Impressions of the demo?

[Gregoshi]

I played just the campaign part earlier this week, but skipped the battles. Today I tried the battles. In short, it was a disaster. I had little to no control over the army and formations were non-existent. Part of the problem was just trying to follow the steps from the advisor. It wasn't bad until the last half of the second battle when things started to unravel. I was having problems with camera control selecting units and clicking properly to get my units to do what I wanted them to do. I felt like a drunken taisho commanding a Chinese fire drill (yet the scripted battle still let me win). All attempts to form a battle line resulted in more chaos - kind of funny looking back on it but very frustrating at the time. I'm going to have to make some control adjustments or just practice getting used to the command and control that are the default.

The castle siege was more of the same, except I was intimidated by the huge castle - very intimidated. In addition to horrible control issues, I had not a clue how to approach the assault or use the new units. The cannons ran out of ammo before the front gate was destroyed and with that, the only real plan I had for the battle. Chokosabe bodies littered the ground in front of the castle gate. At least my ninjas bled all over the ground inside the castle - cleaning up that mess oughta teach the enemy a lesson.

Anyway, it was not a very pleasant experience on the battlefield. At this point I hesitate to even attempt the historical battle until I can exercise some manner of control over an army. Back to the class room for me.

Aside from the above, I was very pleased with the pace of movement and combat. Movement felt natural, not rushed, giving me plenty of time to panic as I attempted to futilely introduce some organization to the mob, er, army. Likewise with combat, it was drawn out long enough for me to not only panic at the flanking moves the AI made, but also allow me time to wish really, really hard that my units would just move where I want them on their own without me having to attempt giving an order. All in all, I'm pleased with the mechanics.

[Drunk Clown]

I find it strange that I had (apparently one of the few) no problems with the gamespeed, then again I started with Rome.

That people have no time to react is only the first couple of times you play it. You'll learn to react faster. I mean my brother plays CoH and he can react fast as ****! If I try that game I fail miserably, but hey, I haven't put the time in it to learn it. Same goes for S2:TW, just play it a little longer, before saying OMG IT'S TOO FAST I CAN'T USE TACTICS. I know this because I hated M2:TW when I first played it; later loved it. Same goes for E:TW.

Btw, can't you turn off the shinyness? (Bloom) So, if you can, how's that a problem? :S

And how come you can't make formations? I can (at least in the second and third battle)

Now the castle siege; I also didn't see an opening, but atleast my cannon broke the damn gate. But first I had my Shinobi and thought, after hearing the advisor, that they could infiltrate the castle very easily and thus I sent them to the castle centre. First I noticed that they could hide themselves about everywhere, then I started moving them around and thought (seeing how the ran/walked) they hide too when they move (or stay low). So I sent them and they got stomped by archers. Now I'm asking myself how are shinobi effective if they can't walk in silence? It was really a worthless unit, they also died very quick in hand-to-hand combat. So what's the point letting them climb up and capture the centre if they can't even hold out against Ashigaru.

After the painful defeat of my shinobi, I wanted to make a mass attack; attacking them from all sides. Ashigaru trough the gate, samurai swordsmen plus the bow hero and the general to the left side of the castle, horsies to the right side (dismounted) and archers supporting the ashigaru (I left the monks behind, stupid).

Result: Samurai swordsmen died, horsies died, ashigaru fared pretty well although sustaining heavy casualties, archers stayed a bit more alive, and didn't want to risk my general. So after the samurai failed I sent my monks in and they beat the living **** out of those archers (don't understand why they had matchlock). Luckily I had a lucky shot with my cannons which killed a cavalry unit for 1/3, which probably helped. And soon after my monks had beaten the archers I won, although I should have died. Strange thing too was that the balance of the power in the upper right corner was in favor of me even though I sustained heavy casualties in comparison with the enemy.

Also those points on the map are lame (archery dojo, farmhouse, Buddhist temple).

My only concern so far is the originality of the troops between different clans. I know the Takeda (I believe) have better Cavalry, but only the word Takeda has been put in front of the standard names, which is utterly lame.

[Zarky]

My only concern so far is the originality of the troops between different clans. I know the Takeda (I believe) have better Cavalry, but only the word Takeda has been put in front of the standard names, which is utterly lame.

Then suggest a better option... This is Japan were talking about, not Europe. Different clans had different preferences over army composition, but any diversity or originality that the developers might implement, would mostly be made up. Unless we go to the Empire/Napoleon solution of having unique units you can only have one/couple of.

[Drunk Clown]

Then suggest a better option... This is Japan were talking about, not Europe. Different clans had different preferences over army composition, but any diversity or originality that the developers might implement, would mostly be made up. Unless we go to the Empire/Napoleon solution of having unique units you can only have one/couple of.

