PDA

View Full Version : So what would you like to see in S2TW?



Kagemusha
06-03-2010, 22:41
Like the title says, what new features would you like to see in the new title of CA, or would there be something old you would like to make a comeback?
For me i would like to have quite few units as historically there wasnt many and one thing in particular would be to have dismounting samurai / Kachi unit that could possibly fight with both yumi and Yari spear. That would be lot closer to the real deal.So what you think?

Beskar
06-03-2010, 22:58
I have a bad feeling, it will be Napoleon: Total War, but with Shogun sprites

johnhughthom
06-03-2010, 23:22
I have a bad feeling, it will be Napoleon: Total War, but with Shogun sprites

I thought Napoleon was supposed to be much better than Empire?

Thermal
06-03-2010, 23:22
Multiplayer campaign (the article says there will be one but I believe it when I see it).
A small but good quality campaign, a still fear they will try to make it huge in some way, I want it to be simplistic.
A few more units than in the original, even if it breaches historical accuracy. I wouldn't want to many, but a bit of variation is good.
Fantastic Landscapes (I think they can pull that one off if not the others).
Oh and good AI, I think shogun 1 had decent AI, it would be good if Shogun 2 did too.

Krusader
06-03-2010, 23:28
Non-invincible Geishas.
Warrior Monks!
No anime/manga.
Units have different heraldry depending on which province they are recruited from.
Warrior Monks!

Thermal
06-03-2010, 23:42
Oh, almost forgot...

RETURN OF THE ASSASSINATION VIDEOS! I loved them...

andrewt
06-03-2010, 23:51
Better gameplay.

1. I like having fewer but more distinguishable units. Ever since Medieval, the number of units keep going up but the differences between them have become so minor that they have really become indistinguishable from each other. Empire had different stats for all the different line infantries of each faction but the differences were mostly too minor as to be worth bothering with.

I like the days of Shogun and Medieval 1 where units mattered. There really was a big difference between the elite units and the peasant units. Stuff like having spears or swords or armor piercing weapons and the like mattered. There was also a noticeable difference between fast and slow infantry and fast and slow cavalry. There were also clear differences in the cost and upkeep between the better units and the lower ones.

2. Fewer but more varied maps. Ever since Rome, the tactical battles were done on the tile were the defending army was on. That meant that almost everything was flatland. I'm so tired of fighting on flatland all the time.

STW had bridge battles, the occasional two bridge battle, battles with choke points, multiple hills, mountains, forests, etc. I used high ground, bridge and forest advantages all the time on Shogun and Medieval 1. I've barely used them on any Total War game since. I don't even remember any bridge battles post-Medieval 1. I haven't lured any cavalry to forests, either. It was all flatland.

A Nerd
06-04-2010, 01:04
I always prefered produceable agents, I never liked the spawning ones
Varied terrain; hills, forests that provide arrow cover, never liked garrisoning buildings...don't know if S2 will have that
family trees, blood line all that etc.

that's all I can think of at the moment.

hoom
06-04-2010, 02:41
Most vital is a return to the Risk type campaign map :bow:
With the Rome type it is essentially impossible to retreat.

In Shogun it was at times best to fall back when faced by superior numbers, gather more force over a few turns & then retake the lost territory.
Often there would be a border buildup then one side would attack & the victor would quickly gain a bunch of territory as the loser fell back, rebuilding his forces until the victors army was sufficiently thinned by having to garrison & the loser was able to concentrate enough force to be a viable defense.
Many other things that were common & cool in Shogun/Medieval are impossible or very rare in the Rome style, like: Allied reinforcement, Sneak attacks by what you thought were friends into provinces you just launched an invasion from, Rethinking your plan if you realise what you were going to do leaves you too vulnerable...

drone
06-04-2010, 02:56
Better AI
Risk-style campaign map
Fewer unit choices (thus better balancing)
4 season years
Moddability
No Steam/SecuRom

A Nerd
06-04-2010, 02:59
Better AI
Risk-style campaign map
Fewer unit choices (thus better balancing)
4 season years
Moddability
No Steam/SecuRom


Do you really think CA will return to this type of map? After all the time and effort put into the 3D style one? I too would like it but I am not expecting as much.

Edit: Steam smells

Intranetusa
06-04-2010, 03:03
1. Better battle AI
2. Better campaign AI
3. Modability
4. No invasive securirom

drone
06-04-2010, 03:23
Do you really think CA will return to this type of map? After all the time and effort put into the 3D style one? I too would like it but I am not expecting as much.
I doubt it. But maybe they can make the engagement box big enough to essentially duplicate it.

A Nerd
06-04-2010, 03:26
But maybe they can make the engagement box big enough to essentially duplicate it.

That's a brilliant idea! Do you think the AI could manage it? To leave his city and come out onto the field? He hasn't done that since MTW, and that was when he had no choice!

Monk
06-04-2010, 03:29
Non-invincible Geishas.
Warrior Monks!
No anime/manga.
Units have different heraldry depending on which province they are recruited from.
Warrior Monks!

Indeed. :laugh4:

There's only one thing CA can do to get me to buy: deliver on the AI front. Everything else is icing on the cake, but if the AI can't even form a battle line then you can count me out.

pevergreen
06-04-2010, 03:48
The game will be on a new engine.

I want an EU3 map system. With all the overlays you can have. Political, trade, diplomatic etc

Very, very very cautious about the seemingly RPG element they are slipping in.

A Nerd
06-04-2010, 03:58
Very, very very cautious about the seemingly RPG element they are slipping in.

Everyone liked the vices and virtues that were added in MTW. The RPG stuff might not be too bad. All in optomistic speculation of course.

gollum
06-04-2010, 04:13
I think too that the RPG element existed in RTW and beyond. However if i understand this correctly - and they mean it as it was in the original, it won't be an RPG element - just that the game will involve the player's character at the centre of everything. In the original such a thing was present inthe sense that the daimyo was the heart of the clan - he had to personally negotiate and fight.

Also i think that the right game to make a paradoxian camp map was Empire. if again i'm reading this corectly and this is indeed a back to basis move, then the smaller scope, roster, less clans etc is the perfect setting to make this as clearly TW as possible ie a blend of strategy and tactics with the focu on the battles rather than a complex strategy game. Of course i may be wrong, because i don't know what they have in mind and there is a large fanbase that wants such a thing to cater for.

mountaingoat
06-04-2010, 04:16
I doubt it. But maybe they can make the engagement box big enough to essentially duplicate it.

this may work , though i did like the old map system much more than the current 3d one..


i would just like to see better detail in the unit animations , specifically in two areas

first off , the more "elite" type units (or just certain units in general) to field a variety of personal weapons in the unit with different animations for each ... right now you can have multiple weapon skins and unit skins per unit .. but when you see an enitre unit of 2h sowrdsmen etc .. or a unit of dismounted knights all with swords.. just seems a bit out of place ..

second would be the collision ... how about multiple units attacking single units etc .. instead of this constant dueling we see ... also with attack stances ... instead of some units (non disciplined for spear walls etc ) just standing back in line , something else could done with them ? (not too sure on this one)

Kagemusha
06-04-2010, 09:19
Ofcourse i would be blown out from my shoes, if there would be an overhaul in the battle system, which would make the game more realistic and lot more hard for human players. Japanese armies were composed of contingents of vassals and allies, not homogenious Clan armies. So if the player could not micromanage troops directly, but just give orders to whole contingents, while two equally dumb AI contingents could slug it out after. Maybe the player could only have direct control of his personal contingent. I know this is just a wet dream which will not happen, but its just an idea. In any way, this can be simulated in MP, with different humans allied to each other.

