Instale o Steam
iniciar sessão
|
idioma
简体中文 (Chinês simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chinês tradicional)
日本語 (Japonês)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandês)
Български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Tcheco)
Dansk (Dinamarquês)
Deutsch (Alemão)
English (Inglês)
Español-España (Espanhol — Espanha)
Español-Latinoamérica (Espanhol — América Latina)
Ελληνικά (Grego)
Français (Francês)
Italiano (Italiano)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonésio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandês)
Norsk (Norueguês)
Polski (Polonês)
Português (Portugal)
Română (Romeno)
Русский (Russo)
Suomi (Finlandês)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Relatar um problema com a tradução
Regras e diretrizes para discussões
0 
Denunciar esta mensagem
To win in this game all you need is 5 high wealth provinces with 4-5 metsukes in each of them and you have overcome the AI's economy and that eco would also give you sufficient map presence for victory. Hattori naturally get 4 high wealth.
That's a lot of metsukes you have there :)
Landnut, selling military access is lame. Doing this counters the AI bonus for difficulty setting which is 90% economic. You might as well be playing on Easy difficulty.
I can never have that many metsukes lol
They start in a very rich economic area which helps them get really wealthy, but you still need to be careful. Omi is a trap because it's wide open to invasions. Better to take Yamato, Kii, Kawachi, Settsu and Ise first, then get a second army set up. Then take Omi and figure out what to do about Oda and Ikko Ikki.
Ally with Ashikaga on turn 1 and you can easily move your armies back and forth through Kyoto instead of having to get bogged down in the forests.
So, don't do something in a game that you are allowed to do because it'll give you an advantage and help you win? So MJ shouldn't have ever driven to the basket because he'll get fouled because it's the only way to stop him and his Free Throw percentage is near perfect and he'll spam points. Tom Brady never should've thrown to Gronk because Gronk is physically dominant over pretty much every defender and they'll just spam touchdowns. Not to mention... how OP is Steph Curry from beyond the three point line? What a ridiculous exploit Golden State is using. The NBA should rescind his championships. That's a pretty hot take for you to claim MJ, Tom Brady, and Steph Curry are lame. You should be on Stephen A Smith's podcast with that take. Or maybe Colin Cowherd. But Colin might get jealous that you out-hot-taked him.
Also lame.... corner camping. But you best believe if there's a hill and some trees in that corner, I'm going to pitch a tent, build a fire and roast some marshmallows in that corner.
I do the Metsuke thing, but I don't often tinker with the tax slider. Some rare occasions I'll slide it to high. But the Metsuke thing is key. Sometimes when I see an enemy ninja nearby, I think about using my Metsuke to kill it, but then a little IRS Angel appears on my shoulder and whispers in my ear "Taxes, taxes, taxes." So I will use a different agent to take out the enemy ninja... or ignore it and hope it doesn't sabotage or assassinate any of my characters.
I don't know these characters or the games that you allude to. You are obviously familiar with them so I assume they are local to you, wherever that may be?
Whatever the case, they are irrelevant to the point. In a pvp game, of any type, the player can, and should, do everything legitimate within the game to gain advantage, in order to win the game. The opposing player is able to adapt and respond to the actions that the opponent takes.
In a pve game, like shogun 2, the AI controlled clans cannot adapt to exploits used by the player. In Shogun 2, game difficulty affords the AI some (mostly economic) benefits. If the player chooses to use exploits that the AI is unable to respond to, then the difficulty benefit to the AI has essentially been eliminated, and the player is effectively playing at a lower level.
Personally, I have no problem with players using exploits. You have already mentioned selling military access (and if you don't think it's an exploit, count the number of times that an AI clan has requested military access from you); and corner-camping. I guess you would be similarly happy with chaining naval vessels in order to move an army to any coastal province in a single turn - after all, the game 'allows you to do it'.
I have no problem with players doing any of these things, but I do consider using them to be lame. It's reminiscent of the players of Civilisation that would give their settler nukes on Turn 1, because the game didn't prevent them from doing it.
