Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Total War: Shogun


Happy Panther

Recommended Posts

I haven't picked it up yet but definitely will. I've been playing the total war series since the original Shogun and have loved every one up to Empire. I played the demo and the graphics/UI didn't seem bad at all....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well having played it for a few days now I can see how the graphics fall short if you have all the settings on low. But that's good because the game downgrades very well to suit your computer. The units are the most detailed they've ever been and when you have a battle with 1000s of units it become quite a load.

The interface is fine imo, but I've also played every TW so I see how it's evolved. It can be sluggish if you have a sub-par computer because it seems they've tried to minimize as much as possible so when you click something(a castle, army, etc) there's a lot to load up. It's a complex game with a lot of controls, so there's really no way around it.

I haven't played enough to really form an opinion about it but I can already tell it's a LOT better than Empire. One thing I have noticed is that you have to tread very carefully. The map is smaller and every province really counts. You can't ignore some things like you were able to in previous releases(like farms, food shortages create a poo ton of unrest).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say so. ^^^

I played a good bit this weekend and I'm loving almost everything about it. Rome is still the pinnacle of the series, but this release made some great strides.

i like rome but i could be a really shitty empire yet destroy massive armies and keep rome from ever leaving the Italian peninsula just by making sure i could take phalanxes and hold them at bridges.

Then i would earn a new general every time because the victory was so overwhelming the comp thought i was a god.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thinking about picking this up. For those who have it, do all of the clans play the same way in terms of unit composition? I feel like that would get stale kind of quickly.

I was worried about that too since it was a big problem in the first Shogun. In a way the problem is still there but each clan has their 'special' units that they can produce cheaper than other clans. Money is tight in the game so it's really helps to build your armies based on what you specialize in. I'm playing the Date clan and they specialize in nodachi samurai, so when I recruit a unit they're 'Date Nodachi Samurai' - they are better and cheaper than other nodachi so I build my armies with lots of them. Other clans specialize in different types of troops or other things like diplomacy, ships, ninjas, castle building, etc.

The unit types are:

Yari (spear)

Katana (sword)

Nodachi (big swords, shock troops)

Naginata (pole arms)

Bows

Cavalry (yari, katana, bow)

and other units like battlefield ninjas(badass), firebomb throwers, matchlocks, monks, artillery etc

The matchups are the classic rock/paper/scissors that the original game was based on. Spears > cavalry, sword > spear, cavalry > sword. Naginata are a balance between swords and spears, a jack of all trades.

So there's not as much variety as Medieval(s) or Rome had but it's a hell of a lot better than Empire(muskets, cavalry, artillery, with little variation). It's much more of a chess match on the campaign and battles.

The best improvement imo is the way generals and agents work. Each named character you have can be specialized for certain things when they rank up. For example ninjas can be specialized for scouting, sabotage or assassination, but you can mix and match as much as you want. Your agents/generals that are high ranks are very important and it really stings when you lose one. There's a awesome balance of risk/reward with all the agents as pretty much every agent can take out another. Oh, and Geishas kick major ass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Not exactly sure that is an honest assesment of the talent he had to work with that year. Olsen had over 1100 yards that season making the PB, Stewart had close to 1100 total yards also going to the PB. He had Kalil at C who went to the PB, Trai Turner at RG who also went to the PB, and Michael Oher at LT who played well enough that the Panthers offered him a new contract the following year. I wouldn't call that a trash OL. He also played with a defense that was stacked with talent as well.   "The thing we are doing better this time around is actually surrounding our #1 overall draft pick QB with talent vs. asking him to completely carry the offense. I just hope that effort is leading us to realize that the guy isn't even good enough to get carried." Please.... Did you not read the list of names Newton had to work with his rookie season. I guess you missed it so I will post it again for you... Steve Smith (PB), Greg Olsen (PB), Brandon LaFell, Ted Ginn JR, Deangelo Williams (PB), Jonathan Stewart (PB), Jordan Grossn (PB), Ryan Kalil (PB) on the offensive side and then he had Luke Kuechly (PB), Jon Beason (PB), Thomas Davis (PB), Star Lotulelei, Kawann Short ( PB ),Charles Johnson, Greg Hardy (PB ), Mike Mitchell, Josh Norman (PB)  For comparison, here is who Young had his first year.  Chuba Hubbard, DJ Chark, Jonathan Mingo, Adam Thielen, Hayden Hurst, Ikem Ekwonu, Chandler Zavala, Bradley Bozeman, Nash Jensen and Taylor Morton. Not a single PB player on the list and most of them aren't even playing any longer. Additionally, his HC was fired during the season and the defense was as bad as the offense.  You might not like the comparison but saying Newton had to completely carry the offense isn't exactly fair to the 4 pro bowlers on offense who played with him that year.
    • That's why I say we have to keep looking. Even if you believe Bryce is the guy, KP and Grier are not and who knows if King is anything more than a gimmick player, we should be active in improving our 2nd QB spot. Season ending injuries happen, and you don't just want to roll over and give it up. How many starters have we seen come from the ranks of backup? Having 2 potential starting QBs is one of the best problems we could have. 
    • Eh, it’s more on how bad the refs are. Some of these calls against the canes are no calls 
×
×
  • Create New...