Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Historical accuracy of Fall of the Samurai

Napoleonic Total War IIINapoleonic Total War III BannedBanned Users Posts: 336
How historically accurate is Fall of the Samurai? I expect some lengthy answers and debates.
Post edited by Napoleonic Total War III on

Comments

  • Half_Life_ExpertHalf_Life_Expert Senior Member Oak Park, CA , USARegistered Users Posts: 4,686
    edited April 2013
    Well it all depends on how you want to look at TW as a whole.

    Total War, although most certainly set in historical times, is not trying to achieve great historical accuracy in a sense. The real accuracy they seek is in Armies, weapons, technology, and other tools of the era, whilst allowing the player to have full freedom the make his/her own decisions.

    When discussing the Boshin War (1868-1869) and the Mejii Restoration as a whole, I would personally say it is on the more accurate side. All of the technology (military and civilian) were in existence within one point or another of the game's timeframe (1864 to 1871ish).

    Lets look at one specific example: the Gatling Gun.

    In the real Boshin War, I am aware of only one domain (clan in game terms) that possessed Gatlings: the Nagaoka. They had two. I don't know how extensively they were used, if at all.

    the Combined Choshu/Satsuma Forces (therefore not a single domain) also possessed one Gatling Gun, I do not know this one's service record ether.

    the Gatling gun was patented by Dr Richard Gatling in 1862, and therefore was in existence throughout the entire game time-frame

    In FOTS, players are free to purchase and wield as many Gatling gun batteries as they wish from what I can tell (each battery has 4 Gatling guns) once they have the ability to recruit them

    The real boshin war had almost no gatlings, whilst wars in FOTS can have dozens of them in theory. My point is that All TW games give you a historical setting, then allow you to do what you want within that setting.


    The only way you can actually the history in FOTS is with the Historical battles, linked in an unlock chain in chronological order, where you play as the Pro-Imperial Forces. I do not know enough about the real Boshin war to give an analysis, others must do that
    "we have officially entered into pre-whinning about our games."- Cogre

    I will always respect differing opinions on here, so long as they are presented maturely and in a civil manner

    "No Battleplan ever survives contact with the enemy"- Helmuth Von Moltke the Elder

    The WWI Thread: https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/30914/why-a-world-war-i-themed-total-war/p1

    I'm skipping TW: Warhammer
  • TatsunoshiTatsunoshi Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 158
    edited April 2013
    And they have, in this article written for the Samurai Archives Shogun-ki blog:

    http://shogun-yashiki.blogspot.com/2012/04/total-war-total-fantasy-shogun-2-fall.html
  • damadman228damadman228 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,437
    edited April 2013
    In short, if you're a die hard fan of historical accuracy and simply can't stand the fact that CA tend to stray from true history in favor of easier access and overall fun factor, you will hate this game. If you don't worry about that too much and just want a war game set in 19th century Japan, you likely got yourself a keeper.
    This might be helpful for those still playing S2 MP:
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=444087

    Also check out this awesome channel:
    https://www.youtube.com/user/milkandcookiesTW
  • SertoriusSertorius Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 938
    edited April 2013
    One historical thing that I like about the game was I was playing the naval battle and I noticed a gatling gun on top one of the ironclads. I remember reading in college (weird because I read it in my US military history and not in Modern Japan) about one of the naval engagements where a ship had gatling guns and used it to repel boarding. And I looked it up on wikipedia and voila, sure enough there's the Kotetsu in the Battle of Miyako Bay. The events were drawn up from real life events: Maria Luz incident (the "Nanban Slaver"), the Haitorei Edict, Kanagawa incident. etc. Although the chronology could be iffy for the sake of gaming I guess eg the Kanagawa incident I looked up and it was 68---the game starts at 69.

    The thing that people don't understand with the timeline is this: the game isn't just about the Boshin War, it's pretty much pre-Boshin up until the Satsuma rebellion (including other Kyushuan revolts in between: Hagi, Saga, Kumamoto and other major rebellions in between---all of which are ironically the same samurais who fought in behalf of the emperor against the shogun)---it's the whole Meiji Restoration. The Shogunate vs. Imperial forces (and the establishment and end of the Ezo Republic) is only a few months to a year.

