Matrix Games Forums

Is the unit limit still set at 2K per side? Is there any way to up the unit and force limits? I realize for some computers it would take forever to get player one side started but as fast as computers are now compared to when the game came out I don't see this as being a problem anymore for the majority of people.

Yes, the unit limit is still capped at 2000 per side. Moving to the main forum as this is a wishlist item, rather than a support issue.

ORIGINAL: Starshaker

Is the unit limit still set at 2K per side? Is there any way to up the unit and force limits? I realize for some computers it would take forever to get player one side started but as fast as computers are now compared to when the game came out I don't see this as being a problem anymore for the majority of people.

The bigger problem is playability. Didn't the regular TOAW executable only allow something like 500 per side? There's some UI work to do to make something like that playable and editable.

ORIGINAL: Starshaker

Is the unit limit still set at 2K per side? Is there any way to up the unit and force limits?

2000 plus units . . . you eventually reach a point where the game ceases to be fun and begins to become work. I understand that we all have a personal definition of "fun" and "work", but growing the boundaries of TOAW to thousands of units just sounds a bit, well, too much of a good thing. Yet there are a few die hards that would thrive in such an environment . . . power to them!

Regards, RhinoBones

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

ORIGINAL: Starshaker

Is the unit limit still set at 2K per side? Is there any way to up the unit and force limits?

2000 plus units . . . you eventually reach a point where the game ceases to be fun and begins to become work. I understand that we all have a personal definition of "fun" and "work", but growing the boundaries of TOAW to thousands of units just sounds a bit, well, too much of a good thing. Yet there are a few die hards that would thrive in such an environment . . . power to them!

Regards, RhinoBones

The only valid reason I've seen is that there are some scenarios like FitE and EA which model many years. Having more than 2K units/side would mean that the changes might be able to be modeled better, although at any give time, only a smaller number of units would be on the screen.

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

ORIGINAL: Starshaker
Is the unit limit still set at 2K per side? Is there any way to up the unit and force limits?

2000 plus units . . . you eventually reach a point where the game ceases to be fun and begins to become work. I understand that we all have a personal definition of "fun" and "work", but growing the boundaries of TOAW to thousands of units just sounds a bit, well, too much of a good thing. Yet there are a few die hards that would thrive in such an environment . . . power to them!
Regards, RhinoBones

The only valid reason I've seen is that there are some scenarios like FitE and EA which model many years. Having more than 2K units/side would mean that the changes might be able to be modeled better, although at any give time, only a smaller number of units would be on the screen.

EA currently runs far below the limit (less than 1K per side, IIRC), however, having a unit limit of 1 million or so would allow me to think about implementing some kind of production/research control aspect...

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

ORIGINAL: Starshaker

Is the unit limit still set at 2K per side? Is there any way to up the unit and force limits?

2000 plus units . . . you eventually reach a point where the game ceases to be fun and begins to become work. I understand that we all have a personal definition of "fun" and "work", but growing the boundaries of TOAW to thousands of units just sounds a bit, well, too much of a good thing. Yet there are a few die hards that would thrive in such an environment . . . power to them!

Regards, RhinoBones

The only valid reason I've seen is that there are some scenarios like FitE and EA which model many years. Having more than 2K units/side would mean that the changes might be able to be modeled better, although at any give time, only a smaller number of units would be on the screen.

With the limit of 2000 units per side, the maximum units a side can have and still sub-divide all of them is 500. With the limit of 32 units per formation, the maximum number of units a formation can have and still sub-divide all of them is 8. Just those limits alone constrain a LOT of current scenarios. Being unable to sub-divide impacts a unit's resiliency.

And, of course, there are plenty of projects that run into that 2000 limit, too, regardless of sub-division.

ORIGINAL: Veers
having a unit limit of 1 million or so would allow me to think about implementing some kind of production/research control aspect...

1 million ought to do the trick [:D]

ORIGINAL: wolflars

ORIGINAL: Veers
having a unit limit of 1 million or so would allow me to think about implementing some kind of production/research control aspect...

