Unit size.

[MasterOfWorlds]

Yes, I know that many of you will make jokes about the size of your units, but relax, this isn't about that.

This is about commanding units. As in, do you prefer small units tactics? Or do you prefer the grand strategies of sending hundreds of troops into battle? With all of the FPS games and such out there, there seems to be an underestimation of the games that actually allow you to produce mass amounts of troops. Even the FPS games, until recent years, have pretty much been you vs. the enemy with little outside help.

Do you prefer to work as a soloist? Small units such as teams of two to ten people? How about grand armies? What do you feel most comfortable commanding/being in in terms of games.

I'm more of a small unit tactics guy myself. I like a team of 3-5 people, which includes myself. Mostly because I tend to get disorganized if I have more people that that on my team. It's hard to get teamwork going with even a few people unless you play together often. It's near impossible to get a lot of people to work together unless they see that you know what you're doing.

So, tell me your preferences and opinions.

 

[Veylon]

I'm kind of a perfectionist. I hate losing units and will pick at the enemy's defenses with a handful of my most powerful units and retreat for repairs whenever damage is taken. I only throw in the waves of disposables when victory is assured.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

Units en masse. That way I usually don't need to think about it and just send wave after wave of niggling soldiers to terrorize enemy units, buildings and the like.
I play RTS a lot so that might have a factor there. The problem isn't that I dislike strategy, it's that I've yet to meet an RTS where continuous waves of basic infantry aren't enough to decimate the AI.

 

[Katherine Kerensky]

What am I?
You tell me

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

I'm not sure if I'm good with large armies or small... I just don't lose either way...
But, I think I prefer a small, technologically-advanced army.

 

[IzisviAziria]

I love RTS games but for the life of me, I am just terrible at them. Not good at micro-managing, picking the right strategy, hell even really picking a strategy. I couldn't even beat the CPU in starcraft :/

But again, I do love RTS, despite my lack of skill. I tend to sit back in my walls, building up a massive force with as much of the biggest, strongest units possible, and then launch a gigantic offensive. It's not strategically sound but dammit, it's fun.

I suppose in direct answer, I prefer commanding whole armies. I've recently been on an Empire at War binge, building up a nice big fleet of Mon Cal cruisers and demolishing the Empire outposts around the galaxy with them.

 

[Omikron009]

I like to build up a big army and steamroll over the entire map. As you may have guessed, I'm not very good at RTS.

 

[SkyeNeko]

small =S i like to keep track of every fight

 

[IzisviAziria]

*snipped*

what game is that?

 

[Sprinal]

Build up lots and lots of units AND........

ZERG RUSH!!!!!!!!!!!

or marine rush...maybe even Thor rush.

Still in FPS games I always find that if I have one companion he/she either does all the work, Does nothing or dies in the first 2 seconds.

Then If I have an army then the levels sudenly become easy.

Also it is very difficult to hide if some idiot who forgot a silencer get trigger happy right next to me

So yeah solo operative

 

[flim.geek.chic]

Small stealthy units. Big units gets noticed Quicker and I preffer sneak attacks.

 

[Katherine Kerensky]

*snipped*

what game is that?

Empire: Total war.
Basically the world from 1700 to 1800. Musket firing arcs... you have to carefully set up infantry positions to maximise killing potential, and minimise friendly fire.
Brilliant game, if not difficult sometimes. Never lost a land battle. Sea battles, I lost one, against a fleet more than 3 times larger.

 

[A Weary Exile]

I play Napoleon: Total War with unit size set to "Ultra" I'll let you guess which one I prefer.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

*snipped*

what game is that?

Empire Total War.

As for me personally, I find value in both. I don't care for games where my units as a whole are expendable (Starcraft 2 as an example), but I am quite fond of games where men are expendable (Total War as an example. You can choke rivers with corpses if need be without throwing an entire unit away). Indeed, my favorite strategy games of the last several years were Dawn of War 2 (I am perfectly willing to sacrifice two of the three scouts in a unit if it buys my tactical squad time to do what they needed even if said loss was a numerically significant part of my army) and the Total War franchise (Though I inevitably find a way to exploit the AI making the act of combat trivial. Empire was the worst offender as the AI is simply rubbish at figuring out how to break a prepared defense when said defense has a significant advantage in artillery).

 

[thiosk]

Or do you prefer the grand strategies of sending hundreds of MILLIONS OF troops into battle?

THAT is my style.

 

[Rpground]

i like teams of 3-6 units,with some technical backup (like X-com with tanks acting as mobile cover) i commanding armies cause i either forget i had this 1 or 2 unit types in my army that if i used them right i would have won said battle...small tactical battles is where i feel most comfortable.

 

[Aur0ra145]

Yes, I know that many of you will make jokes about the size of your units, but relax, this isn't about that.

This is about commanding units. As in, do you prefer small units tactics? Or do you prefer the grand strategies of sending hundreds of troops into battle? With all of the FPS games and such out there, there seems to be an underestimation of the games that actually allow you to produce mass amounts of troops. Even the FPS games, until recent years, have pretty much been you vs. the enemy with little outside help.

Do you prefer to work as a soloist? Small units such as teams of two to ten people? How about grand armies? What do you feel most comfortable commanding/being in in terms of games.

I'm more of a small unit tactics guy myself. I like a team of 3-5 people, which includes myself. Mostly because I tend to get disorganized if I have more people that that on my team. It's hard to get teamwork going with even a few people unless you play together often. It's near impossible to get a lot of people to work together unless they see that you know what you're doing.

So, tell me your preferences and opinions.

Play WWIIOnline:BE http://www.battlegroundeurope.com/ They have it all, all the way from your grunt with a rifle, to driving a Tiger, to being the captain of a destroyer, and then flying in the air force and bombing (either tactialy or strategically) after you work your way through the ground units you can become apart of high command. Did I mention this is a seemless mulitiplayer game. That's right, battles of 1,000+ troops, tanks, anti-tank guns, planes and boats all fighting it out in the european theatre of war. You may even (after a while of gaming) become a side commander, that's right thousands of players attacking objectives and plans you designate.

I loved this game, I flew mainly and the airwar is freaking HARD! Most realistic flight sim I've encountered, but the ground war is grand as well. There is a subscription fee ($15) but the first two weeks are free if you want to give it a try. I highly recommend this game to anyone who has lost faith in FPS's and wants a more tactical and strategic game with hundreds of players by your side assaulting a town or port or airfield.

AND! The dev team actually updates about every two weeks, that's right, they are still supporting it and taking player input to improve the game.

Go Axis! Allies suck!

 

[TimeLord]

If I am playing a game like Dawn of War, the first thing I do is add as many squad members as possible before adding Heavy or Special weapons.

Larger squads last longer and have more guns to kill the enemy with!

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

I like having mass infantry, mid sized group of armor and swarms of aircraft personally.

The small armored formations are easier to command, don't get into as many traffic jams and have enough firepower to hold their own. I use infantry for capturing and defending only, I prefer to have the armor do most of the hard work.

If I have time, I organize my forces into independent armies. I have been guilty of using mass armor in the past though...

...

Time to play Blitzkrieg 2 again!

 

[EllEzDee]

I aim for as few losses as possible, hoping to gain experience with that particular unit.
I hate people whose only tactic is to blob/spam.

 

[klakkat]

I prefer squad combat games, but I haven't seen a competent one since X-Com: Apocalypse, which I would rate as one of the best games of all time had it been a bit more polished, and had some more variety and tactics (Fallout Tactics was decent too, I think it came out later). Hell, I liked a lot of the old turn-based squad combat games, though real time is clearly better.