How many people does a unit represent?

[PPQ_Purple]

You seem to be forgeting china and the far east. Diring the waring states period it was normal for multy milion strong armies to fight each other.

 

[Broken Hawk]

I play each unit as an individual. It's my game and I'll do what I want. Lone Wolf actually started a thread about this? Sorry for disagreeing with him.

 

[Lone Wolf]

It's my game and I'll do what I want.

Well, you are not doing anything with your game by that - whatever you think about units, your playstyle isn't affected by that. Whether you think that a Swordsman unit represents 1, 20, 100 or 10000 people, you play it exactly the same.

Sorry for disagreeing with him.

Why should you be sorry for imaging stuff in a certain way? I just find it strange that you prefer imaging bar brawls between elves and orcs which could be easily quelled by the police in real life then imaging epic battles worthy of FfH Alexander the Great, but to each his own... (Not to mentoin that the fate of the large city depending on three swordsmen who are not described as particularly powerful in any way doesn't make sense).

Anyway, the purpose of that thread was more to hear other people's options about how they imagine things.

 

[Broken Hawk]

I look at Erebus population wise on a much smaller scale. Coming out of the Age of Ice there are not going to be a lot of people. And the cities are not going to have millions of people despite what the city info screen may say. Battles are not going to be on a grand scale nor bar fights (that brings a funny image to mind, think of Sphener and a drunken Balor brawling in a Gambling House ) but something in between. I see your logic and it makes sense but thinking of each unit as an individual works for me.

 

[Lone Wolf]

Coming out of the Age of Ice there are not going to be a lot of people.

But certainly enough to warrant a unit representing more then one person. Even a settlement of 500 people surely will rely on more then 4-5 warriors to protect it.

And the cities are not going to have millions of people despite what the city info screen may say.

Initially, yes. But by the end of the Age of Rebirth, a few cities in Erebus exceeding 1 million is a possibility for me.

nor bar fights

Large gang fights, then. Even by the end of the game, my stacks rarely exceed 35 units. I don't want to think that my epic army I use to conquer Calabim can be safely located in an average-sized bus. I want to feel like a conqueror, not like a mob boss. That's an epic fantasy world of Erebus, not the streets of Vice City.

 

[DaleKing]

I know that it makes more sense for each unit to represent many people but, I also prefer to think of each as a single person. I use the single unit graphics option and it works for me. I know there's some cognitive dissonance in terms of city size, army size etc. but hey, I like rooting and cheering for that lowly swordsman that managed to hold the mountain pass until reinforcements arrive.

 

[far_wanderer]

Here's my take on it:
I always assume that each unit represents about as many people as are visible in the animation, and that there's simply a whole lot of other stuff going on in the background. So when an axeman charges my longbowman, that's a few guys with axes charging a few guys with bows. But that's just a small part of a larger battle going on that I don't get to see. This not the same as saying that each unit represents several hundred soldiers, this is saying that those several hundred soldiers are there, but the three that make up a Warrior unit did something exceptional.
It's a lot like the way the several hundred or so people that a population point represents don't all work at a single watermill. There's a watermill, and that's the significant feature for that small area, but there are also a bunch of other things in that tile that people go to. You just don't see them.
People and soldiers are everywhere, the units just represent the ones that are important to the story.

 

[Lade]

It could be seen like that, yes, but we would still have the problem of a huge city producing tiny little fighting groups that are completely insignificant compared to the population within it.

Early on handful of people take a long time to scrap together an army of untrained clubman. Later, they train, outfit with cool weapons, and magical amulets. If theres a large city, it can do that in one turn, which is perfectly logical. I see no reason a smaller empire's armies could perform better even with less people.

Heroes and assassins are pretty much fantasy elements and I doubt that there is much point in speculating on the "real" numbers behind them. But as far as I see assassins are small elite groups like commandoes or whatnot (still tied to population though) and heroes are basically one person + possibly a few helpers. And please, don't ask me how one guy can defeat thousands of enemies

Its a fantasy games. Hero's are supposed to be able to slay hundreds of untrained brutes.