    It's the same with Rise of the Samurai, it's not just the Gempei War, it's pretty much the Hogen and Heiji Rebellion onwards.
  • TatsunoshiTatsunoshi Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 158
    edited April 2013
    Just a couple of timeline notes...
    Sertorius wrote: »
    ...the game isn't just about the Boshin War, it's pretty much pre-Boshin up until the Satsuma rebellion (including other Kyushuan revolts in between: Hagi, Saga, Kumamoto and other major rebellions in between---all of which are ironically the same samurais who fought in behalf of the emperor against the shogun)---it's the whole Meiji Restoration.

    I think you might be getting the Boshin War and the Seinan Sensou (Southwest Campaign/Satsuma Rebellion) mixed up, or might think the Satsuma Rebellion was part of the Boshin War. FOS starts in 1864, a few years before the historical Boshin War of 1868-69, so it's surely not pre-Boshin. The long campaign goes to 1876, so it misses the 1877 Seinan Sensou altogether. However, I do agree that the game's focus is on the Meiji Restoration as a whole and not just the Boshin War (which is the focus of the Dragon War pack of historical battles).
    Sertorius wrote: »
    It's the same with Rise of the Samurai, it's not just the Gempei War, it's pretty much the Hogen and Heiji Rebellion onwards.

    The game does start before the outset of the Jisho-Juei No Ran (Genpei War), in 1175, but begins long after the Hogen and Heiji incidents (1156/1160 respectively). But again I think what you're getting at is correct-it's more about the rise of the samurai to sharing the reins of government with the Emperor rather than just the Genpei War.
  • SertoriusSertorius Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 938
    edited April 2013
    ^barely: the Kyushu samurai revolts that led up to the bigger Satsuma Rebellion (the Shimpuren, Akizuki and Hagi, 76 and Saga 74) were all within the timeline. The end of game is 1877. The Satsuma Rebellion according to online sources started at Jan. 1877.

    Oh I'm not mixing them up, I'm saying the game is presenting the whole Meiji Restoration (and the warfare that occurred before and after the Boshin War---including the post-Meiji revolts like the Kyushu Samurai rebellions and the Satsuma Rebellion) and NOT just the Boshin War.

    PS And that's been the case in many of its games---they have to condense for the sake of inclusion good and bad parts. It's a game after all.
  • mustachewarfaremustachewarfare Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,092
    edited April 2013
    bow outrange rifle. Yeah~~~~~~~~
  • ArcinatusArcinatus Member Registered Users Posts: 69
    edited May 2013
    My question: Did line infantry really still fight in organized lines with those muzzle loading rifles during this war?
    Loyalty. Duty. Respect. Selfless Service. Honor. Integrity. Personal Courage.
    8.jpg
  • TatsunoshiTatsunoshi Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 158
    edited May 2013
    "Arcinatus wrote:
    My question: Did line infantry really still fight in organized lines with those muzzle loading rifles during this war?

    Yes. Such was the case with other contemporary conflicts, specifically the American Civil War (especially for the first two or three years before fighting from entrenchments became popular). Lines were the best way to keep a unit under command, together and operating as a unit, not to mention making it harder for the men to run away from battle. And besides, they say wars are always fought with the tactics of the last war, so Napoleonic tactics were still in vogue and taught at military academies like West Point :) .
  • SertoriusSertorius Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 938
    edited May 2013
    Arcinatus wrote: »
    My question: Did line infantry really still fight in organized lines with those muzzle loading rifles during this war?

    Yeah it was just 10 years after the American civil war.
  • Half_Life_ExpertHalf_Life_Expert Senior Member Oak Park, CA , USARegistered Users Posts: 4,686
    edited May 2013
    Yeah, infact the campaign starts in 1864, a year before the end of the ACW, many armies were still very much using muzzleloaders and Napoleonic/Line tactics
    "we have officially entered into pre-whinning about our games."- Cogre

    I will always respect differing opinions on here, so long as they are presented maturely and in a civil manner

    "No Battleplan ever survives contact with the enemy"- Helmuth Von Moltke the Elder

    The WWI Thread: https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/30914/why-a-world-war-i-themed-total-war/p1

    I'm skipping TW: Warhammer
  • naishonaisho Senior Member USARegistered Users Posts: 3,425
    edited May 2013
    Tatsunoshi wrote: »
    And they have, in this article written for the Samurai Archives Shogun-ki blog:

    http://shogun-yashiki.blogspot.com/2012/04/total-war-total-fantasy-shogun-2-fall.html

    I have one problem with that write up, CA has never claimed they were making a simulation.


