greatmingmilitary
patreon
Impression: Stronghold Warlords (pre-Alpha)
🕑 Added 2019-10-25 08:40:36 +0000 UTC*Images in this article are screenshots taken from videos of Fireflyworlds YouTube channel.
Recently (recently as in four months ago during E3 2019. I know, I am late to the party), Firefly Studios revealed their next installment in the Stronghold series: Warlords. Unlike previous Stronghold titles, Stronghold Warlords is set to play in the Far East, which naturally brings it to my attention. I've always had a soft spot for small-time studios that put their hearts into making a great game, so I really hope this game ends up being a big success.
I must admit that I have no prior experience with the Stronghold series (aside from watching a few Let's Play videos), so I am writing this impression from the perspective of historical accuracy, rather than commenting on the good or bad of graphics and gameplay features (which also means I won't be looking at this game with a nostalgic filter or comparing it to the cult classic that is the original Stronghold, so I think that can be a good thing). The game is also still in active development, so a lot of stuff are subject to change.
OK, now that I've got this out of the way, let's get started.
What does a Far East setting have to offer?
It's to my knowledge that previous Stronghold installments don't really have distinct "faction" like modern RTS games (to be fair, RTS with distinct faction wasn't really common back then). While there are nominally "crusaders" and "Islamic" factions in Crusaders series games, everyone has access to the same buildings and units, and everyone builds, defends, and lay siege to castle pretty much the same way.
A Far East setting opens up possibilities for completely different playstyle and experience. The upcoming Stronghold Warlords, for example, will feature at least four different cultures: Chinese, Japanese, Mongols, and Vietnamese. Each of these cultures approaches siege and fortification very differently. Chinese for example built very strong walls, but didn't make use of "castle" in the traditional, medieval European, sense. Japanese on the other hand did have something very similar to European castles, yet they didn't build large crenellated walls (they built very large stone foundations with small walls on top instead). The Mongols were certainly not renowned castle-builders, although they did fortify their capital Karakorum with mud walls. The diversity of Far East cultures offers a lot of opportunities for unique and creative gameplay for a siege-focused game like Stronghold.
(No, I don't know anything about Vietnam, sorry.)
For all its potential, it's also very easy to screw up a Far East setting, and a "Far East kitchen sink" is almost guaranteed to end in disaster. Stronghold is not Age of Empire or Rise of Nations, so in my opinion it's better to select one specific time period, and stick with it. Unfortunately and worryingly, this kitchen sink approach seems to be the direction the devs are taking right now.
Random thoughts on the buildings I saw in the pre-Alpha footage
The Keep: It always strikes me as odd that hostile units can casually stroll into a keep and kill the lord inside in the original Stronghold game, even though the keep is supposedly the most heavily fortified part of a castle. An unfortified, Chinese-style palace building actually makes a little bit more sense.
Very tall tower: This isn't very historically accurate or realistic, unfortunately. In general, Chinese-style towers are more fat than tall, and only found on shorter walls like the Great Wall of China. Major city walls have bastions instead of towers.
(This is a tower on the Great Wall of China. Not very tall, isn't it?)
Hoardings: Yes, I love me some hoardings. The hoardings shown here don't look anything like the one covered in my blog article, but there probably wasn't any standardised design back in the day so I will let this slide.
Ewww: I know, I know, it is for making gunpowder. I just don't understand why the devs want to make the process so derpy though (other than for meme purpose). Saltpetre was/can be collected from stable and pig pen, both of which exist in the game. Chinese people also mined saltpetre directly.
Dragon statues (not actually a building, but I thought I should comment anyway): Although they look cool and "oriental", Neither China nor Japan has giant dragon and Buddha statues littered all over the place. Building such a massive statue is a big project, so logically no one wanted to build one at the middle of nowhere for no reason.
Most giant Buddha statues in China are stone statues carved out of a cliff too.
Random thoughts on military units
Hwacha turret: To be frank, this turret looks like a contraption borne out of the mind of a goblin tinkerer. It is obviously not historically accurate (Chinese walls are large enough that one can simply park multiple wheeled hwacha on top and rain death on the enemy) in the slightest.
