Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Sengoku AAR Comment thread

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Show only dev responses
Falc said:
Hrmmm, bit bothered by this... 1620 sounds very much like an arbitrary limit, simply based on the fact that that's the time it took the Tokugawa to unite Japan. In other words, if you're doing it slower, then you won't get the chance to finish, even though there's no good reason why.
Click to expand...

In that sense, all of our games (and many other games) end arbitrary. We could of course set the end date to 1800 but that would mean we release a game promising game-play up to that date and the game does not feature that. The game mechanics devised for this game fit the era that we chose. However, should you personally want to play a longer game, it's very easy to do, just change one date in the settings file.
 
herrhals said:
I have a feeling this games replayability factor is limited.

What is the difference between playing a middle, south, or north kingdom? Besides the obvious change in geography and starting neighbors?
Is there a one-size-fits-all strategy that can be applied to all kingdoms to unite Japan.
Click to expand...

This game of course has a more focused gameplay (and a more concrete goal) compared to say EUIII, but there will still be a difference playing Yamana, Ashikaga, So or Uesugi, just as it is a diffenrence in playing France, Bremen, Ulm or Poland. You can also decide to play as clan leader, daimyo or as a one-province kokujin.
 
Captain Gars said:
This game of course has a more focused gameplay (and a more concrete goal) compared to say EUIII, but there will still be a difference playing Yamana, Ashikaga, So or Uesugi, just as it is a diffenrence in playing France, Bremen, Ulm or Poland. You can also decide to play as clan leader, daimyo or as a one-province kokujin.
Click to expand...

That is what I figured, but like first person shooter games, replayability is greatly limited. This is my impression.
I am intrigued with the "plot" feature and am curious how developed and refined this feature is. As I recently mentioned in the EU3 Sengoku thread (post #70), it might be really neat to implement a similar system to EU3, especially in Italy, German region, and the French region.
 
jpr123 said:
How did you spend all your money? Is it really that expensive to raise your levies? I was watching another preview and the guy playing couldn't seem to get rid of all the money he was piling up, although I guess he wasn't very aggressive and spent many years at peace..
Click to expand...

This is a later build with better game balance.
 
Captain Gars said:
And this actually helps the AI. Players rarely have trouble with military access in say EUIII, but the AI often has. Here the AI will come after you...
Click to expand...
Sounds good to me in this case. Just don't get any mad ideas for the sequel to EUIII. ^^
 
Sandam said:
why are you not using your masters? in last screenshots they are idle.. why not collecting tax or something?
Click to expand...

Building building reduces tax income in the province while they are building. Other actions raise revolt risk. With me needing to throw every soldier I can to the front I don't want revolts back home.
 
King said:
If you have troops inside someone's land or on route to thier land when you declare war you will pay a much higher honour cost for using such dishonourable tactics. So seeing a potential attacker march through your lands isn't bad in fact it is quite a good thing, because you are ironically safer.
Click to expand...

Is it cheaper to DoW someone if their troops are in your lands? Ie you actually do ride out with your army to meet someone and tell them to go home, and YOU have to pay 20 honour?
 
Blastaz said:
Is it cheaper to DoW someone if their troops are in your lands? Ie you actually do ride out with your army to meet someone and tell them to go home, and YOU have to pay 20 honour?
Click to expand...

No, just the same.
 
Captain Gars said:
In that sense, all of our games (and many other games) end arbitrary. We could of course set the end date to 1800 but that would mean we release a game promising game-play up to that date and the game does not feature that. The game mechanics devised for this game fit the era that we chose. However, should you personally want to play a longer game, it's very easy to do, just change one date in the settings file.
Click to expand...

Ah, but that's just it. 1620 is a good approximation of the end of the real Sengoku Jidai, because that's when all of Japan was united and pacified in real history. It was indeed the end of an era, but it came to an end solely due to internal forces.

But, the whole point of the game is that as a player you start changing history and changing the flow of those internal forces. Imagine for a moment that the battle of Sekigahara ends up rather undecided. Both camps suffer great losses and retreat to their fortifications. The situation turns into a cold war and in 1620 you end up with a Japan that is not unified but split in two halves. This would not be the end of the Sengoku Jidai era, would it?