    I keep the quote of MikeB in my sig because it to me tells of CA mission.
    "You have raised assorted issues under what might be termed a “I-don’t-like-it because-I-say-it’s-not-historical” banner. This isn't quite the same as "justified", I'm sorry to say." -MikeB

    Whether it is historical or not CA will make the game they want.
    1---/\__/\
    1=(O-"-O)=/\
    1--- / | | \--/ -|
    1---| \-/ \-_ /
    1--( Neko )

    Naisho the Neko

    "You have raised assorted issues under what might be termed a “I-don’t-like-it because-I-say-it’s-not-historical” banner. This isn't quite the same as "justified", I'm sorry to say." -MikeB
  • TatsunoshiTatsunoshi Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 158
    edited May 2013
    naisho wrote: »
    I have one problem with that write up, CA has never claimed they were making a simulation.

    That's right, they haven't. But the perception of much of the player base is that they ARE making sims, and the article was written to dispell that notion. You'll also notice it states that FOS is a great GAME. Just as I don't confuse movies with actual history, I don't let the non-historical nature of a game detract from my enjoyment of it as entertainment-but the number of people who confuse pop culture with actual history is sometimes staggering (pretty much everything on the History Channel dealing with pre-modern Japanese history is garbage, for example).

    Bottom line, there's room for both sims and arcade style games that deal with history. When I want a sim, I fire up a John Tiller game, Takeda, or Genpei Souran. When I want exciting arcade style action with a dash of history and strategy, I'll play Civil War 1863, Shogun 2, Rise of the Samurai, Fall of the Samurai, or even Sengoku Musou.
  • naishonaisho Senior Member USARegistered Users Posts: 3,425
    edited May 2013
    I disagree, not once have I ever met a person who has played TW describe it as a sim. There have been people who want to make it into a sim (and I have met a few of those) but not once have I met one on or offline ever think of it as a sim.
    1---/\__/\
    1=(O-"-O)=/\
    1--- / | | \--/ -|
    1---| \-/ \-_ /
    1--( Neko )

    Naisho the Neko

    "You have raised assorted issues under what might be termed a “I-don’t-like-it because-I-say-it’s-not-historical” banner. This isn't quite the same as "justified", I'm sorry to say." -MikeB
  • TatsunoshiTatsunoshi Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 158
    edited May 2013
    As a Samurai Archives staff member, I get tons of emails from players who do think it is a sim.
  • Maeda_ToshiieMaeda_Toshiie Senior Member SingaporeRegistered Users Posts: 3,601
    edited May 2013
    Tatsunoshi wrote: »
    As a Samurai Archives staff member, I get tons of emails from players who do think it is a sim.

    Ah, Forum Kanrei.

    Well, yeah, it is a game, not some simulation.

    Speaking of Takeda. Just how close are Magitech
    Total War Forums, the official forums of the Total War series:

    Forum terms and conditions
    Technology Discussion Section
    How not to assemble a PC

    Google-fu, the best skill in solving technical issues.

    Faibo waipa!
  • TatsunoshiTatsunoshi Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 158
    edited May 2013
    Ah, Forum Kanrei.

    Yep, among other things. We wear lots of different kabuto at the SA ;)

    I take it you meant to ask "Just how close are Magitech to releasing Takeda 4"? If so, the answer is unfortunately bad. They've dropped producing PC games and are concentrating on IOS games now. The latest one, "Samurai Archer Defense", is based on the Takeda 1 engine and is a lot of fun. Magitech's games (the Three Kingdoms and Takeda series) were designed as sims and paid a lot of attention to historical accuracy-including extensive supply and recruitment, and making the game as difficult to win as it would have been in real life (which is to say as hard or harder than S2's legendary). The high degree of difficulty and lack of 'chrome' units (not to mention the relative lack of interest in Japanese history among Westerners) resulted in poor sales so Ming told me they had to drop PC development. It's a shame, because it's a great game for those who are really interested in the period. Our re-enactment group in Kyoto still plays Takeda 3-it did pretty well in Japan and for some reason Russia. TWS2's pretty popular, too, especially Rise of the Samurai, but only one of the three computers at our HQ can play it.