Andres
06-04-2010, 09:54
- return to the Risk style campaign map;
- no Steam or SecuRom.

caravel
06-04-2010, 10:08
- return to the Risk style campaign map;
- no Steam or SecuRom.
This^^

And vastly improved AI/diplomacy.

Battles must also be tactical not the idiotic rush-fests they have been in previous TW's.

hoom
06-04-2010, 10:22
Do you really think CA will return to this type of map? After all the time and effort put into the 3D style one?They should because it was better.
Doesn't mean it has to be 2D but it needs that functionality so we can get back to being able to withdraw when we need to & have ally battles again.

Thermal
06-04-2010, 10:37
Risk-style campaign map


Given that the first game had this, it would almost just be a modification of that, I'd like to see how the recent methods work instead.

Although I have the BOA mod, so I am infact playing Shogun on the Rome engine, more or less, its good. :grin:

Bigger engagement box sounds like a good idea.



The game will be on a new engine.



Good, I dislike the Empire engine.

Kagemusha
06-04-2010, 10:45
One thing i would like to see would be attrition. Also they could still use the 3d map, but use pahfindinding so that the AI armies would use roads preferably in order to march straight into enemy. Also entering non allied zone with an army should mean instant war. So the AI could have a condition not to enter a neutral lands in any other case then war. That would eliminate the AI armies hanging around in strange places at the map. Also the attrition would melt down armies in non friendly areas.

Subotan
06-04-2010, 10:52
The Risk map would be a step backwards, methinks. The 3D Style maps offer a lot more flexibility, and the main problem I'm hearing with the 3D maps (Retreating inflexibility) could easily be solved by allowing you to choose where to retreat. (Although obviously not forwards)

hoom
06-04-2010, 11:04
Sod flexible. Give me 'works' & AI knows how to use it.

Subotan
06-04-2010, 11:15
I don't want to return to what is essentially to just an even more Japanese version of Dice Wars. (http://www.gamedesign.jp/flash/dice/dice.html)

If you don't want flexibility, than by all means return to playing STW I.

Sp00n
06-04-2010, 11:37
1, A multiplayer chat room.

2, A return of assassination videos, loved them also.

3, A return of the old classic map damn what was it called the one with small rises in the center that the defender would try and hold and hills on left and right side, was the default MP map until modded flat maps came in.

4, Balance

5, The return of massive mountains, thinking back to those ridiculous hill battles that ElmoOfFear used to make me join late evenings.

6, Hopefully the return of Takiyama (Mizu) and other old Shogun Clans missing atm.I know I'm up for that fellow Takiyama's

I just hope they can make it good.

snorky
06-04-2010, 12:04
NO risk map please, I for one actually considered it a mayor improvement when they introduced the 3d campaign map.
Combined naval and land battles, port assaults and the like. I missed this the most actually in Empire but have been looking forward to this since Viking Invasion(slightly off topic, I wish they make naval battles in a viking total war)
Assassination movies of course
The style of Shogun totals atmosphere was really something different then the other games and looking at the trailer they seem to be returning to that so no real worries there.
Little concerned about the engine, are they going to use the empire engine if so how are they going to make that work. And if there making a new engine I hope they can make it stable enough with the first instalment , not having the expansion deliver what the first one should have.

Nelson
06-04-2010, 15:55
I want to see the Rome style map, not the Risk style. The original map was one region, same battlefield every time. That would be a huge step backward.

I want castles (with ditches or motes) to besiege.

I want the idea of “rock, paper, and scissors” discarded. Units should behave correctly. If a unit was strong in a particular role it need not be artificially weakened in order to enhance the role of some other unit. If yari troops are strong against cavalry they need not be weak versus sword wielding troops. Not all troops are especially useful in particular situations. Designers must not say, for example “Since this unit is really strong in melee we had better make it especially vulnerable to missile fire” or “When the attack strength goes up the defense strength must come down”.

I would like to see units of samurai using all sorts of weapons, not just one. These guys used whatever they liked. They were warriors.

I want alliances to be important and battlefield treachery a possibility.

Is there any evidence of a geisha ever assassinating a daimyo? I do not believe they were so good they left no evidence. But if there is evidence, I’d like to hear it.

Kagemusha
06-04-2010, 16:01
I personally wouldnt want to see any other mainly sword unit rather then the mandatory Nodachi samurais who really were a rare instance as individual samurais on the battlefield never operating as units, but i am quite sure that a Nodachi unit cant be avoided. Other then that Katana was only a sidearm for samurai and cheaper mass produced versions or wakizashi´s were used by Ashigaru´s, so please no katana units. Sidearm for many units, yes, but not the main weapon.

caravel
06-04-2010, 16:39
I want to see the Rome style map, not the Risk style. The original map was one region, same battlefield every time. That would be a huge step backward.
Minor correction, the last incarnation of the risk map (MTW), had as many battlefields as there were borders and a random factor - so in theory there could be many random maps. The 3D RTS map first seen in RTW had set, flat maps, per map tile usually based around the roads.

I fully understand that we will be getting the 3D map, and I'm not opposed to that as such (I like the idea of fighting countless battles in diverse terrain types), but the original map design is not as limited as some like to make out. It's apples and oranges, the original risk map was good, but it's gone and I can't see CA bringing it back.


I want the idea of “rock, paper, and scissors” discarded. Units should behave correctly. If a unit was strong in a particular role it need not be artificially weakened in order to enhance the role of some other unit. If yari troops are strong against cavalry they need not be weak versus sword wielding troops. Not all troops are especially useful in particular situations. Designers must not say, for example “Since this unit is really strong in melee we had better make it especially vulnerable to missile fire” or “When the attack strength goes up the defense strength must come down”.
I think the RPS element is a strength. An entirely historically accurate experience does not necessarily make a good game and would lead to unit redundancy (as is the case in the newer titles).


I would like to see units of samurai using all sorts of weapons, not just one. These guys used whatever they liked. They were warriors.
I think the Yari was the weapon of choice at the time? The idea of massed units of katana wielding Samurai rushing each other is a myth.

-Edit: In essence what Kagemusha just posted.

I want alliances to be important and battlefield treachery a possibility.
I like the idea of battlefield treachery. This was discussed countless times, even before RTW's time, but has never been implimented.

Is there any evidence of a geisha ever assassinating a daimyo? I do not believe they were so good they left no evidence. But if there is evidence, I’d like to hear it.
The geisha in STW is fantasy. I think there is evidence of female ninja, but they were not geisha - I forget the name.

ReluctantSamurai
06-04-2010, 17:07
A return to unit balance and a strong CAI that is capable of beating you. In the original, battles were for provincial control, not just skirmishing for the rights to siege the local city. Even though I rather like the 3D-style of map, the AI just didn't seem to know how to make it work so if a more "Risk" type of map is done, so be it. I miss the excitement of your entire empire hinging on the outcome of a single battle.

Vladimir
06-04-2010, 18:20
Lots of contemporary art and influences. Great music too.

Terazawa
06-04-2010, 21:13
In all honesty, the closer the Battle Mode of STW2 is to STW1, the better. 3D Visuals, and that's it. Any of you think it needs anything else???

