Naval Landing Battle?!

[Lionheartx10]

So has anyone ever had one of these. This was a key feature that interested me throughout the development of the game as to whether it would be implemented or not. Has it survived into the game? I've played plenty of campaigns but never had one of these. Where you fight a naval battle then immediately after fight a land battle with your army that was on your ships. There's even a general's skill on the skill tree that gives +1 and +2 to Naval Landing Battles so surely its in the game.

So basically;

1) has anyone played a Naval Landing Battle in their campaign?

and

2) What are the specific conditions to get one?!

Many thanks.

Let the discussion begin!

[eXistenZ]

Never seen or got one. i guess its one of those announced features that didnt ended up in the game after all, like the unit editor for the previous TW-game

[Xaosan]

played one and thats about it...couldn't say what the requirement was just landed my troops to land near Bizen and the troops in the castle came out to defend as i landed, pretty sure you dont see it often as its a choice to attack landing invaders and most of the time the invading force is better so the ai declines the attack in fear of leaving the castle defenceless.

[Lord Baal]

It's simply yet another siege where you battle exactly the same army. It's like... I don't know... and save re-roll (for all you tt gamers) or a safety net (for all of you tightrope walkers while juggling with motor-saws, circus midgets). You get the opportunity of fight the enemy on the field (in the castle in my case, don't know others experience) and if you loose, no biggies (besides actually losing, you loser! ), you can still retreat to your castle.

[crunchyfrog]

Yes, Several.

If a enemy lands his army near one of your own. You get a option to attack or decline, just like with an ambush.

Other than that, it's a regular battle.

[old_dude]

I've had about three of these and I find them completely silly. We get an "opportunity to intercept" an army disembarking from their fleet. But the interception looks remarkably similar to a typical siege. The only difference is that we don't get to use the spawning garrison troops. If you happen to lose you get to play the exact same battle over again with your garrison.

I end up wondering: why did I not intercept them on the beach? why are they the attacker if I am doing the intercepting? am I really intercepting anything if they assault my walls like any old siege? if they are assaulting my walls anyway, where are my garrison troops? shouldn't this be taking place on a field battlemap with landing craft in the background at least?

My uninformed guess is that the devs just couldn't figure out how to make the real naval landing battles work in time for release so they just jerry-rigged this thing in its place. Please excuse my words if they seem harsh, but this battle type seems extremely half-assed.

[NSFW]

I end up wondering: why did I not intercept them on the beach? why are they the attacker if I am doing the intercepting? am I really intercepting anything if they assault my walls like any old siege? if they are assaulting my walls anyway, where are my garrison troops? shouldn't this be taking place on a field battlemap with landing craft in the background at least?

More or less sums up my thoughts.

I can't see the thinking behind making it a siege, rather than a field battle, in the first place &, given that choice, not getting the castle garrison doesn't make any sense to me.
Why would you ever choose to intercept when it splits your forces?

The only time I can see any potential advantages in doing so would be:
-if the castle's constructing/recruiting something so vital that you wouldn't want to risk it being delayed (for a turn) by the AI sieging but not assaulting.
-There is some other vulnerable, but important, target which the invader might be able reach in the turn they land if they're not intercepted.
Not exactly common, or even likely, scenarios IMO.

Surely there's more to it than that? Do field armies get the opportunity to intercept beach landings? If so, I could see that making the feature a bit more useful.

[old_dude]

The only time I can see any potential advantages in doing so would be:
-if the castle's constructing/recruiting something so vital that you wouldn't want to risk it being delayed (for a turn) by the AI sieging but not assaulting.
-There is some other vulnerable, but important, target which the invader might be able reach in the turn they land if they're not intercepted.
Not exactly common, or even likely, scenarios IMO.

Surely there's more to it than that? Do field armies get the opportunity to intercept beach landings? If so, I could see that making the feature a bit more useful.

I have to admit that this format did allow me to keep a castle I should have lost. The enemy having to run the gauntlet of arrow fire twice to actually get to and keep the tenshu was the only thing that saved me.
As for the field army, just park a unit on every beach you own until you find out.

[spur390]

Maybe in the next Shogun game, we'll have a naval landing that has the ships in the fleet sail up to the shore, and unload troops on the beach when they get close enough. Meanwhile, the archers on the ships can provide some cover for the landers if the defenders get too close, and the defenders can shoot at and maybe even destroy the ships with fire arrows or siege weapons.


One can dream...

[painter]

From my experience, if you're the attacker, you want the enemy to intercept you, because if you win the interception battle, you are allowed to immediately lay siege to the castle town instead of waiting a turn. If you're the defender and you want to play defensively, do not intercept and the AI army will be stuck there until it is your turn to move and you can send nearby reinforcements to bolster your garrison or attack the enemy on the beach.