I have no knowledge of Japan whatsoever. Still without the noticeable difference I find it very hard to make the choice of choosing a clan. In previous Total War games my choice was based on recruitment of different units between different factions (e.g. I played Russia a lot in M2TW due to the Cossack units and the Boyar sons). But now, I have no idea which clan to pick because to me there's no big difference between the clans other than the location.

[quadalpha]

I don't understand how the second tutorial battle is giving people problems. You just chew through the monks in the forest and flank your cav to the left like the guy tells you to, right?

[Drunk Clown]

I don't understand how the second tutorial battle is giving people problems. You just chew through the monks in the forest and flank your cav to the left like the guy tells you to, right?

It's the third.

[Gregoshi]

I don't understand how the second tutorial battle is giving people problems. You just chew through the monks in the forest and flank your cav to the left like the guy tells you to, right?

I personally just wasn't getting the UI (user interface). There are enough differences from STW that I couldn't wrap my mind around it on the first go-round. For example, A and D are strafe left/right and I was mentally thinking rotate left/right. That messed me up a bit. I know Q and E to rotate, but I was expecting A/D so I'd naturally go to those keys when I wanted to rotate - then I'd remember and switch. Also, I'd select 2-3 units and then attempt to draw/drag out a formation for them at a location and the units would get de-selected - I had no problem in doing this with a single unit though. It was a series of issues like this that lead to frustration during the battle and clear thinking when out the window - like stopping all movement and consult help screen and UI control set-up before I continued.

In that second battle with my army in disarray, when I saw the monks in the forest, my cav units were right in front of them when the advisor said to send the naginata after them. I used the cav anyway, since the naginata where just too far way. By the time the cav finished routing the monk/guns, 1) I had lost track of the enemy cav coming around my left (again frustration and panic distracted), and 2) one of my cav was way off to my right near the edge of the map. It is not that the second battle was hard, it was just my inability to handle the UI. This problem followed through with the castle battle as well.

The problems I had with the demo were all squarely sitting in my lap, not the demo's.

[Forward Observer]

I liked the demo well enough that I will still pre-order the game. Being a TW fan, I would have done so anyway, and it would have had to have been pretty bad for me not to.

I was very disappointed with the problems that plagued Empire at release, but since this game is using essentially the same game engine and is more focused as Napoleon was, I have my hopes that it will be a more finished product this time around.

There's a few minor things I could quible about---like troops movement commands seeming to default to run, requiring an additional command change back to walk, or trying to get accustomed to minor camera and command control changes, but nothing I can't adapt or get used to.

On a related note, here's a tip that worked for me in the siege battle. Do not use the cannons to batter down the first gate, but instead use them to take out the one main arrow tower just to the right of the gate. This effectively eliminates the one constant and nagging source of arrow fire raining down on any of your troops as they approach the outer wall.

Since all your troops can scale walls, you really don't need the gate for access anyway. Besides, once you control the level the gate is automatically opened. You have more archers than the enemy plus you can resupply them if you take the village structure to the right front of your starting position, so eliminating this tower early gives you superiority in ranged weapon fire.

Of course I still lost archers trading arrows with the enemy, but having that tower out of the way simply made the first level of the fortress much easier to take with fewer losses.

The enemy general unit also kept running around on the first level, so they had completely routed from my missile fire before I had hardly stormed the same level. The battle was pretty much a given from that point on.

Cheers

[NagatsukaShumi]

I have no knowledge of Japan whatsoever. Still without the noticeable difference I find it very hard to make the choice of choosing a clan. In previous Total War games my choice was based on recruitment of different units between different factions (e.g. I played Russia a lot in M2TW due to the Cossack units and the Boyar sons). But now, I have no idea which clan to pick because to me there's no big difference between the clans other than the location.

I suspect that before you pick the clans there will be a "blurb" telling you about them and what their specialities are, if not it will undoubtedly be posted via a guide on the Org.

Shogun is more about proving your the master of Japan above all others with more or less the same resources at your disposal, rather than Europe which is vast and allows hundreds of cultures.

[Monk]

I suspect that before you pick the clans there will be a "blurb" telling you about them and what their specialities are, if not it will undoubtedly be posted via a guide on the Org.

Not only that, but the game comes with its own encyclopedia (the entirety of which is in the demo) wherein each Clan has its own article. Strengths, weaknesses and a little history are all given for you. Some clans, like the Chokosabe, can recruit much better archers than others. This not only encourages a ranged play-style, but also a much heavier focus on the archery arts (technology).

If you play to your clans strength, not only in army composition but also in tech research, you can easily turn minor strengths into powerful advantages through the course of a campaign. I would assume this was the intention behind the design.

[Prussian to the Iron]

am i the only one who is still unable to use the encyclopedia? all i get is a black window where im assuming it would be.