Campaign Mode is a different story as STW1 was way too basic to even compare to the later TW games. Really looking forward to see how they are going to approach the campaign map, resources and all that. Japan is not Europe - it's much smaller, fewer zones. I think going back to Risk-style map isn't a bad idea in the case of STW since it's so compact.

AussieGiant
06-04-2010, 21:15
I really don't think they are going to go backwards on the map technology. I would not expect a Risk style map.

Historical unit accuracy would be highly desirable and I hope they implement that. I think an important aspect of their games were lost when they tried to "balance" the units rather than replicate the historical accuracy of what happened. There is a real opportunity to educate and inform people about the time periods they pick. But it will be our multiplayer brethren who potentially spoil that with their desire to have a meaning full multiplayer experience. They do not coexist in the same unit roster as far as I'm concerned.

Discoman
06-04-2010, 21:22
I want to see good Battle AI and Campaign AI. I want to see the AI, if on the brink of destruction, be more willing to become a Vassal or an ally, or give something to me. I want what they promised in ETW, I want to see the AI determine the importance of a battle and actually RETREAT if things aren't going their way.

I want a different experience if I'm playing a different faction. Also don't balance the single player/multiplayer together. It makes it really lame that the game gets changed because someone is using an exploit online for their own ego. I don't mass mortars and quicklime, okay? I don't see why the unit accuracy should go down because people respond too slowly.

Terazawa
06-04-2010, 21:22
I really don't think they are going to go backwards on the map technology. I would not expect a Risk style map.

Historical unit accuracy would be highly desirable and I hope they implement that. I think an important aspect of their games were lost when they tried to "balance" the units rather than replicate the historical accuracy of what happened. There is a real opportunity to educate and inform people about the time periods they pick. But it will be our multiplayer brethren who potentially spoil that with their desire to have a meaning full multiplayer experience. They do not coexist in the same unit roster as far as I'm concerned.

You are correct in your assessment that often historical accuracy/single-player experience gets in direct conflict with unit balance/multiplayer experience. This is especially true when the game has only a few units and most armies look the same.

That is exactly why back in the day, 10 years ago, we used to insist with CA to make a seperate unit stat table for multiplayer only. That way you can get a historically-correct and fun campaign experience in single player while multiplayer addicts who don't give a flying crap about history can enjoy their fully balanced units and armies. ;-)

Maybe they can finally do this in STW2 - in the wish list :)

AussieGiant
06-04-2010, 21:32
You are correct in your assessment that often historical accuracy/single-player experience gets in direct conflict with unit balance/multiplayer experience. This is especially true when the game has only a few units and most armies look the same.

That is exactly why back in the day, 10 years ago, we used to insist with CA to make a seperate unit stat table for multiplayer only. That way you can get a historically-correct and fun campaign experience in single player while multiplayer addicts who don't give a flying crap about history can enjoy their fully balanced units and armies. ;-)

Maybe they can finally do this in STW2 - in the wish list :)

Well I really hope so Terazawa. if they try and fudge the damn thing I'm going to have to throw something at CA for being less than informed about their own game style.

hoom
06-06-2010, 03:12
I don't want to return to what is essentially to just an even more Japanese version of Dice Wars.
If you don't want flexibility, than by all means return to playing STW I. Actually I'm loving that Dice Wars :cheerleader:

I guess its not 'Flexibility' that is the problem, its that we are talking about different flexibilities.
The Shogun/Risk style gives flexibility to retreat properly & to give/recieve allied aid but doesn't have manoeuvre.
The Rome style has Theatre level flexibility of manoeuvre but makes it nearly impossible to ever retreat or have allied reinforcement.

I prefer the strategic withdrawal & allied gameplay.
Which is not to say that Theatre level manoeuvre needs to be sacrificed.

What is really needed (& I now remember pointing this out in the build up to Empire) is a 3rd, Theatre level of the game.
My proposal is this:

Risk style turn-based at the Strategic level.
Real-time 3d battles at the Tactical level.
A new Theatre level so that when two armies are in the same province, you get a zoomed in Rome style map of the province & either a period of real-time or several turns of Rome type army manoeuvre per Strategic map turn.


When armies meet on the Theatre level you'd have a Real-time battle on that territory like how we have in the existing Rome style Strategic level.

Could even allow two armies to be in the same province without a battle, standing off/manoeuvring across multiple Strategic turns.

Raiding villages would also work better since there would be time for a defender to react. Could even allow for proper dispersed/concentrated army gameplay.

Allied support would happen Shogun style on the Strategic level & then the allied force would be present on the Theatre level as a separate army (under the control of the player?).
Would be best to have some sort of ability for the two forces to join & manoeuvre together as allies, an AI that would try to do that & on the opposing side, attempt to keep the allied forces separated & defeat them in detail.


I want to see the AI determine the importance of a battle and actually RETREAT if things aren't going their way. This is a big part of the problem with the Rome style strategic map, its virtually impossible to successfully strategically retreat.
In Shogun you can retreat at the strategic level with no harm to your army (unless the fall-back province is taken by the enemy in the same turn!)
You can also retreat in-battle and your army/remnants will withdraw to a different province.
The AI could & did do this.

Two of my alltime favourite Total War battles were:

Shogun: My 'pissing around' army consisting entirely of high honour, fully upgraded Kensai & battle ninja went on assault vs a near full stack of mostly Ashigaru.
The Strategic AI saw only a handful of enemy & told the garrison to fight. The Battle AI took one look at those super-elite guys & ran the hell away!
Medieval: The Golden Horde attacked a vastly outnumbered (like 10:1 or worse), infantry heavy army that I'd carefully setup hidden in a small forest.
The Horde had a couple units of cavalry severely mauled probing my front & flanks, seems to have realised it was not going to be able to do much damage with the big 'cav in forest vs infantry' & 'units in forest vs arrows' penalties and that I wasn't going to be lured out of my forest (I clamped down hard on chasing), turned around & decided to attack something easier next turn.


The AI used to do these tactical retreats even in Rome (haven't played enough M2:TW to know if its still happening there) but often the retreat is not to a safe area due to the movement restrictions, so they normally still lose, just in a 2nd battle.
Also the default unit balancing was done with values that meant the AI rarely realised when it was at a disadvantage.
Various mods improve this amongst other balancing issues.

------------------
A separate suggestion I'd like to see would be Diplomacy level gifting of units between Allies. This would have interesting game-play effects & could enable Allies to be actually useful.

Monk
06-06-2010, 04:52
A separate suggestion I'd like to see would be Diplomacy level gifting of units between Allies. This would have interesting game-play effects & could enable Allies to be .

Victoria allowed something just like that, and it provided a really interesting way to boost an ally's chances. Of course, half the time they'd totally mismanage your resources - but i always loved the idea of giving troops to other nations and having them gain experience to return home as veterens, ready to fight for you.

If there was a way to instantly recall such gifts, (say because someone declared war on you while your units were gifted. Perhaps impose turn limits on their reappearance to simulate them journeying home) and have them return to your capital? That'd be a great addition to the diplomatic model. Provided the AI could handle it of course.

hoom
06-06-2010, 07:16
I seem to have failed to finish the sentence :oops:
Should have ended "actually useful".

Agree on them being returned under certain circumstances, that'd be an important aspect :yes:

Seyavash
06-06-2010, 07:37
I always thought the 3d map was an improvement and each CA game has made it better. It allows for a more in depth campaign within each region that simply adding more regions cannot do so I hope they continue to move forward on this.

