Gameplay Videos

[SturmChurro]

Pretty much agree with @Zoner16. Main difference is, in Shogun 2 Korea was without any detail. Just tip od Peninsula...here in 3K it seems they bothered with detail shoreline. And we even see part of Japan Sea...Check my second picture up. The map could easily end in Yellow sea, no point in depicting whole Korea as it is...

I mean, it's kind of tiny, and about as detailed as like the Sahara or something in other Total War(s). I don't know much about asian history, but wouldn't it be a lot of naval combat or something? Too bad this game won't have that, but maybe it's for the best with the idiot ai.

[zoner16]

I mean, it's kind of tiny, and about as detailed as like the Sahara or something in other Total War(s). I don't know much about asian history, but wouldn't it be a lot of naval combat or something? Too bad this game won't have that, but maybe it's for the best with the idiot ai.

The Sahara is the same as the Shogun 2 situation. They wanted to put in states on the east and west African coasts and the Sahara just came with the package to keep the map rectangular. Korea here could have easily been omitted entirely, and based on the size of the regions in the game already, it could fit quite a bit of stuff in it. Plus, I imagine the Korean gaming market would like it

There's no indication that any of the Korean states had anything resembling a respectable naval force in this era, and even the Chinese didn't have much of a saltwater navy for anything except for trade and transport. The warfare between them was completely land based.

[SturmChurro]

The Sahara is the same as the Shogun 2 situation. They wanted to put in states on the east and west African coasts and the Sahara just came with the package to keep the map rectangular. Korea here could have easily been omitted entirely, and based on the size of the regions in the game already, it could fit quite a bit of stuff in it. Plus, I imagine the Korean gaming market would like it

There's no indication that any of the Korean states had anything resembling a respectable naval force in this era, and even the Chinese didn't have much of a saltwater navy for anything except for trade and transport. The warfare between them was completely land based.

Maybe it was a different era where I thought koreans had fleets, or something like that. This is why I won't nitpick too much about this game's historical accuracy.. I know next to nothing about it! That's probably what they are thinking as well with a bit of their western audience, nobody will know anything about the era!

Either way, I'm not for or against a Korea DLC, but are their any 'cool' heroes from there? Unfortunately that seems to be the theme they will want to cash in on..

[Seether]

My Rise of Three Kingdoms mod has Goguryeo as a faction. In my opinion, one of the ‘cool’ heroes, and excellent military commander, is Go Gye-su. Plus the whole power/political struggles during the reigns of Gukcheon and Sansang, including the U family, is quite interesting.

[PikeStance]

Must of south Korea was in Shogun 2's map. Shogun 2 had the excuse to have it, as they couldn't fit all of Japan on a rectangular map without including at least some of Korea. It also had the excuse why not to make it relevant in game, because no sane mainstream gaming company is touching the Imjin War with a ten foot pole right now, given the nationalist pissing contests over it and subsequent conflicts (same reason we will never get a Sino-Japanese war DLC).

3K very easily could have not included Korea at all. The map could have cropped off a good chunk of its eastern bounds and they wouldn't have lost anything currently playable, just a bunch of ocean. So them including Korea almost guarantees future plans for it. Additionally, there's no political diatribe over the wars between Goguryeo and the various northern states. It's ancient history, and honestly, most countries involved take pride in the part they played.

Korea, Japan, and China all have rivalries. Koreans tends to be the group "pissed on" the most. I hardly think a 16th-century war is going to get anyone's nationalist spirit in a huff. I cannot imagine what nationalist feelings swell over the 1st Sino-Japanese War. I never met a Chinese or Korean student that had any knowledge of it.

[zoner16]

Korea, Japan, and China all have rivalries. Koreans tends to be the group "pissed on" the most. I hardly think a 16th-century war is going to get anyone's nationalist spirit in a huff. I cannot imagine what nationalist feelings swell over the 1st Sino-Japanese War. I never met a Chinese or Korean student that had any knowledge of it.

