Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Tokugawa Ieyasu has similarity to Sima Yi too, both are very patient. Sima Yi refuse to fight Zhuge Liang no matter what & just wait until he died of illness. He also pretend to be senile for years until he can find his chance to overthrow Cao clan.
Nobunaga = Cao Cao according to Koei, but historically they really aren't all that similar.
Tokugawa Leyasu = Liu Bei for the most part, considering his natural demeanor and charisma.
Hanbei Takenaka = Zhuge Liang for the most part, mirroring many of Zhuge Liang's teachings.
hmm...can't really think of anyone else. Seriously, the two flagship title's historical figures shouldn't even be compared. They were all admirable of their own right and were known for doing specific things.
To just say: "Oh this guy is the equivalent of that guy because he betrayed his lord!" is ultimately silly.
For example: Sima Yi overthrows the Cao clan, but served Cao Cao loyally until his death. He only began the overthrow assumedly because the Cao clan were becoming incompetant, and rulers that not even Cao Cao would approve of. After Cao Shuang's military failures and furious at the Cao's attempts to stifle his power, Sima Yi did what he had to.
It can be assumed that Sima Yi for the most part, did what was necessary to secure Wei(Future Jin) as a dominant force.
Mitsuide Akechi overthrew Nobunaga, but did it for ultimately selfish reasons. He was wronged several times by Nobunaga Oda, but Nobunaga was still the best chance Japan had at a unified country.
It can be assumed that Mitsuide Akechi simply wanted to prove a point and then tossed the land into further chaos when it was so close to security for the sake of garnering his own power.
Mitsuhide Akechi is more like Lu Bu, selfish and dumb, but strong :).
What's about Masamune Date, my fav hero in sengoku era, he had interesting story, born late, an able leader for Shogun but born too late to actually affect anything when the powerhouse like Tokugawa is already holding strong. Masamune to me is like Jiang Wei, try to conquer the region so many times, unsuccess, but he was able to hold on to his Northern provinces for a long time.
But masamune date doesn't have Cao Cao waifu :(
This is actually false. Zhuge Liang lost his fair share of battles. He was a terrible military strategist but a genius minister and advisor. Also Zhuge Liang never took to the field and fought in battles like Uesugi Kenshin did.
Also, Uesugi Kenshin are military leader, not strategist .... or else, the Takeda clan would have been lost long time ago :).
Me not being able to command a bunch of farmers has nothing to do with Zhuge Liang's capacities as a strategist. Also Shu at the time commanded a rather well trained militia compared to most minor lords at the time. To be frank, Xu Shu had a better track record in his time with Shu than Zhuge Liang as a military strategist.
Historically, Cao Cao's men were outmaneuvered and utterly defeated many times by the inferior Shu army, simply because Liu Bei managed to get a decent strategist. (Xu Shu)
Like I said, Zhuge Liang was a genius foreign diplomat and minister, but when it came to war, he was average at his best and complete ♥♥♥♥♥ at his worst.
He's one of the best strategists of Ancient China, because he saw the long game. He understood that Shu's best chances of winning the war was to divide the land into three kingdoms. It was also absolutely necessary to take advantage of Liu Bei's popularity with the populace. However, this doesn't translate into actual battles.
Side Note: To answer your response on Uesugi Kenshin, I was answering a question about another guy who wanted to know who Uesugi Kenshin's equivalent was. The other guy answered: Zhuge Liang. This is completely ridiculous and false, hence my usage of the name in my response comment.
The true people to deserve the accolades for military strategists are:
Sima Yi
Zhou Yu
Lu Xun
Lu Meng
(Just a lot of Wu Generals at the time honestly...)
Xu Shu (If he stayed in Shu, he would likely have taken the military strategist role while Zhuge kept the minister role)
Depends how narrowly you define war.
He seems to have been more than decent on the strategical level, organising proper logistics and support, setting long-term goals, that kind of thing.
Not sure how good or bad he was in terms of actual battlefield tactics, you probably know a lot more than me about that.
Would I place him in the top percentile? Ehhh depends, his claim to fame is Chi Bi, but that was mostly due to the efforts of Wu Strategists, with Zhuge playing foreign diplomat. Later on however, he would prove himself a capable ruler, when he followed Liu Bei's advice and ruled over Shu alongside Liu Shan as a Prime Minister. He stabilized Shu's southern borders, and led several Northern Campaigns into Wei which, while ultimately wasteful did put Wei on the defensive.
I do believe he is overrated, but I might've sounded a bit too harsh up there. If I were Liu Bei, I would've kept him managing my infrastructure and domestic affairs because like you said, he was actually quite good at logistics, support, setting long term goals. Maybe also send him to Wu occasionally to butter up Sun Quan. I wouldn't really trust him to manage my military if I had the likes of (God forbid) Cao Cao, or Zhou Yu.
So to actually answer your question: In terms of battlefield tactics, Zhuge Liang knew his fair share of formations/strategems/etc, but I doubt he could have utilized them to the best of their potential. His successes overall are a bit erratic, ranging from brilliant to abysmal. He's certaintly not the "Godlike" person that many people make him out to be, but him joining Shu effectively saved Liu Bei's hide. If Zhuge Liang were pitted against Cao Cao or Sima Yi in a one on one battle, it'd be close but my money would be on Wei.
Because they're both called "dragons"... I see what you did there...
And for that I totally disagree with what you've said. Just like what some people said in this thread, you just can't simply compare people from The Three Kingdoms period of China to the figures of the Sengoku jidai. I'd say in terms of strength, maybe you could compare Kenshin to Lu Bu. But in terms of intelligence, I wouldn't know. Although Kenshin was hinted to be a good strategist and tactician, he's not like Takenaka Shigeharu or Takeda Shingen.
Kenshin's main claim to fame was holding his own against both Hojo and Takeda forces. He didn't get the name "God of War" and "Dragon of Echigo" for no reason. I'd say, he's closer to Lu Meng from the Three Kingdoms era if we're so inclined to compare the two era's generals. Lu Meng was a great soldier, but also mastered strategems and became a reasonable military strategist of his own right.