Shogun 2 Total War

[fzhfzh]

Rome TW's graphics IMO is already quite good, it's the Shogun and medieval with their 2D sprite that need graphics refresh the most.

[freedom16]

well thats why i mentioned agincourt which was the most decisive victory of the hundred years war (15th century).
an army of French knights were massacred by a much fewer army of english yeomen. but historians disagree whether it was the longbow with the bodkin arrow (which they had to shoot at less than 20 yards to penetrate plate armor); or the soggy ground that acted like quicksand and allowed the yeomen to ruch in and hack the stuck knights to death which was the actual cause of victory.
it was not until the significant use of the polearms in the latter half of the 15th by footmen as you have mentioned that the knights cavalry charge eventually lost its military impact and shock value.
but from the time of charlemagne in the 9th century to the late 15th century , the mounted knight ruled supreme in the medieval battlefield. thats a good 600 years.
id say thats a fairly effective weapons system to have lasted that long...

The Knights on horses were like the tanks of our time, a true judgernaught and the knights were around before Charlemagne anyway. Read the murder of charles the good its like the effect of his empire and his vicous murder while he was in church praying, compared to the fall of the Ottoman empire chaotic results. In terms of the battle of Agincourt in 1415, October 25th, it was the English Lowbow that saved the day, it could of been the weather that slowed down the French Knights. But in reality it was the mens training and how they angled their bows that saved the day. Plus their willing to break vow of Chivalry where it died. It did last somewhere else in a different form. Did anyone watch the show warriors? Medieval history is just so amazing and has such an impact on modern history. It was also the French metal armor that stopped them.

[freedom16]

I know its quite good but still to me that is the most important game ever! Love that game so much, i am a history major and antiquity is what i enjoy studying.

[trvelbug]

The Knights on horses were like the tanks of our time, a true judgernaught and the knights were around before Charlemagne anyway. Read the murder of charles the good its like the effect of his empire and his vicous murder while he was in church praying, compared to the fall of the Ottoman empire chaotic results. In terms of the battle of Agincourt in 1415, October 25th, it was the English Lowbow that saved the day, it could of been the weather that slowed down the French Knights. But in reality it was the mens training and how they angled their bows that saved the day. Plus their willing to break vow of Chivalry where it died. It did last somewhere else in a different form. Did anyone watch the show warriors? Medieval history is just so amazing and has such an impact on modern history. It was also the French metal armor that stopped them.

yes of course knights were around before charlemagne. but it was in this era where they started carrying spears (not lances) to charge with.
with regards to agincourt , historians and books i have read debate this issue. it was long believed that the longbow won the day. but in order to pentrate armor, a lngbow has to be fired straight and at a distance of 20 paces or less. at that distance an archer would only get to fire once on a chrging knight. add to this the fact that the english were outnumbered almost 3:1 you can see how its difficult to imagine them winning by the longbow alone.
many modern historians believe that the soggy ground ( torrential rains the nights before) was the main culprit. most of the french army were heavilly clad knights and many of them got stuck or fell from their horses in this mud. its not easy getting up with a full plate of armor and many of them were felled by arrows where they lay and others were hacekd to death as they could not get solid footing in this quicksand like mud.
like you said chivalry was also broke down as most french nobles were killed. part of the code of chivalry was to ransom nobles and not kill them.
so agincourt is historical for these two facts: it was the first time an army of knights were completely annihilated by an (smaller)army of commoners and for its disregard of chivalry.

[Koshinn]

not really. read a little bit more on the roman's maniple formation. romans used their own cavalry to tie up opposing cavalry and phalanxes would get destroyed by the much for flexible maniple formation. in fact it made the phalanx, as the greeks used it, obsolete by the time of caesar.

See the entire pyrrhic war. The only real battle that the maniple proved superior is the battle of pydna, but that could be attributed to the ineffective use of cavalry by perseus.

[luffytubby]

I wish the mods... there are so many mods for each game! If they could be cross compatible so we could use or Rome TW and Medieval 2 Mods in this new Shogun 2 TW... That would be incredible.

[trvelbug]

See the entire pyrrhic war. The only real battle that the maniple proved superior is the battle of pydna, but that could be attributed to the ineffective use of cavalry by perseus.

i am trying to remember the reference i read regarding a certain lesser known historical figure who used the greek phalanx against the romans and lost. the book fully describes how the maniple system defeats a phalanx. it was circa 120bc and much later than the pyrrhic war where i believe the romans have not perfected this system yet.
ill get back to you when find the reference from my shelf... im quite interested to remember myself

[Koshinn]

Was it Polybius?

[trvelbug]

Was it Polybius?

no it wasnt, it was written by a modern historian. looked for the damn thing last night. anyways ill pm you when i find it as it is a good read.

[trvelbug]

but these are some of the things are i remember from the book:
the maniple gave the romans two major advantages- initiative and mobility. with it, the roman soldier could bunch up or move apart from one another. a maniple also allowed them to change facing almost instantaneously and change formation on the fly. it also allowed them to move through the battle field at a quick pace.
the author described this battle where the maniple would march towards the pahalanx in a cohesive square at a steady pace. as they approached they quickened their march and spread out in a wide line abreast formation only 4(?) men deep. the center would engage the phalanx head on while the wings would encircle them. the pahalnx would be unable to turn or form a circular shield wall bec of their overlapping spears and would thus get destroyed.
cavalry was used to tie up the opponents cavalry only
interesting read...