You should prep for high taxation in the background and every player that plays this game will inevitably stockpile happiness and repression anyway, so it sits in settlements all game not being used, its basically like the food resource, so, aim to buildup surplus happiness and/or repression in wealthy provinces, this whole region is so broken in terms of economy and the higher your tax percentages the better because these are naturally high base wealth settlements without the need for upgraded markets at the start is a big bonus, you can even recruit ranked monks because there's also shrine's nearby(so unbalanced), and use their happiness skill and retainer(and bonus to tech while your there) and have them sit and tank very high taxation all game.
Oh and Iga can also be made into a strong eco provicne don't forget that one theres your fifth province, it can get to around a respectable 3000 maybe a little bit more with a sake den+market its on a par with fertile province because of the tradition.
In the very final year of 1575 I finally decided to try taking Kyoto, which seemed reckless to me because they exclusively employ samurai whereas the bulk of my forces were still ashigaru.
It turned out to be a very easy battle ! Much easier than some of the castle sieges I had to deal with against the ikko.
I misplayed too, and let the ashikaga army attack my sieging forces (whereas I could have singled them out in a night attack during my turn).
All of this to bring about one question, since all the posters here seem quite experienced : I noticed, both in the land battle and the siege of Kyoto itself, that the Ashikaga army routed relatively easily. In the land battle, they routed before my yari ashigaru could even reach them ! Likewise, their samurai routed very easily during the siege, so I am wondering : what exactly was going on ?
The Ashikaga army is made up entirely of samurai, so I expected them to endure the fight much more (which is why I was hesitant to attack, with such a large portion of my army being ashigaru). Are they supposed to give up so easily, because they're a decadent clan that has grown weak ? Or am I downplaying the role of flaming arrows and max level units, even if they're ashigaru ? Or am I too used to Ikko units having extreme morale due to their reliance on shrines ? There might be more than one correct answer...
I will never forget my max level ninja, Chisato, for carrying out the assassinations of the ashikaga daimyo, the ashikaga heir, and their general in three consecutive turns. They were all dropkicked from high up in their citadel.
This makes me sad. My attempt to be funny completely hinged on you knowing the people I was talking about. But now I know I was firing comedic blanks. I have failed.
So we're saying a lot to each other. Let me clarify my position.
I agree with you that selling access is an exploit. I've never done the navy chain thing, but I would agree with you that is an exploit as well. I've admitted already corner camping is lame (which means I agree it is an exploit). I think as far as those things are concerned, you and I agree.
But now let's clarify the definition of an exploit. Because this discussion is meaningless unless we're on the same page of what an exploit is. I think we are, but I just want to make sure. You mentioned my use of selling access and said "count the number of times that an AI clan has requested military access from you". So what I'm taking from that is that you define an exploit as:
The human player doing something the AI "can't" do or "don't" do. Because the AI can sell access, they just don't do it. At least they never have with me. I've got over 3000 hours.
So, I agree with that definition, but I think I'd expand it slightly to include at the end "which gives the human player an advantage."
So definition of exploit in full.
"When the human player does something the AI can't do or don't do that gives the human player an advantage." If there's no advantage, then who cares. It's meaningless.
Now, with that definition established (maybe you agree or not, but you can tell me in your reply) let's talk about some exploits.
Putting your five metsuke in your five most profitable provinces. AI don't do this. I've never seen it. I see their metsuke running around trying to kill my agents and bribe my armies, but the AI never puts them in their most profitable provinces. And you make a lot of extra money off that. More money over the long term then you get from selling access.
Microing your units during battle: The AI don't micro. Not in the sense that humans do. The AI is incapable of coming up with the tactics that a human player can come up with. Like hiding matchlocks in the woods and then swing them around to flank the engaged enemy. Many a AI armies routed using this. And I've seen them do it zero times. You might say, but hmmmm. The AI has sent cavalry around my rear countless times and hit my flanks. Yup. And they charge right into spears when they do it. At least to me. I always have some ashigaru in the rear to smoke them when they come. And they charge spears all the time. So, have you eliminated your spear infantry from your stacks yet? So unfair to the AIs charging cavalry.
Parking a navy at chokepoints. AI does four things with their navy. Attack enemy ships, blockade, raid trade lanes, and take trade nodes. But they don't park their navies in chokepoints. If you ever see an AI navy parked in a chokepoint, it's probably because that's the spot it just happened to run out of movement points in. Not a conscious effort to keep enemy ships from passing.