1 million ought to do the trick [:D]

What, are you wanting to model WWI at the individual squad level with 100 meter resolution maps?[X(]

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick

ORIGINAL: wolflars

ORIGINAL: Veers
having a unit limit of 1 million or so would allow me to think about implementing some kind of production/research control aspect...

1 million ought to do the trick [:D]

What, are you wanting to model WWI at the individual squad level with 100 meter resolution maps?[X(]

Naw, with that many units, however, and more events, one could do away with the replacement engine and give a player full control of producion through disbands.

*sigh*
Why is it some think that a higher unit limit is so every single unit is on the map???? [&:]
 
The reasons to up the unit limit are many. Just look at FitE. If you are familiar with the Soviet side you would know that units changed so much between 1941 and 1943 that almost a whole new army is needed to correctly model the changes. Other large scenarios could also benefit from a larger unit limit. NOT to have 10,000 units per side on the map at the same time. But to correctly model army changes over a long period of time.
 
I understand that the original Opart was not really made to cover long time periods. But as in many other games the people who actually play the game tend to think beyond what the game devolopers intend. Imagine that. Kind of sounds like Matrix's roots. [X(]
 
Anyways, it seems there are not enough who want a higher unit limit to give any chance of modeling multi year campaigns correctly and I imagine the work involved wouldn't be compensated by further earnings. But it would be nice to see. [8D]
 
 

again, In the later part of the war my German troops are stuck without the ability I desperately need to devide.. 2000 ho humm

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick
What, are you wanting to model WWI at the individual squad level with 100 meter resolution maps?[X(]

I'm a believer that this will be possible eventually. A real-time game where you can command whole armies modeled down to the squad/soldier level.

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

With the limit of 2000 units per side, the maximum units a side can have and still sub-divide all of them is 500. With the limit of 32 units per formation, the maximum number of units a formation can have and still sub-divide all of them is 8. Just those limits alone constrain a LOT of current scenarios. Being unable to sub-divide impacts a unit's resiliency.

You're not going to want to divide all the units in a formation; and HQs can't divide.

ORIGINAL: bos

I'm a believer that this will be possible eventually. A real-time game where you can command whole armies modeled down to the squad/soldier level.

I'd be really hesitant to move things down to this level. It can get really unreal; Runstedt pauses time to adjust the movement of a ten man fire team 500 miles away.

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick

What, are you wanting to model WWI at the individual squad level with 100 meter resolution maps?[X(]


[/quote]

That would be a tactical level scenario. What you'd want to do is model WWI at the Company level with 1 Km resolution.

That's be fairly tactical too!![X(][X(]

Here are my 2 cents:

1) I don't think it's valid to say that since the scale could always be further increased, we should not increase it further. If that was true there would never have been any reason to expand the scale from the previous 500 unit limit to the 2000 unit limit today.

2) I think the term "unit limit" is a little missgiving since scale is also a question of map-size and location names.

3) I personally think the scale could and should be increased since it would allow for scenarios that can not be made today with the present limitations on scale. I am almost finished with a central europe scenario at 5km/hex, but the unit limit will not allow me to model local defence forces properly since I don't have enough unit-slots. I am also working on maps for northern and southern europe on the 5km/hex scale, but the 300 by 300 map is to small. By increasing the scale, these scenarios - and many others - could be designed.

4) Increasing map scale to say 999 by 999 would ( I think... ) not require much work with the GUI since it is already designed for a 3-number digit. I would imagine that increasing the number of place names from 400 to say 9999 would not require any changes to the GUI?

5) Lastly I do agree that there are other enhancements that could be made before these changes that would add more functionality to the game. That does however not mean that these changes should NEVER be made.


/Ratbag

ORIGINAL: Ratbag55

Here are my 2 cents:

1) I don't think it's valid to say that since the scale could always be further increased, we should not increase it further. If that was true there would never have been any reason to expand the scale from the previous 500 unit limit to the 2000 unit limit today.

Well, the 2,000 unit limit has existed since TOAW was first released commercially.

"It's always been that way" is never a reason to keep it that way!!