However STW had the best atmosphere of all of the game so I hope this will be just as immersive.

One thing I would like to see return is the army formations. I know I can set up my own but I always enjoyed playing around with the preset formations.

hoom
06-06-2010, 07:55
However STW had the best atmosphere of all of the game so I hope this will be just as immersive.And part of that immersion is the subtle hints that the campaign map is a piece of paper on the floor of your campaigning tent, covered with tokens indicating friendly & enemy forces and that you're the Daimyo sitting there puzzling your options before sending off messengers to deliver your orders by pushing 'end turn'.

The Rome type map doesn't really give that sort of immersion in implementations so-far.
Its not impossible to do though, you get some hints of it in Empire & the beta for R.U.S.E. (WWII RTS) had a wider than strictly necessary max zoom out which showed the map as sitting in the middle of a command bunker (think Battle of Britain) with people sitting around it all WWII style & bits of command style background noises coming more prominent as you zoom out.
At full zoom in R.U.S.E. goes about as close as you get in Shogun/Medieval but you spend most of the time about the same zoom as you do in the Rome type 3D map.

InsaneApache
06-06-2010, 09:04
I know that there's no chance but a bloody battlefield was a great atmospheric trait. Real red blood. Everywhere. It just made the whole battle seem, I dunno, worthwhile in a twisted sort of way.

antisocialmunky
06-06-2010, 13:26
Korea/Asia Expansion. I would honestly buy it if it doesn't come out in mod form first.

Swoosh So
06-06-2010, 13:39
A multiplayer foyer for chat! i like napoleon totalwar but cant get into it at all due to the lack of a foyer.

Beskar
06-06-2010, 17:45
Victoria allowed something just like that, and it provided a really interesting way to boost an ally's chances. Of course, half the time they'd totally mismanage your resources - but i always loved the idea of giving troops to other nations and having them gain experience to return home as veterens, ready to fight for you.

If there was a way to instantly recall such gifts, (say because someone declared war on you while your units were gifted. Perhaps impose turn limits on their reappearance to simulate them journeying home) and have them return to your capital? That'd be a great addition to the diplomatic model. Provided the AI could handle it of course.

They should do it so you loan a general with the units, similar to the Crusade system which the computer would use (and you would use when you recieved some).

It should also affect relations if you just kamakazi with another players units as well, and other factors.

Yoshitsune
06-06-2010, 18:28
I would love a campaign that starts in the 12th century "Horse and Bow" era and allows the player to progress right up to the 16th/17th Centuries. Could also include the Yuan/Mongol invasions of the 13th Century...

And please NO risk-like strategic map - that was my biggest peeve with the original. Japan is a rugged, mountainous country and armies were usually confined to roads for a reason

Oh and YAH!

Prince Cobra
06-06-2010, 20:36
A really good AI on the battlefield and on the campaign map. That's it.

bobbin
06-06-2010, 21:25
Little concerned about the engine, are they going to use the empire engine if so how are they going to make that work. And if there making a new engine I hope they can make it stable enough with the first instalment , not having the expansion deliver what the first one should have.

They will most likely use the Empire one as it will follow their established pattern of getting two games out of each engine.

General Malaise
06-07-2010, 00:15
I haven't posted here in forever, mostly because I stopped following TW after Medieval 1, but I saw they were re-making STW recently so I popped on back.

Anyway, one thing I'd like to see is this time around to have the Yari Ashigaru carry nagae yari (longspears) and function as pikeman/phalanx and the yari samurai carry the shorter version and function more as elite spearmen. That's always bothered me from the first one, where yari ashigaru were just cheap junk troops (until they become cheap overpowered units in MP later, heh) when historically they had their own tactical role on the battlefield.

Although this brings up another point which concerns me now, as I saw they claimed to be making 30-40 units (which will no doubt increase with the obligatory expansion). Give the japanese only really used about 10 weapons at the time period tops I'm not seeing how they are getting that number. There's the long and short yari, nodachi which were rare, katanas which were not carried alone but with another weapon, teppo which *could* be split into arquebus/musket again, naginata, nagamaki which were also not common, and daikyu and hankyu (yumi, bows) which too were not carried alone. For instance cavalry often carried a bow and a spear.

I'm really only seeing a way to get about 8 distinct unit types here:
Yari Ashigaru (longspear, nagae yari)
Teppo Ashigaru (arquebus, teppo)
Yari Samurai (shortspear, yari)
Nodachi Samurai (longsword, odachi)
Naginata Samurai (naginata)
Yumi Samurai (longbow, daikyu & katana)
"Light Cavalry" (shortbow, hankyu & shortspear, yari)
"Heavy Cavalry" (nagamaki or long tachi sword maybe)

...all of which is a long, round-a-bout way of saying what I definitely do *not* want to see, and that's more fantasy BS units like battlefield ninja and kensei. Better it would be to take those 8 basic types and have them have slightly different stats based on training in different martial arts schools and slight variations in weapon/armor style (like fork yaris vs straight yaris) by region. Given this stuff about "hero units" though I suspect we're going to be getting hokum. Hopefully then, which is another thing I *do* want to see, it will at least be easily moddable this time around.

Kagemusha
06-07-2010, 07:57
I haven't posted here in forever, mostly because I stopped following TW after Medieval 1, but I saw they were re-making STW recently so I popped on back.

Anyway, one thing I'd like to see is this time around to have the Yari Ashigaru carry nagae yari (longspears) and function as pikeman/phalanx and the yari samurai carry the shorter version and function more as elite spearmen. That's always bothered me from the first one, where yari ashigaru were just cheap junk troops (until they become cheap overpowered units in MP later, heh) when historically they had their own tactical role on the battlefield.

Although this brings up another point which concerns me now, as I saw they claimed to be making 30-40 units (which will no doubt increase with the obligatory expansion). Give the japanese only really used about 10 weapons at the time period tops I'm not seeing how they are getting that number. There's the long and short yari, nodachi which were rare, katanas which were not carried alone but with another weapon, teppo which *could* be split into arquebus/musket again, naginata, nagamaki which were also not common, and daikyu and hankyu (yumi, bows) which too were not carried alone. For instance cavalry often carried a bow and a spear.

I'm really only seeing a way to get about 8 distinct unit types here:
Yari Ashigaru (longspear, nagae yari)
Teppo Ashigaru (arquebus, teppo)
Yari Samurai (shortspear, yari)
Nodachi Samurai (longsword, odachi)
Naginata Samurai (naginata)
Yumi Samurai (longbow, daikyu & katana)
"Light Cavalry" (shortbow, hankyu & shortspear, yari)
"Heavy Cavalry" (nagamaki or long tachi sword maybe)

...all of which is a long, round-a-bout way of saying what I definitely do *not* want to see, and that's more fantasy BS units like battlefield ninja and kensei. Better it would be to take those 8 basic types and have them have slightly different stats based on training in different martial arts schools and slight variations in weapon/armor style (like fork yaris vs straight yaris) by region. Given this stuff about "hero units" though I suspect we're going to be getting hokum. Hopefully then, which is another thing I *do* want to see, it will at least be easily moddable this time around.