Assasins aren't going to slit the throats of every unit in a hundred person unit. Maybe they would with an archmage, but poisening water/food makes much more sense.

 

[Lone Wolf]

I like rooting and cheering for that lowly swordsman that managed to hold the mountain pass until reinforcements arrive.

And you don't like cheering for your divisions? 300 Spartans style?

 

[TheJopa]

Large gang fights, then. Even by the end of the game, my stacks rarely exceed 35 units. I don't want to think that my epic army I use to conquer Calabim can be safely located in an average-sized bus. I want to feel like a conqueror, not like a mob boss. That's an epic fantasy world of Erebus, not the streets of Vice City.

And you're right. Epic battles ala LotR instead of tavern fights- and at the same time, much less soldiers involved than in say WW2. Battles would be about of the size European middle ages armies.

 

[Broken Hawk]

Amelaunchier's 'pedia entry is an example of a typical battle that I envision. A Confessor and some Paladins vs. a Balor and some Imps. Nothing on an epic scale.

 

[Kyzarc Fotjage]

Its a fantasy games. Hero's are supposed to be able to slay hundreds of untrained brutes.

Assasins aren't going to slit the throats of every unit in a hundred person unit. Maybe they would with an archmage, but poisening water/food makes much more sense.

Look at Hurin, father of Turin, when Morgoth captured him in the Silmarilion. He held a river crossing, alone after his hundred or so men died, and killed 60 trolls, countless orcs, and almost the chief balrog. Look at the Song of Roland, a french ballad, were one knight held off an army while his army retreated. Look at Cuchulain, an irish hero, who fought off an army for 5 days while his friend roused Ulster. Fantasy is full of individuals fighting off armies. They just tend to die afterward.

I agree that Assassins don't kill entire squads by hand

 

[F-F]

I decided to do some calculations regarding the army size. Below we see how many stacks does it take to "fill" an army consisting of 100 000 men:

1 soldier per stack -> 100 000 stacks needed
50 soldiers per stack -> 2 000 stacks needed
200 soldiers per stack -> 500 stacks needed
1 000 soldiers per stack -> 100 stacks needed
10 000 soldiers per stack -> 10 stacks needed

Personally the largest amount of stacks I've had in game was probably between 50 - 80.

But considering that at its largest the Roman Empire had an army consisting of 375 000 men, the above 100 000 is not by any means an incredible amount; the armies in FfH could easily be greater than 100 000. Which in turn would mean that one would need even MORE stacks to fill 375 000 with the above given figures.

 

[Lone Wolf]

Amelaunchier's 'pedia entry is an example of a typical battle that I envision. A Confessor and some Paladins vs. a Balor and some Imps.

That seemed more like a minor incident then a typical battle to me. Worthy of 2, maximum 3 units on each side.

Nothing on an epic scale.

Where's the fun in that?

 

[TheJopa]

Problem with one man holding an army, even if you set everything else aside, is that you can send five men against one, another five as a reserve, and 990 others to simply bypass the hero and advance forward, leaving lunatic behind.

 

[Kyzarc Fotjage]

Rambo held off an army, and Hurin, and Roland, and Cuchulain

 

[Broken Hawk]

Where's the fun in that?

I guess there is no fun in that...for you.

 

[PPQ_Purple]

Problem with one man holding an army, even if you set everything else aside, is that you can send five men against one, another five as a reserve, and 990 others to simply bypass the hero and advance forward, leaving lunatic behind.

Don't you read any books/watch any action movies?
The bad guys newer do that.
Honor demands that they wait their turn to combat the hero 1 on 1 instead.

 

[Darksaber1]

Yeah, the purpose of the Army/City Watch/Henchmen is to (about chapter 3, or ten minutes into the movie) charge the hero one at a time (not so fast as to tire him), get slaughtered, then make cameo appearances doing the same thing later on, when the villan-pretending-to-be-a-good-guy helps the Hero escape from them, in order to earn the Hero's trust.

 

[Kyzarc Fotjage]

And this post is dedicated to those fine men