The Mori have also resurrected a number of dead clans as vassals - loyal allies in the war with the remaining clans as well as reliable trading partners. This is the point where the game gets easier.
This is a good place, I think, to pause for a moment and reflect on how this campaign was conducted - what I did right and what I didn't do right; and to reflect on Shogun 2 Total War in general.
The Mori campaign
First, what I didn't do well.
I was slow in expanding my clan in the beginning phase leaving me not much time in the end game phase. This was because I was more interested in role playing than actually winning, therefore I took my time - too much it seams.
Another thing I didn't do well was preparing for 'Realm Divide'. In case you don't know, once you conquer a certain number of territories an event, 'Realm Divide', triggers, and the whole of Japan (including your allies) turns against you. There is a way to monitor how close you are to realm divide but I wasn't paying attention. So when it triggered I found my army scattered all over Shikkoku with newly annexed territories that I could not afford to garrison. What I should have done was to stop expanding just before realm divide, pacify the recently conquered territories, prepare myself economically and militarily, and get my armies in position to attack my potential enemies.
In the early battles, I underestimated the effect of archers in siege battles. The nemesis of archers are cavalry units and in siege battles, the effectiveness of cavalry are largely diminished or fully neutralized. Archers on the defensive are protected behind a powerful defensive structure - a castle. On the offensive archers are in no danger from cavalry unless they sally out and if they do archers should be well protected by other melee units. A castle defended by large numbers of archers is therefore a formidable challenge to any attacker. What I didn't fully appreciate was how effective archers also were on the offensive. Japanese castles offer little protection from arrows and the indirect fire of archers outside a castle is uncannily accurate. But I quickly learnt as the Battle of Kyoto video exemplifies.
(P.S. One other mistake I made - creating vassals after realm divide. They unreliable, and will eventually hate you and stab you in the back.)
What did I do well?
I invested in a strong navy from the start. I cannot over emphasise how important this is because the long coastlines of Japan make amphibious flanking manouvers a real threat (and opportunity). The geography of Japan makes it unfeasible to defend all provinces and carry out a concentrated offensive operation at the same time. As most provinces are exposed to the sea, this makes the navy supremely important and relevant in both defence and attack, more perhaps than in any other total war game. After realm divide there were no less than 4 attempts by the AI at large scale amphibious landings. By then I had strong advanced fleets protecting the Eastern and western sea flanks and the inland sea which effectively shut down any invasion attempts. If not for this, the campaign would certainly have been lost as all my armies were up north and I could not spare any troops in the rearward provinces. If the enemy had landed a substantial force in the rear the consequences would have been unthinkable.
Another thing I did well was converting tactical victory (victory in battles) into strategic gains (occupying enemy territories). It is not enough to win battles, but to win and exploit. After an enemy army is smashed, there is usually a window of opportunity in which the enemy's provinces lie exposed and undefended. An effective strategy I found for exploiting this is to peacefully occupy the provinces I conquered and set the tax rate to zero so my entire army is free to move on and carry out a concentrated attack on the next province without leaving any troops behind to garrison. A concentrated attack with heavy numerical superiority ensures victory with few casualties and that the army is preserved intact for the next offensive. This worked very well in the campaign and is still working for me in the end game.
Impressions of Shogun 2 Total War
When I first laid eyes on a total war game more than 10 years ago - a demo of the first Shogun total war - it was love at first sight. It was the wargame of my dreams and I have played every total war game since. STW2, while not being the most epic in scope, is easily the most enjoyable total war game.
I think what makes this game so fun to play is that there is a sense of balance overall. Every element in the game seems to fit nicely into the overall gameplay. All units have strengths and weaknesses and no particular unit feels overpowered or superfluous. I especially liked the naval battles. Admittedly, they are not as graphically impressive as the naval battles in NTW and ETW, but as I began to master the naval tactics I began to enjoy naval battles a lot more. Again, it comes down to balance, every naval unit has its use and there is a great sense of satisfaction in using them well. In comparison, naval tactics in NTW and ETW - which really boils down to having bigger ships and more guns - can be rather bland.
The AI in STW2 is very competent. In the tactical battles, in my experience the AI rarely made stupid mistakes and the mistakes which it did make are easily the kind of mistakes which a human being might make from oversight. In field battles, I noticed that the AI is careful to guard its flanks against my cavalry flanking manouvers and is quite good at exploiting any gaps and open flanks with its own cavalry. In another battle, the Battle of Otsu, a video of which I am going to upload when I have the time (difficult when you have a crying baby to take care of!), I had overwhelming numerical superiority and had the AI effectively surrounded in an ambush, but I was surprised by how the AI managed to delay my inevitable victory by distributing its forces to defend in all directions so that it prevented me from crushing its flanks or its rear. It even managed to exploit a couple of my mistake when I accidentally left units exposed. The AI, however, is slightly weaker at the strategic level, it always insists on storming castles regardless of how well defended they are. It almost never tries to starve out a garrison. I essentially won the game by holding and defending castles against the AI. I was able to inflict more than twice the number of casaulties doing this.
A controversial element of gameplay is the 'Realm divide' event. When I read about it in forums, admittedly I was not enthused. It felt like an arbitrary way to spice up the middle and endgame when there were other more interesting ways of doing this without trashing the diplomatic side of the game. However, when I experienced it in game, it wasn't so bad. As you can read from my AARs I managed to make it plausible and justifiable in terms of the overall story. Still I think there are better ways of making the endgame interesting - how about, for instance, introducing a powerful foreign invader (e.g. Chinese, Koreans) thus forcing the remaining clans to unite against that invader? This was done in MTW2 to very good effect through the Mongol and Timurid invasions.
Graphically, STW2 is, like past total war games, impressive. The 3D battles are very cinematic. But, I think there is still room for improvements such as longer draw distances. Given the continuous improvements in computer technology, I look forward to what CA can do in the next decade. My favourite games are Paradox strategy games (Europa Universalis, Hearts of Iron, Victoria) which have very deep strategy elements, and Total war games with epic 3D battles integrated into the campaign. I dream of the day when the strengths of both are combined and when CA can introduce a level of gameplay depth equivalent to Paradox games into the total war series.