You could add Yumi Ashigaru there as well as Ashigaru bowmen became more and more widespread from very early on. Some say that it was infact the grouped Ashigaru bowmen that made the mounted samurai more or less to change their weapon of choice from Yumi to Yari. During the latter part of the era, mixed Ashigaru units pretty much were the mainstay of armies. You had teppo Ashigarus, supported by Yumi Ashigaru´s when they were reloading, while Yari Ashigaru´s would protect both from mounted and enemy foot soldiers. Or the first two would give support fire, while the spearmen would engage in hand to hand fighting. Also during the latter part of the era many Kachi/ Samurai carried Teppo´s as some Daimyos even wanted that most if not all men should carry firearms, while discarding most other weapons.

Sp00n
06-07-2010, 14:10
Totomi, a multiplayer public chat room.

The Battle Field birds.

:laugh4:

caravel
06-07-2010, 16:22
The Battle Field birds.
I doubt they'll have quite the same charm as the simple origami birds of STW.

A Nerd
06-07-2010, 16:30
Perhaps if birds would roost on the fallen to be startled away when units approached, that might carry some appeal and reveal the charm of the origninal? Or would that be a little to morbid? A nice touch to the 'settling down' affect after a battle has been fought.

Peasant Phill
06-07-2010, 20:13
I would like to see:

More tactical depth and a BAI that can handle that:
- weather effects with noticeable effects on weapons, fatigue, field of vision, ...
- interesting battlefields that are more than a few rolling hills and a tree here and there like in ETW

Strategical depth and the SAI that can handle that:
- AI armies avoiding battles on unfavorable terrain and defending on choke points
- allied armies that actually join forces and fight together

It seems to me that most of my battles in ETW are very similar and thus not as memorable this in contrast to a lot of battles in MTW (I joined the TW train just after STW)

General Malaise
06-08-2010, 07:35
You could add Yumi Ashigaru there as well as Ashigaru bowmen became more and more widespread from very early on. Some say that it was infact the grouped Ashigaru bowmen that made the mounted samurai more or less to change their weapon of choice from Yumi to Yari. During the latter part of the era, mixed Ashigaru units pretty much were the mainstay of armies. You had teppo Ashigarus, supported by Yumi Ashigaru´s when they were reloading, while Yari Ashigaru´s would protect both from mounted and enemy foot soldiers. Or the first two would give support fire, while the spearmen would engage in hand to hand fighting. Also during the latter part of the era many Kachi/ Samurai carried Teppo´s as some Daimyos even wanted that most if not all men should carry firearms, while discarding most other weapons.

True, but the point is more that they'd all just be variations on the same basic thing since there were few weapon types in common use, particularly because you're looking at one culture here. One way I could see them realistically doing unit variation that would still retain a tactical "tightness" is to split units up by "caste" or "class". So you'd have your conscript ashigaru, retainer samurai, and temple-affililated sohei. That'd give something like: (nagae) yari ashigaru, teppo ashigaru, yumi ashigaru (with katana or other sword for melee) and naginata ashigaru. Then mounted and unmounted versions of essentially the same for samurai, except switching out teppo for nodachi/odachi and then again for sohei (except maybe with a kanabo in place of nodachi this time). Still, that's only about 20 units total, and that's treating mounted and unmounted units as different types rather than just letting mounted units dismount. They said about 40 units total and there's bound to be more with DLCs and expansions. So, whereas others seem to be complaining about the lack of "scope" I'm much more hesitant about pointless bloat.

Kagemusha
06-08-2010, 07:42
True, but the point is more that they'd all just be variations on the same basic thing since there were few weapon types in common use, particularly because you're looking at one culture here. One way I could see them realistically doing unit variation that would still retain a tactical "tightness" is to split units up by "caste" or "class". So you'd have your conscript ashigaru, retainer samurai, and temple-affililated sohei. That'd give something like: (nagae) yari ashigaru, teppo ashigaru, yumi ashigaru (with katana or other sword for melee) and naginata ashigaru. Then mounted and unmounted versions of essentially the same for samurai, except switching out teppo for nodachi/odachi and then again for sohei (except maybe with a kanabo in place of nodachi this time). Still, that's only about 20 units total, and that's treating mounted and unmounted units as different types rather than just letting mounted units dismount. They said about 40 units total and there's bound to be more with DLCs and expansions. So, whereas others seem to be complaining about the lack of "scope" I'm much more hesitant about pointless bloat.

I completely agree that more then 20 units per faction would mean entering the realm of fantasy.

Subotan
06-08-2010, 09:17
My list:

1. Please Please PLEASE focus on the diplomatic AI. This is the single most important reason why I did not enjoy E:TW, and why I did not buy N:TW. I'm aware that it's hardly a piece of cake to make a good stategic AI, and I'm not expecting to be playing against a group of computerised Bismarcks, but when compared to Paradox Games, Civilisation, Galactic Civilisations 2 etc., the diplomatic AI stands out as the primary flaw of the TW series. IMHO, this should recieve more attention than the tactical AI.

2. Trade routes where one of the things I really liked in E:TW, and I hope to see a similar mechanism implemented again in Shogun II. It'd be cool to have a little fleet of Red Seal ships zipping around to Korea, China, the Phillipines, Indonesia, other domains, etc. There should however be advantages, like higher public order, from restricting trade and imposing an isolationist policy.

3. Resist the temptation to achievement spam. I generally dislike getting achievements for things I was going to do anyway (E.g. You finished the tutorial! Have an achievement!), but if they can be used to indicate different styles of play (E.g. Win a battle of 1,000 men without entering into hand to hand combat) or amazing successes (Win a battle when outnumbered ten to one) then they add to the game.

4. The region level system for E:TW felt like Paradox's "state and province" system in Victoria taken to the extreme. Although I very much liked the idea of controlling the territory around cities as well as the cities themselves, it always felt odd to capture Paris and suddenly control the whole of France. I'm guessing this won't be as much of a problem though in SII:TW, as you will be working on the domain level.

5. Oh, and of course, please let us mod it! :yes:

Sp00n
06-08-2010, 09:43
It seems to me that most of my battles in ETW are very similar and thus not as memorable this in contrast to a lot of battles in MTW (I joined the TW train just after STW)

I agree purely from a battlefield variation point of view ETW and NTW's battles play out in a similar way almost every time its a gunpowder era unfortunately. Good News though if they get it right again Shogun's battles don't play out the same.

As much as I like ETW and NTW they are dominated by gun warfare which I personally never thought makes the most varied battlefield experience. I always found them like playing Shogun with only muskets and weak cav in other words just using 2 units.

andrewt
06-08-2010, 18:45
I completely agree that more then 20 units per faction would mean entering the realm of fantasy.


Maybe they're doing it the Rome/Medieval 2/Empire way. They would give each faction "unique" units that are just reskinned versions of other factions' units with no or completely negligible differences in stats. I still get a kick out of Medieval 2's unique "French" units in the English version, which is just them giving French names to common Western European units.

Sasaki Kojiro
06-08-2010, 21:18
Well, I would like:

Minimal or no diplomacy
Minimal or no economy stuff
Focus on warfare

What shogun had, and the other games lacked, was that the campaign was won on the battlefield. Start as takeda, play a few turns, Kai is invaded...you lose, tough luck, decent chance that the game is over. Start as Oda, if you are good enough at tactics to take out the warrior monk ronin right off the bat without building up an army, you get a big head start. I commonly fought every battle I could with my daimyo in order to get him up to rank 4 or 6, same with other chosen generals.