Flying crow: Straight out of Age of Empire III. Shen Huo Fei Ya (神火飛鴉) is actually a late Yuan or early Ming period weapon, so it's not exactly an "early" gunpowder weapon. Then again, if the weapon can spray caltrops everywhere and launch micro-rockets, then I am all for it.
Fire oxen: Just your typical suicide bomber cow. Nothing to see here, move along.
Auxiliary axeman: You are looking at the first hint of the dreaded Osprey taint...also that axe is a pure fantasy design.
Sword-and-golden-washbasin (sorry for my failed attempt at humour): What is a 19th century Dadao guy doing in a medieval-themed game?
Catapult?: Easily my most hated unit from the pre-alpha footage. Is this supposed to be a weird mobile trebuchet thing? The devs really should just stick with the fixed trebuchet design from previous games.
While I don't expect Stronghold to be the epitome of historically accurate video game, I still want it to maintain some degree of believability. Unfortunately, Stronghold Warlords failed in this regard. It's very telling when the most historically accurate unit in the game is that suicide bomber cow (and it's not even that accurate!).
The Osprey taint seeps in
Fire lancer: The fire lancer is terrible. Real terrible. He is based on the Osprey depiction of a Japanese commander of the Kofun period (around 4th century AD), wielding a Chinese weapon invented in the 10th century.
Also, you can't reload a firelance like that. It is basically a one-shot weapon.
"Fukienese tribesman": Of all the terrible Osprey illustrations, the devs just have to pick the worst one. This illustration is reconstructed based on vague Marco Polo's descriptions of "Fu-chau" tribal warriors, with an overdose of artist's imagination and drugs, and a shield robbed from Mōko Shūrai Ekotoba (Illustrated Account of the Mongol Invasion).
One major problem when a Western game developer wants to make a game about the Far East, but knows nothing about it and can't be arsed to actually do research, is that he often turns to Osprey books for reference. This leads to a "blind leading the blind" situation because, let's face it, Osprey books, at least the older ones, are absolutely terrible when it comes to visual reference — and video games are all about visuals! This is particularly egregious for a video game like Stronghold series, because Osprey actually published some decent books about Chinese and Japanese fortification, yet as far as I can tell, the devs simply ignored them.
Comments
GreatMingMilitary
Osprey's books are only useful to give the most rudimentary overview of a culture's military history, and their illustrations on Chinese military are terrible. In fact the illustrations are so bad that it's easier to find things that they get right than vice versa.
Bren Zo
a little new to this blog, but what's the issue w/ Osprey? i thought they were considered rather reliable in their depictions
GreatMingMilitary
Oddly, some blog posts just seem to disappear from the frontpage of my blog despite the fact that the links still work (my recent Imjin War critiques are like that too LOL). I have no idea why. I guess it's because of the wonky template that I used (I've added ramdon codes and stuffs into it over time and now I am afraid to change it). BTW this is the link to the second part of my blog post (In case it doesn't show up in my blog). http://greatmingmilitary.blogspot.com/2019/06/chinese-fortification-p2.html
Lancelot
I have just know about this game today. I loved Stronghold when I still a child. But serious, it failure after every years, so sad. When check everything about SW in youtube. My view is: their gameplay until now still not good. It don’t really have any upgrade compare to the origin Stronghold. They even still not include any element from the Chinese’s forstress building/protect/siege/… to. We can see they explain the siege battle simply as “ catapult attack, and the wall be destroyed.”. Remember, their game is Stronghold. It focus in “ how to build the forstress, protect it, and conquer other fortress.”. So, they are ignoring the most interesting part which is good for their gameplay. I doubt they have anyone who really know about history to help them. Now I’m writting a letter to them. Hope the link to your blog can help them a little ( if they really read my letter). By the way, where are you store your series of “Chinese Fortification” in the blog? I find in “Fortification” and can’t find any link to this writting: http://greatmingmilitary.blogspot.com/2019/06/chinese-fortification-p1.html Thank you.
