Quote Originally Posted by screwtype
But I'm suprised to hear you say you struggle with Shogun but not with ImpII, because it's just the opposite with me! Shogun is a bit of a cakewalk for me these days. I've probably only ever lost three or four campaigns (and yes, I always play on the hardest mode). With ImpII I've lost far more games than I can count, and sometimes deep into the campaign, dammit.
I confess I reload Imperialism II (and Civ games) to get a starting position I like. I think your starting position is even more important in Imp2 than in Civ. You can tell which factions are going to be serious just by looking at their starting provinces. Not having enough wood or hills etc just hamstrings you. What I like about both ImpII and Civ4 is the high wire act I play at the beginning - trying to maximise technological development, seize the best lands and invest for economic growth with a minimal army (butter, not guns, every time). It's great fun because the AIs in both games are absolute sharks and the more aggressive will go for you if you fall too far behind in military power. It can be cut short by the Swedes arriving with horse artillery, but it is extremely tense and fun.

Shogun I never really mastered. I found starting in the east too cut throat - whoever won early there, won big and I prefer slower boiling games. So I tended to choose more leisurely western expansion or even better the challenge of Oda. But I was not skilled enough to avoid encountering a late game Hojo horde and endless battles which exhausted me.

All this talk of Imp2 is making me want to fire it up again.