Also, keep the tech tree tiny. The most pernicious thing about medieval was that not only did they add tons of pointless micromanagement stuff, it took hours and hours to reach even the midpoint of the tech tree. In MI:

11 turns--> yari cavalry or cavalry archers
13 turns--> warrior monks

Starting from an empty province. It makes the game "go and fight" instead of "sit and wait".

LittleGrizzly
06-08-2010, 22:47
If it can recreate the multiplayer experience of STW even partially my wildest dreams will be fufilled (depending on Ms Alba also)

So i guess

1) Multiplayer chatroom
2) Totomi like maps which don't offer much advantage either way
3) Terrian needs to count for something, like it did earlier in the series
4) Either have the units and armys balanced already or make a seperate stat for MP
5) Less useless units, maybe this could be something seperate between SP and MP, have less near clones for MP, it just makes balance harder.


Would also be nice for a few single player things like better diplomatic and battlefield AI. Lastly some way to still present the player a challenge once he has become the strongest power, making allies work together more effectively could help with this, make a few medium powers able to work together and take on a much larger power, could also be fun when the player is a smaller kingdom working with the AI.

Although MP is what ill buy the game for, good mp is enough for me to buy the game just good SP and I probably won't... although i do love Shogun!

Kagemusha
06-08-2010, 22:56
Maybe when a player would be able to control Kyoto he would be declared Shogun or Kanrei, which would give all the other Clans only option of submitting or declaring war to that Clan.I think that could create a nice challence?

LittleGrizzly
06-08-2010, 23:01
Maybe when a player would be able to control Kyoto he would be declared Shogun or Kanrei, which would give all the other Clans only option of submitting or declaring war to that Clan.I think that could create a nice challence?

yeah that would be cool, back in STW it was pretty meaningless but it could be made to force the hands of some of the remaining larger clans

General Malaise
06-09-2010, 01:31
Maybe they're doing it the Rome/Medieval 2/Empire way. They would give each faction "unique" units that are just reskinned versions of other factions' units with no or completely negligible differences in stats. I still get a kick out of Medieval 2's unique "French" units in the English version, which is just them giving French names to common Western European units.

Reskins are pretty lame though. Best way to do it would be to drop the preconfigured, static unit model altogether and allow component customisation. This would retain historical accuracy, tactical "tightness" and variety all at once I'd say. In other words, it'd work something like this:

CLASS PRIMARY WEAPON SECONDARY WEAPON (OPTIONAL) ARMOR MOUNT
Ashigaru Teppo same options as former None None
Samurai Yumi (hankyu) Light Yes
Sohei Yumi (daikyu) Medium?
(Nagae "pike") Yari Heavy
(shorter) Yari
Nodachi
Katana
Naginata (and/or nagamaki)
Kanabo

Adding secondary weapons and heavier armors would affect speed and stamina as well as cost/upkeep. Of course you could build the swordsmith/armoury/drill dojo to boost other stats as well. Not every weapon would be available to every class though and maybe not every primary and secondary weapon combination (couldn't really carry a long spear and a short spear for instance). and some weapons should be limited to certain classes (nodachi for samurai, kanabo for sohei I'd say). All of this is probably a waste of time to suggest though since they're almost certainly going to stick with the old model of standardized units.


EDIT: I see the forum formatting messed up my chart but I'm sure you all get the idea anyway.

IceTorque
06-09-2010, 01:31
1.) Risk style map. (fight, retreat to castle, abandon province, this style map also makes for a much more challenging game)
2.) Hand crafted battle maps. (no more generic crap that all look so similar)
3.) Throne room, populated with characters that can be interacted with. (advisors, generals, spys, and geishas)
4.) Very large armies. (as large as is possible)
5.) Armies that form and hold a battle line, and protect their flanks (and hide a few units in the trees to surprise me, just like the original shogun)
6.) Nerf Geishas

Actually, I would be happy with an exact copy of the original game just with updated graphics and larger armies.

ichi
06-09-2010, 05:04
A balanced multi-player that has a good rock/paper/scissors and an improved diplomatic UI for single.

Ha, who am I kidding, if they just repackaged the original I'd not only buy it I'd prolly play it too much. After MTW I just lost interest 'cause the bells and whistles overwhelmed the simple beauty of origami birds.

I haven't posted here in almost five years. I see a few of the old pros still around. Wonder if S2TW will bring back many of the originals?

/bow @ Gregoshi san, site looks great, hope you have been well

Gregoshi
06-09-2010, 06:13
:fainting: ichi!! It has been way too long since you last graced our forums. I am well and hope the same holds true with you. Glad to see you here and hope it isn't another five years before you return again. :bow:

I hear you about the bells and whistles ichi. I remember playing RTW and one night in mid-game it hit me - I just wasn't having any fun playing it. That was quite a shock because TW games are supposed to be awesome. A lot of what wasn't fun about it was bells and whistle stuff. What is funny is that much of it was things on our wish lists for the next TW game(s) after STW. Be careful what you wish for because you may get it! :laugh4: But to the point, while STW single player definitely needs a boost, CA needs to find balance between too much and too little in the campaign features department. Enough to maintain the challenge and fun factors, but not too much to introduce tedium into the game - or at least switches to turn features on/off if practical.

Between the Org's 10th anniversary celebration and the S2TW announcement, many old friends (and foes :laugh4:) have come out of the dark, hidden corners of the internet. I love it!

Kagemusha
06-09-2010, 08:10
:couch: I think it was after some years HOF awards that you disappeared Ichi?Great to see you back and great to see so many other old timers returning to the forum!:2thumbsup:

Monk
06-09-2010, 09:54
A balanced multi-player that has a good rock/paper/scissors and an improved diplomatic UI for single.

Ha, who am I kidding, if they just repackaged the original I'd not only buy it I'd prolly play it too much. After MTW I just lost interest 'cause the bells and whistles overwhelmed the simple beauty of origami birds.

I haven't posted here in almost five years. I see a few of the old pros still around. Wonder if S2TW will bring back many of the originals?

/bow @ Gregoshi san, site looks great, hope you have been well

Welcome back, Ichi. :bow:

mountaingoat
06-11-2010, 10:16
Reskins are pretty lame though. Best way to do it would be to drop the preconfigured, static unit model altogether and allow component customisation. This would retain historical accuracy, tactical "tightness" and variety all at once I'd say. In other words, it'd work something like this:

CLASS PRIMARY WEAPON SECONDARY WEAPON (OPTIONAL) ARMOR MOUNT
Ashigaru Teppo same options as former None None
Samurai Yumi (hankyu) Light Yes
Sohei Yumi (daikyu) Medium?
(Nagae "pike") Yari Heavy
(shorter) Yari
Nodachi
Katana
Naginata (and/or nagamaki)
Kanabo

Adding secondary weapons and heavier armors would affect speed and stamina as well as cost/upkeep. Of course you could build the swordsmith/armoury/drill dojo to boost other stats as well. Not every weapon would be available to every class though and maybe not every primary and secondary weapon combination (couldn't really carry a long spear and a short spear for instance). and some weapons should be limited to certain classes (nodachi for samurai, kanabo for sohei I'd say). All of this is probably a waste of time to suggest though since they're almost certainly going to stick with the old model of standardized units.


