some questions?

[madgamer2]

love this game and several(make that many) years ago I played a table top battle using the "Fields of Fields of Glory" rules. I love the Warring states period also.
I just need to get some answers to a few questions

1. I tried the single player game with Takada and noticed I was attacking and the computer AI had 3K+ more troops than I did. I always had some points left over(7-20) depending on what units I picked. playing at the lowest difficulty setting I had to restart the first battle 4 times before I could win it. Is it normal to have that large a difference in troops? The second battle I just could not win and gave up. I know I don't have the hang of the combat system so I must be doing something wrong.

2.Is there anyplace where the keyboard key assignments are located in the manual?

3 Any good videos that show how the combat system works?

[jomni]

1. Campaign or Skirmish? Suggest you learn the system. Turn on detailed tooltips.

[madgamer2]

It was the campaign single player. I think you are right. I also have come to the conclusion that I had a disadvantage in troops because I tend to pick quality over quantity. Isa there any way to allow the computer to select forces in the single player historical campaign?

[jomni]

Only the first deployment can be automated. The subsequent purchases are manual. Since it is campaign, there are many more factors to consider like force numbers in the strategic map, relative sizes of armies, and province garisson. All may make some battles very hard. So you must choose your battles wisely.

Quality, if used correctly, is helpful. But quantity will give more flanking opportunities.

[rbodleyscott]

Keyboard shortcuts are listed in section 25 of the manual.

[madgamer2]

Thanks quality vs. quantity was what I was thinking. With Tanaka in the campaign I had picked quality but fighting the first battle was difficult even on the lowest difficulty setting. I won but had high losses. The second battle I had no way to win because I was really out numbered. The problem for me is what to choose in the campaign. Unless you know of a source that can help me like a video or s post the only way is to use tool tips and scrimmage mode and note how the computer chooses. Thanks for the hhelp

[rbodleyscott]

Thanks quality vs. quantity was what I was thinking. With Tanaka in the campaign I had picked quality but fighting the first battle was difficult even on the lowest difficulty setting. I won but had high losses. The second battle I had no way to win because I was really out numbered. The problem for me is what to choose in the campaign. Unless you know of a source that can help me like a video or s post the only way is to use tool tips and scrimmage mode and note how the computer chooses. Thanks for the hhelp

I think it is more a matter of learning to use whatever troops you have effectively rather than picking the perfect army composition.

[madgamer2]

Yes I think you are correct. I have been approaching this game like any other computer game when in fact it is NOT a computer game rather a miniatures
game based on the "fields of Glory" tabletop rules. In my youth when home computers were just starting (my first an Apple 2E first game Zork) I used to attend large board game conventions like Gen Con where you could play miniatures battles as well as checkout the latest board games. It was possible to preregister for some of the miniature games as well.
Much of the criticism leveled at this game is from those who have never had the joy of playing in a multiplayer miniature battle. When they play this game they don't like all the things that happen in such games and are reproduced in this computer version of this game. I hope that we see more such miniature battles and campaign games in the future. They don't like or realize that a miniature type battle can last several hours. So I will have to sit down with this game and learn it the right way......AGAIN

[Hrothgar]

Madgamer2,
Can't tell whether you know this, but the companion game, Pike & Shot is the same system, but covering warfare in Europe from the late 15th century thru the seventeenth. Tons of playable armies are included. The final and most complete version is Pike & Shot: Campaigns, which includes the most content. If you like Sengoku Jidai, then I'm sure you'd like Pike & Shot also.

[madgamer2]

Yes I have known about P&S from steam. Not sure why I did not buy it at the time. I might have been thinking that porting a miniatures game to the computer would not work but when this game came out I bought it because the period covered was one of my favorites and I had played a miniature
game that used the "Fields of Glory" at a large board gaming convention many years ago. That game got me interested in Asian style combat games
which led to buying several games by Koei including "Romance of the Three Kingdoms XI.