See, I'm not asking for gameplay past the Sengoku Jidai era. I mean, sure, 5 years or so to make sure everything is settled down, getting past the first succession, something like that to truly establish peaceful dominance. But once you have that, it'd just be boring to play out 2 centuries of peace. But saying that the Sengoku Jidai would have ended in 1620 no matter what, that just feels a bit wrong. I'm happy to hear I can easily change this.



Ah, and one more question: is the Sanada clan in the game?
 
Falc said:
Ah, but that's just it. 1620 is a good approximation of the end of the real Sengoku Jidai, because that's when all of Japan was united and pacified in real history. It was indeed the end of an era, but it came to an end solely due to internal forces.

But, the whole point of the game is that as a player you start changing history and changing the flow of those internal forces. Imagine for a moment that the battle of Sekigahara ends up rather undecided. Both camps suffer great losses and retreat to their fortifications. The situation turns into a cold war and in 1620 you end up with a Japan that is not unified but split in two halves. This would not be the end of the Sengoku Jidai era, would it?

See, I'm not asking for gameplay past the Sengoku Jidai era. I mean, sure, 5 years or so to make sure everything is settled down, getting past the first succession, something like that to truly establish peaceful dominance. But once you have that, it'd just be boring to play out 2 centuries of peace. But saying that the Sengoku Jidai would have ended in 1620 no matter what, that just feels a bit wrong. I'm happy to hear I can easily change this.



Ah, and one more question: is the Sanada clan in the game?
Click to expand...

No the objective here is for you to do as least as well as the historical figures did to win the game. The victory condition is set that way. This is not a sand box game, there is a clear victory condition and you have a set time to do it. Otherwise you don't win it is that simple. The whole point of the game is to win it inside the time limit we have given you.

Nope no Sanada clan.
 
Falc said:
Ah, but that's just it. 1620 is a good approximation of the end of the real Sengoku Jidai, because that's when all of Japan was united and pacified in real history. It was indeed the end of an era, but it came to an end solely due to internal forces.

But, the whole point of the game is that as a player you start changing history and changing the flow of those internal forces. Imagine for a moment that the battle of Sekigahara ends up rather undecided. Both camps suffer great losses and retreat to their fortifications. The situation turns into a cold war and in 1620 you end up with a Japan that is not unified but split in two halves. This would not be the end of the Sengoku Jidai era, would it?
Click to expand...

No it wouldn't. Ending it in 1620 is just as arbitrary as ending HoI in 1948 but to have WWII drag on until the year 2000 or Sengoku till 1800 without reflecting any changes in technology etc is in my mind worse. Having an end date also adds to the challenge of this game: you have 153 years to capture 180 provinces, claim the Shogun title and hold out against all enemmies for three years. But lets not derail this AAR comments thread too much.

Falc said:
Ah, and one more question: is the Sanada clan in the game?
Click to expand...

I'm not at work so I can't say for sure, but from searching the beta forum I couldn't find them so odds are they're not in the game at start. They might however be on the list of clan names available when brekaing lose and forming a new clan.
 
siis said:
No weekend update(s)? :D
Click to expand...
What? You think King would waste his precious free time playing games when can do it at work and get payed for it? ;)
 
Having spent the better part of my Weekend in the pub watching rugby (Scotland won btw) I now have an update for you.
 
It seems like the AI are actually expanding faster than yourself, should make for some difficult wars in the future.

Oh and Scotland won't win when they play England!
 
I can't see the pictures on any computer! :(

Are they taken down?
 
Johhog said:
I can't see the pictures on any computer! :(

Are they taken down?
Click to expand...

Pics work fine here :)

BTW:

To prevent the Yamana gaining more spoils in the war we subjugate the Fuwa clan. They become a subclan inside greater Nanbu collective, we have added the biological and technological distinctiveness to our own.
Click to expand...

Somebody has watched WAY too much Star Trek episodes/movies, but still a nice read King :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back