EDIT: I see the forum formatting messed up my chart but I'm sure you all get the idea anyway.

i like this idea .. i wonder how this could grow or at least fit into stw2 ... i mean .. there is still room for "static" type units .. or maybe there isn't .... no doubt we would like to have multiple weapon types for certain units (with seperate animations) and even make them "static" .. but i like this idea of being able to customise the layout of certain units or maybe all units ..hmmmmm

Kagemusha
06-11-2010, 11:30
I think one nice feature would be for the missile troops being able to plant large wooden shields or pavises to the ground like they were used on many occasions.In other words,things like these:

https://img809.imageshack.us/img809/8626/shield.jpg

caravel
06-11-2010, 11:42
Well, I would like:

Minimal or no diplomacy
Minimal or no economy stuff
Focus on warfare

What shogun had, and the other games lacked, was that the campaign was won on the battlefield. Start as takeda, play a few turns, Kai is invaded...you lose, tough luck, decent chance that the game is over. Start as Oda, if you are good enough at tactics to take out the warrior monk ronin right off the bat without building up an army, you get a big head start. I commonly fought every battle I could with my daimyo in order to get him up to rank 4 or 6, same with other chosen generals.

Also, keep the tech tree tiny. The most pernicious thing about medieval was that not only did they add tons of pointless micromanagement stuff, it took hours and hours to reach even the midpoint of the tech tree. In MI:

11 turns--> yari cavalry or cavalry archers
13 turns--> warrior monks

Starting from an empty province. It makes the game "go and fight" instead of "sit and wait".
This.

The focus needs to shift back to warfare - which is the TW games' strongpoint. Diplomacy worked best in the older games when it was simplistic and functional. It did not detract from the main thrust of the game. The risk campaign map was ideal for this purpose also. While I am fully aware that CA won't bring it back, I still see the risk map as the better model - and the ideal map for the TW games.

Gorky
06-11-2010, 12:12
first of all i like all the development in empire and napoleon:
- good strategic map
i like that in one province there are many economic center, and we can be able destroy, the province economy without a direct attack
but i see in napoleon and empire: the easier way is the same (attack the province center) - maybe we have grater distances on a province, we can use better this features
- close up non warrior character spy/assassin
it would be great, that gentleman and spy, has more function: gentleman make provinces happier, and give moral in an army, and spy demoralize enemy, and lover corruption in own cities, and lower the unrest... (and it would be even more grater, they can ad our army special abilities during the combats

-i like the graphical advance the city's looks at the strategic map, but i am sorry about the sea treading simbol stay very simple
(it would be great that we can build a special harbour, which has many advantages: defence towers, upgrade missionary center, police, secret agency, embassy, ad small fortress: we dont need to explore whole new provices its enough one harbour city - may sometime randomly (depend on happiness) attacked by natives from land and see

so and that what i like to see in next tw:
- harbor hase defences from see (towers), and if we want to capture one harbour we have to fight at near the coast, and fight against, grond defences, and ships simultaneously
- ships, has cargo bay (one ship can only transport limited numbers of unit)
- ships - on board army is look like army in a bulding - this soildiers go up deck and shot/fight with the enemy (capture ship) - of course with limited number can fight at the same time - depend on ship kind - , but dead soldiers replaceble from cargo...
- smaller ships can be able to go up wider rivers (and can go nearer the beach)

- rivers can be use as road (trading, and transpoting faster)
- trading roads can be attacked like see trading routes (we can't be able to see where is exactly, but we can see that somebody is robed our traders)
- bandits and rebels appear more often (depend on happiness and unrest, and number of town guard) and they can made more unrest
- some building has monthly wages - police/ town guard/tax collectors etc. where is civil servant is working, but it would be great adnvantage to you, more specialized armored citizens, it can be kill bandits like spy can be executed, and so on...
- the town fight looks terrible to me at empire, and napoleon: it would be grate, that it looks like more like a town: specialized man fight outside the town, and at square if they need more space for formation, but armored citisens can be able to make baricade inside the town (like army man can be on the field)
- there would be more building and tipe of building: more garden, squeare, road, statue, street: like medieval tw II
- there are be more building, and more depend on each other: gold mine - jewel shop, iron mine - armor upgrade, and so on...

-and i hope in shogun tw 2 we will have the posibility to capture korea... or china:-) (at least in accessory)

General Malaise
06-12-2010, 02:42
Also, keep the tech tree tiny.

Personally, and this may be heretical, I'd rather tech trees (at least as we know them) be gone entirely. Techtrees in strat games are the equivalent of levels in RPG games. Metagame contrivances there to keep you grinding to gain in power. They might make sense in Civilization and Empire Earth type games, but in a game whose period is less than a century there is no reason to have tech be changing that much at all (how is it a daimyo wouldn't be able to draft yari calvary at the start of the game already, without needing to build up some tech things?). I'd prefer whether or not drafting "high level" units or agents be based on a tactical considerations like perhaps having many elite units could make one prone to civil war as powerful warrior classes often took opportunity to revolt against their masters or drafting high level agents running the risk of them similarly turning against you, or just simple upkeep/use-value ratios, rather than who can rush to build building A the fastest and pump out unilaterally superior troops.

EDIT: To clarify further by providing another example: say, instead of simply building a "Legendary Swordsmith" to get "+1 to weapons", you'd first have to have a legendary swordsmith in one of your provinces in the first place (sort of like the legendary swordsmen event from the original) which you'd have to achieve by a mix of population level, contentment/happiness level, and economic strength/wealth. Perhaps also a faction honor or "kingdom power" type thing (for anyone who has played KoH) which would incline superior artisans or samurai to move to your lands.

Gregoshi
06-12-2010, 03:59
I'm liking your idea General (Sir!).

Sasaki Kojiro
06-12-2010, 04:50
I like it to. Maybe leave the economic type improvements (port, mine, farmland). But the "build a fortress and then a famous horse dojo to get heavy cavalry" did seem a bit silly.

The armor and weapon improvements could be available for a price when building a unit--makes sense, no? Less expensive in the right province.

Of course, they will leave it all in. Because "features" are what sells (even to us here, if we didn't know better). But of course, the tangible features remove other features from existence--the tactical and strategic features that you can't put on the box, but that make the game great.

Tony Furze
06-12-2010, 13:22
Surprised to see Battle AI on some of the lists. If the Battle AI is at least as good as the original, that would be a bonus. I've only played on Normal difficulty and found the AI opponent as wily and unpredictable as a human opponent.

Also non-Japanese units would be a plus.

Trimming up the campaign aspect. Leave the rest as it is.

Sol Invictus
06-12-2010, 17:06
I am sure that the Teppo units will be able to construct some sort of defensive barrier. I very rarely used them in the original game because their melee ability was so poor. I also wouldn't mind seeing the Tech Tree disapear for this title because the short time period makes it pointless. The original system was fine with the ability to train most of the units from turn one and to increase their effectiveness by building better training facilities.

antisocialmunky
06-14-2010, 04:38
I wouldn't mind a more strategically indepth map with more economic targets and stuff. Maybe treat them like actual small towns and have garrison untis pop up in them they are invaded.

Really, a better AI and more ambience.