[Biffa]

I'm not interested in P&S at all and I think there's enough content in this game for anybody interested in the period, but you may find like me that the game balance is a little in favour of the AI in most situations, I guess this constitutes as a challenge but it can be a bit jarring and sometimes spoils the enjoyment of the game there's many examples and my list seems to grow with every new campaign I play. I've never had a bigger army either in points or numbers to start off with, my generals have been in 30 battlefield duels and I've only ever won one, I've never got a unit to flank, move, sit alongside and then charge in one turn and the AI seems to be able to do this frequently, my armies never recover as quickly from a battle as those of the AI, the AI can see through woods at huge ranges, so ambushes are almost impossible and the list goes on, sometimes when your tactics/strategy are dependant on these moments then it can get quite annoying very quickly, I'm not sure if there's a log for some of these 'outcomes' but I'd happily find it and post it.

[madgamer2]

It was said by a previous reply that when you choose you units you can go for quantity (cheep units) or quality( good units) and your strategy with more units (even cheep on the flanks ) you force the AI to spread out and you chances of getting a flank or rear shot increase. I will reserve judgement till I use the tool tips and small battles with units chosen by the computer. Remember what I said about this NOT being a computer game but a miniatures port to computer.......think about it. I am a veteran of several miniatures games many years ago and I am not sure you can capture the atmosphere of a table top miniatures game. Give me a couple of weeks and I will get back to you.
I played the single player campaign with Takada where he has numbers for the first part of the game and can keep the reinforcements from the west from getting in by blocking the two crossings. I just went forward and attacked everything and even took out his HQ but the reinforcements just kept fighting but were easier to kill and rout because of the loss of the HQ. I took 3 hrs. of real time to win but then the battle against Hojo where Takada has the troops in the woods was impossible to win going right at him because Hojo has almost 4K more troops than Takada. I think the only chance for Takada is to group his troops in the woods to the west at the north end of the woods and try to take out the HQ.

[rbodleyscott]

The AI follows the same rules as the player and is given no advantages except the balance of starting forces depending on the scenario and difficulty level. In skirmishes and campaigns, the player actually has the advantage in starting force points on the lowest two difficulty levels. On higher difficulty levels the AI does have an advantage in force points. The actual ratios for the different difficulty levels are shown in the campaign section of the manual.

Looking at the numbers of men is not a good way of judging the odds, because infantrymen are much cheaper than cavalrymen, and lower quality troops are much cheaper (and less effective) than high quality troops.

[madgamer2]

Yes I believe what you say is true but in the single player campaign game with Takada I choose more large units and still had less troops than the AI. In the first battle where I faced the AI I had moor troops to start with but the AI's strike force comes on from the east side of the map facing a river with only two way across, with one middle top and the other lower right.
I was able to hold off the strike force by holding the two crossings till I destroyed the troops that the AI had at the onset of the battle including the HQ.
I thought the battle would end but the strike force kept attacking. Eventually I won the battle but then the Second battle against Hojo(?) I was outnumbered in number of units and quality of units. The main force I had was deployed in the center between two large forests. I had a large number of troops hidden
in the forests on my left. There were 3 units on right middle also. I had at least 3K less troops and could not find a way to win. I do not blame the game but perhaps my selection of troops was the error. It would be nice if the computer could pick the troops a the start of the single campaigns.

[Paul59]

It would be nice if the computer could pick the troops a the start of the single campaigns.

In Pike and Shot campaigns you have the option of Automatic Force selection at the start of the campaign, I would be surprised if Sengoku Jidai does not.

It sounds like you are playing at too high a difficulty setting, try reducing the setting, but I think you will have to start a new campaign for it to really take effect.

[Biffa]

Will do a video about a recent amazing battle which was a far more challenging affair than it should have been, it's interesting to watch since I managed to max out terrain advantage to win, I think I was a bit lucky with the random battlefield.

Far more challenging than it should have been since the background was far from logical.

The AI did one of those impossible "insta-seiges" where it moves and takes a region on the same turn (something I've never been able to do), sadly the region it took was my main base which had been in my possession the whole campaign, my nearest army was had about 12,000 troops the AI's army was only 9,500, naturally I struck immediately, I had a huge advantage in Cavalry (6 units v 3) and was sure I it would be easy. When the clash was turn ready I checked the msg window and was stunned to find that local forces (in what had always been my home region) had joined to oppose me! Why was my clan so hated in their own region?! His force had now gone up to 15,000 and my presumed Cavalry advantage was suddenly and inexplicably gone at 6 units v 8!!!