    It also goes to show why there are many more 'games' than 'sims' released-they take less historical research, give the creators more freedom, and sell a heck of a lot better.

    If you weren't asking about a release of Takeda 4, sorry.
  • naishonaisho Senior Member USARegistered Users Posts: 3,425
    edited May 2013
    I take it then that those who send emails asking about it have never played any TW prior?


    hmm, well one thing I might as well caveat though, the battle system in TW (for all its unrealistic tendencies) it probably the closest your are going to get in terms of a well designed simulation of large scale combat. You would be hard pressed to find a more complicated battle engine anywhere that can simulate so many different things. The pathfinding alone is extremely impressive because of how many things it juggles.
    1---/\__/\
    1=(O-"-O)=/\
    1--- / | | \--/ -|
    1---| \-/ \-_ /
    1--( Neko )

    Naisho the Neko

    "You have raised assorted issues under what might be termed a “I-don’t-like-it because-I-say-it’s-not-historical” banner. This isn't quite the same as "justified", I'm sorry to say." -MikeB
  • easytargeteasytarget Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,428
    edited May 2013
    Tatsunoshi wrote: »
    As a Samurai Archives staff member, I get tons of emails from players who do think it is a sim.

    This made me laugh. Virtually nothing about this game thank god is a simulation.

    Oh, and as to the OP, who starts a thread like this only to not participate in it? See if you can guess the answer, it starts with a T. And the OPs user name is a dead give away they aren't even interested in Japan.
    This space intentionally left blank.
  • Maeda_ToshiieMaeda_Toshiie Senior Member SingaporeRegistered Users Posts: 3,601
    edited May 2013
    Tatsunoshi wrote: »
    Yep, among other things. We wear lots of different kabuto at the SA ;)

    I take it you meant to ask "Just how close are Magitech to releasing Takeda 4"? If so, the answer is unfortunately bad. They've dropped producing PC games and are concentrating on IOS games now. The latest one, "Samurai Archer Defense", is based on the Takeda 1 engine and is a lot of fun. Magitech's games (the Three Kingdoms and Takeda series) were designed as sims and paid a lot of attention to historical accuracy-including extensive supply and recruitment, and making the game as difficult to win as it would have been in real life (which is to say as hard or harder than S2's legendary). The high degree of difficulty and lack of 'chrome' units (not to mention the relative lack of interest in Japanese history among Westerners) resulted in poor sales so Ming told me they had to drop PC development. It's a shame, because it's a great game for those who are really interested in the period. Our re-enactment group in Kyoto still plays Takeda 3-it did pretty well in Japan and for some reason Russia. TWS2's pretty popular, too, especially Rise of the Samurai, but only one of the three computers at our HQ can play it.

    It also goes to show why there are many more 'games' than 'sims' released-they take less historical research, give the creators more freedom, and sell a heck of a lot better.

    If you weren't asking about a release of Takeda 4, sorry.

    Whoops, my post got cut off. What I meant is how close is the Takeda games (IIRC, they do have games for the 3 kingdoms period and Rome as well) is to a sim, given your comment earlier. You mentioned logistics and recruitment, but what about the battlefield?

    It is unfortunate to hear that Magitech stopped developing its PC games. I have always wanted a version of Koei's RTK series with real time battles.

    When you said that 1 in 3 computers in your HQ being able to play S2, is it due to the requirements (yeah, TW games are taxing on computer resources) or due to software/driver issues?
    Total War Forums, the official forums of the Total War series:

    Forum terms and conditions
    Technology Discussion Section
    How not to assemble a PC

    Google-fu, the best skill in solving technical issues.

    Faibo waipa!
  • Napoleonic Total War IIINapoleonic Total War III Banned Banned Users Posts: 336
    edited May 2013
    Right first thing's first, I wanted to find out about whether FOTS was historically accurate or not. I'm not talking about Magitech or Koei here.