Using agents on rebel settlements for low risk levelling. AI don't do this. But I (and many players I believe) will park a ninja in rebel province and sabotage that rebel army until the ninja has 4 or more stars.
Parking an Army at a bridge. Again, the only time I find AI armies defending a bridge is when they were travelling somewhere and just ran out of movement points.
Province development- Do you deliberately not upgrade your castle, but do upgrade your farms so you can maximize growth for that long term revenue boost. This technicque is talked about ad nauseum in videos and discussion boards. I think everybody who plays this game and halfway knows what they're doing, does this. And it is absolutely an exploit. The AI does not do this. They upgrade pretty much everything if they have the money.
Ambushes- The AI does employ ambushes from time to time. I don't think they're nearly as effective at using them as the human player, so using ambushes is an exploit in my mind. But that doesn't fit with the can't/don't aspect of our definition of exploit. But there is an aspect of ambushing that does fit. When the AI ambushes me at a certain location, I will send ninja there to reveal that army or avoid it altogether. But when I ambush the AI with 3 or 4 stacks, the AI will send 3 or 4 more full stacks into my ambush so I can delete delete delete their army. So, the AI can't or don't avoid ambushes a human player would reasonably be able to know are there. So, ambushes can very much be exploitative against the AI.
I'd say 100% of Shogun 2 players are guilty of using one of these (micro'ing...we all do it. There's nobody playing this game that doesn't micro on some level).
I'd say 99% of us are guilty of two of these exploits (micro'ing and Province Development). If anybody reading this is part of the 1% who doesn't dev up your farms without devving castles, please raise your hand. I've never met a unicorn before.
I'd say probably 80% are guilty of three (micro'ing, Province Development and the Five Metsuke rule). I suspect everybody who has been educated on the 5 metsuke rule, uses it. But I could be wrong. It is incredibly satisfying to bribe an army and execute enemy agents, so I can understand some players choosing to use their metsuke for that.
But over 50% of players I'd be willing to bet use all these. They are all exploits by the definition of exploit. Which I took from what you said.
My point in all this is that everybody is using exploits. They either don't understand it's an exploit or they're just picking and choosing which exploits they accept as legitimate and which are not. But these are all exploits. Unless I'm off on the definition. But that's what discussions are for. Anybody else feel free to chime in. What is your definition of an exploit? What is the dividing line between a legit exploit and an illegit exploit?
What level difficulty were you on is my first question? But other than that, did you engage with any other units prior to your ashigaru reaching them? Did you kill their general? Did you demoralize them with a monk prior to the battle? Did you assasinate their generals before the battle? Otherwise, I have no clue. I've never fought a battle where the AI routed before any of my Soldiers even reached them. That sounds like some Dr. Strange stuff going on in that battle.
I was playing on normal difficulty but watching the replay, I was wrong : my units did engage in melee battle... for a little over a minute only ! On the results screen, there are only 500 casualties inflicted on their 3200 unit army...
They didn't have any generals either. In fact, it seems that the main army's stand-in general was a light cavalry unit that charged into my main attack force, basically killing itself in record time. I also noticed the yellow and red sandal icons over the Ashikaga reinforcement army, which could explain why they routed at the first sight of trouble despite not taking any losses.
I didn't use monks outside of settlement management, simply because they kept being killed or converted by the large amounts of high-level ikko monks I encountered (even my best ninja had trouble assassinating some of them, and it diverted too much attention from assassinating high ranking generals of their armies or sabotaging their economy).
Looking back, I clearly didn't use enough agents to counteract the ikko when I had the chance.
All in all, watching that replay was very insightful on the many details I had missed when playing. Getting rid of their makeshift general unit really sped up the routing process. Once one of their units routed, the others fell like domino !
Since that failed Hattori campaign, I played and won a normal FotS campaign as the Satsuma, even earning the title of Imperial vanguard ! Playing FotS right after the many castle-siege-turned-bloodbaths of the Sengoku Jidai campaign sure highlights the domination of naval support and artillery in general. You can even take castles with only a couple Parrott gun units, forcing smaller garrisons into surrender without a single friendly casualty. Although, it did feel to me that the AI wasn't as apt in FotS as in the main campaign : could it be because of the different line-of-sight required for infantry units ?