Original vs. Warlord

[ReluctantSamurai]

There's a patch to fix the enemy reinforcement issue and you can edit unit stats to meet vanilla STW specs. I'm not at my own 'puter at the moment, but I'm sure someone here will chip in the needed info before I get home. Puzz3D is usually a gold mine for that sort of thing.......

If not, I'll make sure to post up where you can get the appropriate data.

[Milo]

I think I remember something about a patch to fix the reinforcement issue but Google just gives me dead links.

Thanks for the info all! I'll keep playing but keep some forces in reserve for the whack-a-mole part.

Matt

[caravel]

The original STW was better balanced than the MI/WE version. In this latter version some new units were added and these units imbalance the game somewhat. Some other stats were also changed.

[Martok]

IMHO, the only real improvement that the Warlords Edition has over the original red box 1.12 version -- and I realize that at least a few people here would dispute even that -- is that building costs and build times have been halved, which obviously helps to quicken the game's pace.

That aside, however, I would still favor the original STW over WE. As Wilbo and Cynwulf already pointed out, it's better balanced. While units like Kensai and Battlefield Ninja are undeniably fun to play with, they really knock the rock-paper-scissors system off-kilter (to say nothing of being unhistorical "fantasy" units).

[Wasp]

I think Martok is right about the 'fantasy units' - I like to toy with them now or then, but never use them seriously as a part of my army (well, the kensai might be stationed on a bridge). I've used the kensai as a roleplaying kind of character before.

However, those units have such a high building requirement that I've rarely seen the AI train more than one of them. And even that was only in the 1580 scenario, where the necessary infrastructure is already mostly developed.

Still, if someone could post the 'correct' stats, that'd be useful

[KrooK]

Depends what are you playing.
Into single player much better is ... Warlord. More campaigns, some much harder (like Oda-Expert-1530). Into multi some people say that MI is inbalanced. I don't share this opinion but I was weak when playing STW multi. All in all I suggest you Warlord :)

[Togakure]

I have both versions. I like the unit balance of original better. I like WE's halved production costs for buildings. Doubled geisha production time makes it easier to play Expert without having to deal with tons of enemy geishas running amuck during the late game.

Most of all, I like the additional campaigns that WE offers (1530, 1550, 1580). I've had Shogun since it first came out and play it more than any other game, even now. The standard Sengoku campaign had become a bit boring, and the additional campaign scenarios were and still are a delight. The Mongol campaign is just ok. I play it for kicks once in a great while because I enjoy using Mongol cav.

I don't trip on the "fantasy" units, I just don't use them much. The AI rarely produces them, so that's not a problem. I do use Battlefield Ninja, but only a single unit mixed with an army when I feel like trying to ambush the taisho, or, one "army" of nothing but ninjas (Tokugawa 1580 campaign begins with 9 units; I put them all in one group). These I use to raid, draw a larger enemy force where I want them, or to attack/assassinate a poorly protected daimyo or heir. I limit myself to the one group, and don't build additional units unless they suffer a lot of attrition.

The additional campaigns scenarios are what I like best about WE, what make it my choice over the original version.

For multiplayer, the Samurai Warlords mod for Medieval/VI is still my favorite.