    Did the soliders really have fast moving guns as they did in the time period?
    What about the railways? First one I know was bulit in 1872
    There was some disccusion about FOTS missing the 1870s - Is this true?
    It seems a bit odd that's it starts at 1864, because the Boshin war was only 2 years, so why put 1864?
    Do you think it would have been better to include Saigo Takamori in the game during the last stages of his life?

    Now were the units in FOTS any accurate?
    Were there things such as red bears and white bear infantry?
    One of the most unrealistic things I find is that when you're attacking a fort, they're fighting in exactly the same style as Shogun 2 did. Do you really think that those castles must have been used for attacking? I don't think so.
    Are the uniforms any accurate?

    And are the artierrly and foregin units any accurate? I know there was foregin involvement, but just how deep was it in Japan? I don't think they sent units there but there was an article saying so. And samurai units wouldn't have existed surely in the Boshin war, thats like being transported over 300 years from Sengoku Jidai to the Boshin Era.

    On the other hand Takeeda 3 does seem quite similar to Shogun 2 and Medieval 2. now Magitech is really interesting me, are they a Japanese games developer? If so they've done a pretty good job but I can't help but notice that they are quite similar to the total war games.

    And to the poster who accused me of '' not being interested''. I wonder has he watched any Japanese series? Three Kingdoms? There was a serial made on the Russo- Japanese War. You must have watched Throne of Blood, the Hidden Fortress, Kagemusha, Ran. Surely you have must have watched these movies. If so, can you answer my question as to where the Japanese Obession for three kingdoms come from? Since you so highly claim to be an expert on this issue.

    Yep, I'm buying Takeda 3.
  • TatsunoshiTatsunoshi Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 158
    edited May 2013
    naisho wrote: »
    I take it then that those who send emails asking about it have never played any TW prior?

    There were a handful of Japanese players who never played TW before (no interest in Rome or European history and I suppose too young for S1). They thought they were buying a sim, weren't happy after buying it, and wanted to know if Western players knew Japanese history wasn't really like this. Other than that, I'd say the rest had played some version of TW. Like I said before, unless you deal with it on a regular basis, it's hard to believe how many people put blind faith in their pop culture sources, especially when the subject isn't from their own culture. Whether it's TWS2, the movie "The Last Samurai", or the novel "Shogun", you'd be amazed at the number of people who think that's the way it was. And most pop culture stuff on Japan produced by Westerners is pretty inaccurate-I'd say 75% of the information on the 47 Ronin or Musashi available in English is based on fictional sources. Remember, the people you see posting on the forums or meet in multiplayer are usually the most hardcore and well-informed (about the game, at least) players-they're just the tip of the iceberg. There are a lot of casual players out there that are never heard from.

    As to the battle engine, in my opinion Takeda 3's is much better, although it doesn't have nearly the graphics that TWS2 has. On the plus side, though, we were able to easily mod units and give them our family's traditional flags-not to mention slapping the SA logo on a few of them for fun.
  • TatsunoshiTatsunoshi Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 158
    edited May 2013
    Right first thing's first, I wanted to find out about whether FOTS was historically accurate or not. I'm not talking about Magitech or Koei here.

    Did the soliders really have fast moving guns as they did in the time period?
    What about the railways? First one I know was bulit in 1872
    There was some disccusion about FOTS missing the 1870s - Is this true?
    It seems a bit odd that's it starts at 1864, because the Boshin war was only 2 years, so why put 1864?
    Do you think it would have been better to include Saigo Takamori in the game during the last stages of his life?

    Now were the units in FOTS any accurate?
    Were there things such as red bears and white bear infantry?
    One of the most unrealistic things I find is that when you're attacking a fort, they're fighting in exactly the same style as Shogun 2 did. Do you really think that those castles must have been used for attacking? I don't think so.
    Are the uniforms any accurate?

    And are the artierrly and foregin units any accurate? I know there was foregin involvement, but just how deep was it in Japan? I don't think they sent units there but there was an article saying so. And samurai units wouldn't have existed surely in the Boshin war, thats like being transported over 300 years from Sengoku Jidai to the Boshin Era.

    On the other hand Takeeda 3 does seem quite similar to Shogun 2 and Medieval 2. now Magitech is really interesting me, are they a Japanese games developer? If so they've done a pretty good job but I can't help but notice that they are quite similar to the total war games.

