Hi all,

I've only played STW, so forgive my ignorance about this.

I am used to the Daimyo and their heirs ageing throughout the course of a campaign (I'm not the swiftest of campaigners) but the troops are not dealt with in the same way. In the version of STW I have, you cannot demobilize the units you no longer need and some of them may have been kicking around for many years, without ever seeing combat. Particularly the starting units which cannot be upgraded (in this version) and end up being no match for the teched-up units you eventually have to face, making them only of use for garrisons in non-frontline provinces.

So I'm curious about the more advanced versions of the TW series. You can demobilise them or upgrade them but, in the latter case, does the game represent the fact that they could be getting on in years, might march across the battlefield less quickly than their younger peers? (I'm thinking of one of those Kurosawa films, one of which has a little light relief in the form of a pair of peasant soldiers who were late-middle aged, evidently having done the job for years, without ever seeing combat).

Or is it taken as read that they serve for 'n' years and are constantly replaced by fresh blood, as in modern-day armies?


I recall being irritated by the fact that building a swordsmith or armoury in the game did not entitle you to re-equip your entire army. Surely the output of the smith or armoury could be transported across your lands? No, only troops raised in that territory got the benefit. You couldn't even do it by circulating units through the province in question. I guess that problem has now been fixed in that way but there is obviously a certain cost penalty so you end up upgrading a few units well, rather than all of them to a lesser extent?


The demobilisation business interests me, but I'll have to go and buy MTW or RTW to see it for myself.
My knowledge of history is sketchy, at best, but I had the impression that (in Europe, at least) there were no 'standing armies' in the Medieval era. They were raised whenever needed and disbanded at the end of the warring season, or whenever hostilities finally ceased. Too expensive to have them sitting around for years, just waiting for things to happen.

If this was represented in the game then, when long periods of peace become established (I've seen this mentioned in other peoples' posts), you ought to be able to get by with just tiny garrisons (militia), enough to keep rebellions at bay and high-quality guards look after the royal personage, of course. Then, when your spies alert you to mobilisation going on abroad, you get a chance to rush together a force as best as you can with the funds available and go off for the fight.

This was probably the reason why many conflicts were resolved with just one key battle, with the protagonists' entire armies on the field at the same time, not split into chunks looking after arbitrary 'provinces'.

I've no idea what countries did to protect home turf when they went off to foreign lands for a punch-up but perhaps this is where the business of diplomacy comes in? Even if they are not all overtly allied to you, you still need to be assured that no other country would take advantage of your side 'playing away', so the army would probably not depart home soil until all your various consulates had given the nod?

Anyway, returning to the point, what would you think if the game worked by allowing you to accumulate koku/florins through your economy during times of peace then, when the AI declares war on you, you shift to an interface like the multiplayer screen? You have X amount in the bank, you raise the best army you can, you go into battle and the outcome determines your "empire's" future course.

Even if you did win, you may have nothing left in the bank and, even if you disband your army immediately, it could take years of saving up your annual profits before you're ready for another conflict (but the same goes for your opponent too, I suppose).

I can't say this would make for interesting gameplay but I would see it as a more accurate representation of reality. Long periods of boredom interspersed by short periods of extreme violence. Such is war.

It is possible to sustain a conflict (or peace through a sustained military stand-off) for a period of many years but you'll have to tax your populace heavily in order to do that, with consequent risk of trouble from within the longer it goes on.

Wait a minute, that's the modern world

All historical corrections and your personal opinions (game or real-world related) would be most welcome