Samurai should not retreat!

[HotDog Fish]

That would also go with Ironclads from WWI then like theHMS Erebus that had two 152 mm and the big 380 mm's on a gigantic turret then! It could also go 14 knots; had a displacement of 8585 tonnes; 102 mm internal belt of armour belt, 102 mm obver the magazine and 330 mm on the turret face and it's dimensions where 123.4m x 26.9m x 3.6m. Also it was launched in 1916. The British made omnitors at the time because of their effectivness against (not being attacked by) subs due to their flat bottom, low profile and effective armour compared to battleships. So does the Civ3 monitor include these, because they where considered 'un-seaworthy' as well! And used for coastal bombardment due to this limitation (and this WAS 1916, where almost all steam ships could cross the Atlantic)?

 

[Zachriel]

Retreating is not the same thing as running away. If your daimyo gives the order to withdraw, you withdraw. Here is an example which includes tactical withdrawals by both armies.

Battle of Nagashino
http://www.samurai-archives.com/ban.html

On the northern flank, the outermost Oda unit retreated, causing the Takeda to chase, only to be hit in the flank by another Oda unit.

Nobunaga signaled his men to withdraw to the palisade.

Of course, Civ3 is a strategy game and doesn't depict this level of tactical detail. The use of ashugari gunpowder units to defend the palisade is of particular historical importance.

 

[Silverflame]

Originally posted by HotDog Fish
That would also go with Ironclads from WWI then like theHMS Erebus that had two 152 mm and the big 380 mm's on a gigantic turret then! It could also go 14 knots; had a displacement of 8585 tonnes; 102 mm internal belt of armour belt, 102 mm obver the magazine and 330 mm on the turret face and it's dimensions where 123.4m x 26.9m x 3.6m. Also it was launched in 1916. The British made omnitors at the time because of their effectivness against (not being attacked by) subs due to their flat bottom, low profile and effective armour compared to battleships. So does the Civ3 monitor include these, because they where considered 'un-seaworthy' as well! And used for coastal bombardment due to this limitation (and this WAS 1916, where almost all steam ships could cross the Atlantic)?

Sorry for getting off topic to the ironclads again but
There were ironclads in WWI? I never knew that. I thought everyone was using destroyers and uboats back then. But I can believe you.

Oh and indeed later in the civil war more ironclads were used, and they were able to keep themselves afloat. But they were still too weak when attacking forts, like fort sumter (spel?).

 

[HotDog Fish]

They where using monitors during WWI, not Ironlcads, monitors where well exactly like ironclads in every single way but better and bigger. For example mosst People couldn't tell the USS Monitor (from the American Civil War) from the Confederate Atlanta where diffrent groups of ships. These monitors during WWI where mean't for coastal bombardment, and thanks to their shape, would be more addept at avoiding torpedos . The only problem was that they could never sail well and wouldn't do too well in the open seas, here's a link on it
http://www.jeroenkoppes.com/ww2/ships/hms_Erebus.asp

 

[WillJ]

Originally posted by superunknown
The way I see it, the only reason why he has a movement of two is he is not wearing any armor, thus being able to move faster.

The Samurai is, or at least should be, wearing armor. The reason the Samurai was given two movement in Civ3 is because Samurai were the Japanese equivalents of European knights. Taken from the Civilopedia: Like knights, Samurai were landowners who volunteered military service in exchange for a larger warlord's protection. In Civ3, Samurai replace knights and are given an extra defense, and they don't require horses. Nothing else is changed, because this is a decent, balanced improvement for a UU. Thus, even though it doesn't make much sense, and Samurai shouldn't really have any more movement than other ground units, Samurai have 2 movement. (And with 2 movement comes the ability to retreat.) Historically, it's inaccurate, but in game terms, it works fine, I guess.

 

[sabo]

Off Topic: I think the Colour of your Armour should centre on your preferences.

but I don't think the color of your armor should center on your preferences.

 

[CurtSibling]

Originally posted by superunknown



Well, RobOz, I wouldn´t form my opinion based on a movie about turtles, but then I believe that was your little joke.

Well, superunknown , you are forming YOUR opinion based on a game that has as much to do with 'history' as Xena, Warrior Princess...

Just because Japanese never retreat in the movies, doesn't mean EVERY Japanese person is a 'never-say-die' war machine...

Kids...pah!

 

[hbdragon88]

Originally posted by Silverflame


Becuase the first successful ironclad, the Monitor, is what the ironclads in this game are based on. The Monitor was so unseaworthy that it it had enough trouble staying afloat in the coastal waters. It even had to be towed. And when that major confederate port was being destroyed, the boat that was towing of the Monitor was busy and let go for a minute, and suddenly the Monitor sank. Or something like that.

Anyway, yeah, samurai should be able to treat all terrain as roads and without a retreat.

Unseaworthy. It was a storm that it got sunk in. It was just recently towed, after 140 years.

I'm not even sure how ironclads are so important. The only way I see is how that they signaled an end in wooden warfare.

ON TOPIC: I think that it's a tossup. On one hand it's good for it to retreat. But since Firaxis also screwed up somewhat on other UUs it doesn't make a big difference.

 

[Reboot]

Urm, maybe the developers thought of the Samurai not solely as a walking unit, but also as a riding unit? There are Samurai who ride horses all decked with armour, right?(or are they strictly speaking another class of troops altogether?)

Anyway, we know that the unit picture for the Samurai is not exactly accurate, since Samurai wear armour and banners in battle. The picture is more like Samurai of the later eras... like in Kenshin! hmmm, maybe he'll make a cool fictional UU.

 

[ogrejedi]

Off topic:

None of you can write English properly. You're all wrong.. The real, original way of saying what you fools call "armor" or "armour" is, of course, "herepad". Similarly, it is neither "color" nor "colour", it is "bleo".

 

[superunknown]

Fate is in Heaven, the armor is on the breast, success is with the legs. Go to the battlefield firmly confident of victory, and you will come home with no wounds whatever. Engage in combat fully determined to die and you will be alive; wish to survive in the battle and you will surely meet death. When you leave the house determined not to see it again you will come home safely; when you have any thought of returning you will not return. You may not be in the wrong to think that the world is always subject to change, but the warrior must not entertain this way of thinking, for his fate is always determined.


Uesugi Kenshin (1530-1578)

 

[superunknown]

The line between suicide and death in battle was often thin, especially since a certain measure of glorification was attached to the notion of perishing on the battlefield. Here we find the 'nobility of failure' Ivan Morris once wrote about, the gallant death of the losing warrior. The Battle of Nagashino in 1575 provides us with a moving example. The Takeda army had been crushed by the combined forces of Oda Nobunaga and Tokugawa Ieyasu and now faced complete annihilation, with no less then ten thousand men already dead. The venerable Takeda general Baba Nobufusa had somehow survived the morning's slaughter and now led the remains of his command in a doomed rear guard action.

 

[weirdo1821]

"No retreat for them" :in best Soup Nazi voice from Seinfeld:
The code of Honor is what counts, if they do retreat, then they should go down a level.

 

[CurtSibling]

Originally posted by ogrejedi
Off topic:

None of you can write English properly. You're all wrong.. The real, original way of saying what you fools call "armor" or "armour" is, of course, "herepad". Similarly, it is neither "color" nor "colour", it is "bleo".

Correction, my boy.

I actually can speak the proper dialect of Great Britian.
I too spell 'Armour' and Harbour' the way it is meant to be spelt...
But in my accurate prose, I am in the minority in these fora.