    I'm not exactly sure what you mean by 'fast moving guns'. Rate of reloading or the movement rate of artillery?

    The railways issue was covered in the SA article, but yes, you're right, an extremely short track length in 1872, and no real network for a good decade or more. Japan couldn't afford it and blasting tunnels/building bridges in the mountainous/river filled Japanese landscape was expensive and extremely time consuming.

    FOTS does have part of the 1870's-it cuts off in 1876 in the long campaign.

    Have no idea why CA has the game starting in 1864. I would have chosen 1863, since that's when the "order to expel the barbarians" (joi jikko no chokumei) was issued by Emperor Komei and the real armed conflicts started. However, as has been discussed the game doesn't really focus on just the Boshin War, but the Bakumatsu/Meiji Ishin period in general. So 1864 isn't a bad time to start.

    It would indeed have been nice to have the Southwest Campaign (Seinan Senso or Satsuma Rebellion) with an older Saigo included, but the game cuts off right before then. Would have made for a nice historical battles package, especially when paired with the 'Dragon War' Boshin War package (with the young Saigo).

    Units accurate? Well, way too many special abilities and varied stats/abilities-not nearly as much differentiation. No 'battlefield ninja', etc. The basic unit types are OK, but too much chrome heaped on them to be historical.

    There were red bears, white bears, and black bears (red bears were Tosa infantry, white bears from Choshu, black bears from Satsuma). Not really distinct units other than color of headgear-no special skills or unique training, etc.

    There wasn't a lot of fighting or castle sieges in the Boshin War or Satsuma Rebellion, although there were notable castle sieges at Goryokaku and Kumamoto castles. Blasting them with artillery and small arms was the preferred method, although there was hand to hand fighting when the castle's defenders would occasionally sally out to strike the attackers.

    The uniforms in the game are VERY accurate. I believe CA used a popular Japanese picture book of uniforms as a reference and this turned out very well.

    Artillery in the game is accurate-these were the guns that were actually used, although it's way too easy to amass great quantities of them.

    The way foreign units are treated in the game is not accurate. They should have been an 'npc' or 'allied' force used to defend foreign interests and nothing else. There's no way the Brits, Yanks, or French would have allowed a unit to be under the direct command of a foreign county. Fighting ALONGSIDE them when it coincided with their interests, yes-fighting as part of their forces, no.

    Foreign involvement in Japan was the primary reason the Bakumatsu happened. They were instrumental in rearming Japanese forces and providing experts/advanced tech, but aside from a handful of advisers did not take part in the Japanese civil War. However, they were quick to respond to any threat to their national interests (as seen at the bombardments of Shimonseki and Kagoshima)-mostly naval forces. There were units of marines stationed at the various foreign consulates, but again, not to take part in the conflict.

    There were traditional samurai units at the beginning of the Bakumatsu, but it didn't take long for them all to be issued firearms (although many were the outdated arquebus). This applied to both the Shogunate and Imperial forces. They would still wear swords, but traditionally armed samurai units, despite what you often see in highly romanticized prints, had virtually disappeared by 1867 or 1868. Police forces like the Shinsengumi or Mimawarigumi would patrol with just swords, but when warfare came, they used rifles and cannon like everyone else.

    Magitech is based in Canada. Takeda is clearly inspired by the original Shogun and the real time battles look similar (as would be expected-they're depicting the same basic thing), but plays quite differently and much more realistically. Not as good looking as TWS2 and lacks the flash factor of the chrome units. Both fun to play excellent games but Takeda tends to be too difficult for casual players.

    Whew! Wall of text.
  • TatsunoshiTatsunoshi Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 158
    edited May 2013
    Whoops, my post got cut off. What I meant is how close is the Takeda games (IIRC, they do have games for the 3 kingdoms period and Rome as well) is to a sim, given your comment earlier. You mentioned logistics and recruitment, but what about the battlefield?