The problem I'm finding with many of these 'unusual' features in the game is that the usual rules of combat and campaign are pretty much broken in favour of the AI, trying to be smart (my previous port blockade post) or using any form of common sense to overcome problems and secure a strategic advantage are continually frustrated by what to me are game breaking and illogical game design decisions, yes they can be explained or justified but any wargamer with any experience knows there has to be some adherence to basic military/strategic/geographical/topographical etc rules for the game to make sense.

It would appear that like all my other mistaken assumptions in this game the AI unit numbers and army sizes aren't related to anything logical and certainly aren't predictable. Another example is when you use diplomacy to encourage other clans to join you, their troop numbers actually seem to come from your manpower pool, you would have thought that with extra regions supporting your war effort you would have more manpower and resources, I was about to raise a new army but then suddenly Hojo joined me so I went back to raise my force and despite having a huge treasury all the men from my regions had gone!!! Hojo must have stolen them to make the army they 'gave' me!

If we can't make an assumption about the features of the terrain, the number of the enemy forces, when or even if we can raise forces then the Campaign map is almost pointless and only serves to make a very misleading 'random force battle generator'.

[rbodleyscott]

The explanation for these events can be found in the manual.

Local garrison forces will join armies defending captured provinces. The availability of such forces is reduced to a maximum of 150 points in captured provinces to reflect the fact there will be no local militia forces. This is reported in the province tooltip if you mouse over the province prior to counter-invading.

The reported size of enemy forces is affected by the fog of war factor and will be within 75% and 133% of the true numbers. In this case it seems that your scouts underestimated the size of the enemy army. Note that both sides are affected by the fog of war factor and AI decisions are also based on inaccurate estimates of player forces.

Neutral clans do not use any of your manpower when they join you. The automatic annual refit of your other forces is probably what did so.

All of the above apply equally to AI and player sides. The rules do not favour the AI. The only thing that favours the player or AI is the initial balance of revenue/forces, which depends on the difficulty level chosen at the start of the campaign. This ratio also determines the ratio of forces at which player or AI generals will accept battle when a province their army is occupying is invaded or counter-invaded. If their forces cannot match the specified ratio they will retreat. Both player and AI generals may misjudge these decisions as a result of the fog of war factor.

[GShock112]

Looks like he had the fight of the day and pulled it off... more or less what I had expected for me to happen with my Takeda campaign and I got crushed instead.

[ErissN6]

Keyboard shortcuts are listed in section 25 of the manual.

In French manual, this is in Section 23 (page 88), and they are wrong (exerpt):
" A – fait défiler la carte vers la gauche.
D – fait défiler la carte vers la droite.
E – fait tourne la carte vers la gauche.
Q – tourner la carte vers la droite.
S – faire défiler la carte vers le bas.
W – faire défiler la carte vers le haut. "

It should be, and moreover ingame:
" Q – fait défiler la carte vers la gauche. (map to the left)
D – fait défiler la carte vers la droite.
E – fait tourne la carte vers la gauche.
A – tourner la carte vers la droite. (turn the map to the right)
S – faire défiler la carte vers le bas.
Z – faire défiler la carte vers le haut. (map to the top) "

So, the manual was translated, but it's not very useful as the game can't be played with french keyboard.

[rbodleyscott]

Keyboard shortcuts are listed in section 25 of the manual.

In French manual, this is in Section 23 (page 88), and they are wrong (exerpt):
" A – fait défiler la carte vers la gauche.
D – fait défiler la carte vers la droite.
E – fait tourne la carte vers la gauche.
Q – tourner la carte vers la droite.
S – faire défiler la carte vers le bas.
W – faire défiler la carte vers le haut. "

It should be, and moreover ingame:
" Q – fait défiler la carte vers la gauche. (map to the left)
D – fait défiler la carte vers la droite.
E – fait tourne la carte vers la gauche.
A – tourner la carte vers la droite. (turn the map to the right)
S – faire défiler la carte vers le bas.
Z – faire défiler la carte vers le haut. (map to the top) "

So, the manual was translated, but it's not very useful as the game can't be played with french keyboard.

Thank you for pointing this out.