The Imjin War is still trotted out in the Korean Assembly as the birth of modern Korean nationalism. Since nationalism across Asia is on the rise, old conflicts get pulled out more and more in political dialogues, particularly their representation in media. In particular, the Imjin War is seen as a prelude to Japan's colonization of Korea and the beginning of Japanese war crimes against Koreans, both of which are still very, very touchy subjects in both countries. It probably wouldn't get banned, but it'd probably get a lot of negative attention that CA wouldn't want.

The 1st Sino-Japanese War isn't nearly as contentious as the second, but the CCP loves using the conflicts with the Japanese as a talking point, and won't hesitate to ban things that don't tread the party line on that front. Anything that might be construed as undermining Chinese resistance to "Imperialist Aggression" during the Qing and post-imperial eras is something that still falls under heavy party censorship. The other danger is that the Qing era is when China's treatment of its large northern and western minorities suddenly becomes relevant, and that is a very big political firestorm.

The danger in both cases isn't that your average citizen off the streets is going to particularly care. It's that the media and politicians will to score nationalism points.

[PikeStance]

The Imjin War is still trotted out in the Korean Assembly as the birth of modern Korean nationalism. Since nationalism across Asia is on the rise, old conflicts get pulled out more and more in political dialogues, particularly their representation in media. In particular, the Imjin War is seen as a prelude to Japan's colonization of Korea and the beginning of Japanese war crimes against Koreans, both of which are still very, very touchy subjects in both countries. It probably wouldn't get banned, but it'd probably get a lot of negative attention that CA wouldn't want.

The 1st Sino-Japanese War isn't nearly as contentious as the second, but the CCP loves using the conflicts with the Japanese as a talking point, and won't hesitate to ban things that don't tread the party line on that front. Anything that might be construed as undermining Chinese resistance to "Imperialist Aggression" during the Qing and post-imperial eras is something that still falls under heavy party censorship. The other danger is that the Qing era is when China's treatment of its large northern and western minorities suddenly becomes relevant, and that is a very big political firestorm.

The danger in both cases isn't that your average citizen off the streets is going to particularly care. It's that the media and politicians will to score nationalism points.

I think you are conflating politics with gaming. The CCP wouldn't have any issues with the First. It is the Second that is contentious due to the atrocities committed. Even then, they would not ban the game. Hearts of Iron 4 is available. Yes, it was prohibited briefly but when Waking the Tiger DLC was release it has been allowed. I still do not know what was contentious as the Independent "Tibet" and the division of China was a false assumption given both are present in the DLC.

I teach history in China to Chinese students. I ask specific questions about what is contentious and what is not. The only period discussed was the Chinese Civil War; roughly 1911- 1949, excluding WW2 which I taught. Korean war, I was told, was fine.

[zoner16]

Today's Records mode stream.

They start streaming in the middle of a campaign (turn 27), just after Ma Teng took Chang'an off the remnants of Dong Zhuo's forces after Dong Zhuo himself got assassinated by Lu Bu.

AI seems to be improving. Defenders in a siege move with more purpose, encampments are actually used as fortifications and not just as a deployment zone (see the old AngoryTom video), and it makes a better effort to engage all of your units. It will occasionally pull units away from unengaged but still threatened entrances to reinforce other areas, thereby creating a gap easily exploitable by cavalry (who can jump in faster than they can change their minds). However, it's being proactive and it's still something of a historical mistake as well.

They don't really zoom in much, so I can't say how combat animations look.

Still worried about destroyed units being remustered with the pre-destruction experience level. I didn't get an answer on that during the AMA.

[Abdülmecid I]

Out of couriosity, what's the white mist appearing during Dong Zhuo's duel? Is it a regular special effect of combats between heroes or is it just a unique ability of the tyrant's legendary sword?

[zoner16]

I've seen a couple of different special effects come out from duels, but I don't know if they're just generic effects to highlight the combat or if they're an ability effect. This one is new as well, but nothing in the Blade of Xiang Yu's description suggests that that it's the cause.

[PikeStance]

Since they switched to Historical, they have not been as thorough with explaining what they are doing. Wheels seem more interested in playing.

[Daruwind]

Latest batch of videos:
https://www.reddit.com/r/totalwar/co...ft_megathread/