give no basic option to change it.

I do think that there should be more formations than just the pike square for pike units.

And I'd like to see units actually be able to dismount, and not just before the battle actually starts.

But I think my biggest issue with these game is the how restrictive they are with some units.