    The battlefield is very well done and does a solid job of recreating how samurai actually fought. Only five unit types (cav, spears, samurai, bow, gun)-spear units have archers mixed in for support, gunners also have archers to provide covering fire during reloading, and I'm pretty sure archers have a few spears mixed in for protection. The units are clan based rather than unit based (the way it was historically), so there's a mix of weaponry. A retainer will bring the vassals he's required to supply by his koku stipend, and can be delegated further 'house' troops by the daimyo. Troops are affected by morale, commanders, losses, etc (just like in S2) but also add other elements like how full their bellies are (there is straggling and outright desertion as well). Historically used preset battle formations are used (not generic ones) and you can also invent your own, and each one comes with an actual benefit to it.

    One nice feature is the ability to detach some of your starting forces before the battle and have them appear as reinforcements at a specific spot later on in the battle. The maku (an emplaced field headquarters) used by commanders is featured prominently-I wish this was something we'd see in S2.

    Battlefields are more realistic than S2 battlefields tend to be-samurai armies rarely fought on anything but an open plain unless a castle was involved (although they were fond of bivouacking on a hill-almost no Japanese commander would attack a position on a hill unless, again, a castle was involved). The plans of the castles use the actual tenshu and layout of the historical castles associated with each clan, not generic ones.

    In my opinion, though, the best feature is the command structure. Command and leadership was VERY important in a Japanese army-you had a bunch of headstrong individuals who, contrary to popular belief, were liable to cut and run and required a lot of supervision and inspiring leadership. Each 'unit' in Takeda is clan based, and has its own leader. Leaders tend to be more skilled handling one type of unit than another depending on their social status and education. A good leader is essential for keeping a unit together in battle and inspiring it to fight effectively. The daimyo can (a limited number of times per battle) inspire and rally troops by having the war drum beaten in the maku-and the daimyo also influences the behavior of the army as a whole. Troops fighting for a famous commander will enter battle with far more confidence than those fighting for a hack. Fighting carelessly and losing quality generals in battle can basically screw your chances at the campaign.

    Similarly, the game also makes you pay for wasting horses and gunners. No matter how much money you have, Historically, Japan had a limited capacity to produce/procure guns and horses, so if you lose a lot of horses or guns in a battle it can take a LONG time to replace them, and they have to be brought to your field force from a castle. Same thing for recruiting replacements, although that's somewhat easier. The neat thing about this dynamic is that you can inflict huge casualties on the enemy with few losses of your own, but if those losses are quality generals or lots of horses/guns, it will really hurt your chances at winning the game, so it pays to play somewhat cautiously as was done historically.

    There are aspects that aren't historical, mainly for gameplay reasons. For example, the cav units are comprised of all horses, whereas there was no such thing as a real cav unit in Sengoku armies. Each mounted horseman would have anywhere from two to five foot retainers running alongside his horse (to unseat mounted enemies and keep their lord from being unseated), and the horseman would usually only outrun his support when the enemy was routed and fleeing.

    I'm pretty sure Magitech's "Sango" game has real time battles in the days of the Three Kingdoms, but I haven't played it so might be wrong about that.
    When you said that 1 in 3 computers in your HQ being able to play S2, is it due to the requirements (yeah, TW games are taxing on computer resources) or due to software/driver issues?

    The requirements. We use donated computers and no one is going to donate an up-to-date high end computer ^_^. The gaming is just a small part of the club-there are jidaigeki movies, guest lecturers, and lots of the guys use it to get out of the house at night and socialize (lots more fun than volunteering for the neighborhood fire watch, which a lot of the retired guys do to get away from their wives!), so no one wants to sink a ton of money into the equipment. My wife and I donated the high end machine.

    Wall of text part 2
  • JanneJanne Member Registered Users Posts: 32
    edited May 2013
    Look at the casualty numbers for the Boshin War. That alone should tell you how realistic this game is trying to be. The linked article is quite unfair and borderline petty I think, it seems more like the writer found a chance to rant about something he/she knows a lot about and FOTS was the victim. The point is, the game is fun, a lot more fun than a military simulation of the same time period would be.
  • TatsunoshiTatsunoshi Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 158
    edited May 2013
    As the writer of the article, I'd like to point out that you seem not to have read the last half of it where I emphasize how enjoyable and fun the game is despite its lack of historical accuracy. It was written in response to the many email inquiries I received about how historically accurate it was and how it worked as a sim-not very well, but I told everyone to buy it anyway.
Sign In or Register to comment.