Steiner14

When i started to play CM i learned the basics purely against the AI and that was by far enough to be fascinated for quite some time. Later, when the AI was no challenge anymore i began to try this strange PBEM thing for the first time.

Wow! That was a revelation! A complete new gaming experience began. Tasks, that worked against the AI, suddenly became very difficult. Because of stronger opponents, soon i had to learn how to read CM-maps to get a slight advantage over them. Careful planning and execution became prerequisites to have a chance against better and more experienced oponents. While the AI forgives tactical mistakes, and time to correct them, a good oponent does not. That was one of the most beautiful lessons, after playing the AI had become boring.

When i got better and was winning against most of my randomly picked PBEM-oponents, and with the experience of vanishing oponents if their situation had become uncomfortable, i began ladder-playing.
After around 40 battles ladder-playing became boring, too, because ladder-playing means playing meeting engagements and balanced battles only. Since i had a very high winning streak, i knew i had understood CM-tactics well and that was no longer a challenge, since reaching the top of the ladder would have meant to play much more games, all of the same. But i didn't want to play meeting engagements only, but was interested in the whole variety CM offers: from highly unbalanced attack and defend to historical battles.
I wanted to learn, how an attack against a heavily entrenched oponent has to be conducted in CM, or how a defense could be played against much stronger attackers. That was the reason, why i stopped ladder-playing and kept playing with a handful of players, that had proven very strong and reliable oponents.
And to answer your question: playing big battles with such oponents is a great experience.
BUT: They easily can span over several months and therefore you need to know your opponent well.

Bigger battles do not always mean better, but they offer aspects, smaller battles cannot:
Having battalion sized forces at your disposal, on a big and wide map, and an enemy, that could have weaker, but also could be two- or threefold stronger than you, and you have to think very carefully, before you decide, what to do with all those units and where and when to move them, while you know, your oponent is a very good player, who will merciless punish you for every little mistake, is a great experience.

Smaller battles quite soon reveal the whole picture.
In smaller battles one or two good moves, or losing one of two or three tanks, can also flip the coin torwards one side. But big battles can stay undecided for a long time, since single losses have a relatively smaller impact on the outcome and they contain enough units to compensate for bad luck.
In big battles more surprises later in the game are possible, because of the amount of units and the size of the map.
Big battles also allow real world tactics with flanking movements over several hundred meters.

Therefore i would say big and huge battles are great- IF the players on both sides have enough tactical experience to handle big forces on big maps and have enough knowledge about each other. Therefore i wouldn't recommend big battles for beginners, but for very experienced players with enough patience they are very entertaining and somehow the crown.