Vlad The Impaler
06-14-2010, 09:45
- online campaign
- better diplomacy
- unit development like in civ (develop special abilities, traits or retinues kinda stuff for units; for example, if a unit will fight mainly in mountain area they will receive a trait or a commander which is specialized in mountain warfare and boost their abilities in such areas; this kind of system can apply to units too, making them more valuable;
- an easy to mod game: STW II should gather all the good stuff of the previous games; melee or guns, the tactical engine should be the best and suitable for all kind of modding, from Assyria to XVIII century; Napoleon is other thing and belong to modernity, such as American civil war; also the map and the faction/units/provinces slots should allow modders to tackle a lot of periods of history;
- more complicated provinces: being the ruler of the center of a province doesn't mean that you rule all the province; at the edge of the province, various monks monasteries, samurai peasants small clans or ninja villages will not be so willing to follow you; these entities should posses some economical power or wonders (temples, mines) which will make you interested in bringing them under your rule; feudal Japan was a net of clans, small or big.
actually all the historical periods covered by TW games (except NTW & ETW) were a sum of such autonomies, centralized states appeared only later;
- more facilities for online gaming as being the main way to strenghten a community;

seienchin
06-14-2010, 16:20
Poor CA... So many fans, so many opinions. They have to dissapoint people. I hope it wont be me.^^
I would love to see mixed units and units who dont react like they should. Forcing you to plan before the battle.

Gorky
06-14-2010, 17:09
technikal trees: more crosses - one development depend on more other:
you can use diferent ways (to develope more efecient martial arts or, the christian ways: more effective guns)

special unites need not only knowledge, they need special places (provinces - with sacred palces)

bulding develompment, need not only local basic, they need more provinces (like: to build a chatedral you need at least 4 chatolic temple)

one development has positive and negative effect:
example:
chatolic way: lower moral, abilities to traditonal warriors, good for trade
traditinal way: good for low unrest, poor trade, special unites at special places (like german berserkers, RTW)

more upgrade possibiliti, and more building
village and small town has the posibility to build wooden wall
(make the wooden wall harder to upgrade to stone wall, at rome and medieval, it was realy fast)

Sasaki Kojiro
06-14-2010, 17:41
Poor CA... So many fans, so many opinions. They have to dissapoint people. I hope it wont be me.^^
I would love to see mixed units and units who dont react like they should. Forcing you to plan before the battle.

Yes, it's amazing the people who want exactly the opposite what made shogun a good game. Hopefully CA will make a solid tactical battle game with none of the frills.

Gregoshi
06-14-2010, 18:04
Yes, it's amazing the people who want exactly the opposite what made shogun a good game. Hopefully CA will make a solid tactical battle game with none of the frills.
Indeed. However, the campaign does need some improvement - perhaps more throne room activity/action and just enough tweaking to clan mechanics to make the AI clans more competetive strategically. With daimyos and their families getting wiped out too easily in STW, fighting an endless ocean of rebels at end game wasn't fun. A titanic showdown with a major rival clan would be awesome. If you recall, the STW campaign was so shallow that after the first couple of months, the SP forum was all but dead. There just wasn't a lot to discuss about the nuances of the economy/diplomacy etc. However, being swamped with a million decisions before going into battle isn't the answer and isn't what I want either. Simplistic complexity - how's that sound? :laugh4: But I think one of the overriding measures is how well the AI can handle itself. If the AI can't handle a "feature" well, then it will just be a source of frustration to the players.

seienchin
06-14-2010, 18:52
Well just as I said before, if CA would go a more realistiv way I would love to see mixed units etc. etc.
But on other hand I love the simple plain challenging style of shogun. It was in my opinion the best TW Game, because of its balance.
When I played it 2weeks ago I was shocked, that my heavy cavallery didnt just wipe everybody from the battlefield like in all other TW games including every mod. Shogun was just incredible fun to play, because of its balancing and risk style canpain map. SOOOOOOOO Epic and exotic. :)

Sasaki Kojiro
06-14-2010, 23:24
Indeed. However, the campaign does need some improvement - perhaps more throne room activity/action and just enough tweaking to clan mechanics to make the AI clans more competetive strategically. With daimyos and their families getting wiped out too easily in STW, fighting an endless ocean of rebels at end game wasn't fun. A titanic showdown with a major rival clan would be awesome. If you recall, the STW campaign was so shallow that after the first couple of months, the SP forum was all but dead. There just wasn't a lot to discuss about the nuances of the economy/diplomacy etc. However, being swamped with a million decisions before going into battle isn't the answer and isn't what I want either. Simplistic complexity - how's that sound? :laugh4: But I think one of the overriding measures is how well the AI can handle itself. If the AI can't handle a "feature" well, then it will just be a source of frustration to the players.

Ah, but discussion of the shogun campaign portion has been the most consistent feature of the forum. We've had consistent campaign stories for a long time. I played it again myself when I saw the shogun 2 announcement, had a lot of fun as takeda with some custom rules (max 8 units for my armies, no "smart campaign start").

seienchin
06-14-2010, 23:43
I didnt play Medieval 1, when it came out I still continued playing shogun for like 2 years. It was just so good and satisfying. Off course it always ended with me fighting against endles hordes of shimazu or hojo troops, but still it was great. :)
Sometimes I just had key provinces of the enemy rebell by using endless hordes of spies, then sometimes I assasinated their lords and heirs and other times I just bribed them, but most of the time it was cruel fighting^^. I never rushed the enemy (Except the Hojo, when playing as takeda) and tried to get my hands on key regions and then waited for chances to imrpove my lands, when the other daimyos fought against each other. In Shogun the Ki never only focusses on destroying the player and I had the feeling that diplomacy was much easier and reasonable.
Mongol Invasion on the other hand was kinda lame...^^ No diplomavy, no geishas, the mongols not beeing able to built up the provinces they took, so mostly when playing as the samurai the mongol invasion just bleed out, before even taking whole of kyushu.

By the way, it was my golden Age of gaming back then. Having played Zelda, MGS, FFS starcraft etc. I was just stunned by the scale, sound and style of shogun. It was the peak of my gaming history. :)

By the way, do you think there will be a Mongol Invasion addon or additional campain?^^

Subotan
06-14-2010, 23:46
I voted that I'd get it, but only if it is not Steam exclusive.


I dislike Steam for the same reasons I dislike any intrusive copy protection software or unnecessary commercial bloatware that locks the user in to a single service where the available products are not necessarily at the best available prices...



2nd:[No] Steam conection. I didn't buy NTW and ETW because of this fact.
.





No Steam/SecuRom




Edit: Steam smells


- no Steam
Hello 2004! Welcome to 2010! In the future, the price of PC gaming existing at all is that we have to use a media platform which has gradually improved to the point of become an acceptable service.

Seriously though, all the Steam haters should be lucky that something like this exists, therefore preventing PC gaming from slowly descending into a permanent nadir.

General Malaise
06-15-2010, 00:06
PC gaming isn't going anywhere, so the condescending attitude is quite unnecessary. Plenty of game developers out there don't use Steam and do quite well or if they do use it also offer non-Steam options. Many of these are indie companies like matrix games or spiderweb but, frankly, they tend to produce better products than the big companies anyway.

The reason it *looks like* PC gaming is dying is because people only consider it from the standpoint of the big companies, like those involved with TW, who, instead of realizing that the PC gaming audience is quite different to that of the console and that the PC offers different possibilities, are foolishly trying to compete with the console market particularly by focusing on shallow things such as graphical development.

I personally would have no problem if PC games, TW for example, never went past the graphics of STW or MTW as long as they maintained their level of gameplay. Even if PC gaming was somehow to die because I refuse to use Steam, then fine, let it die. There's plenty of good PC games already out there and I'm not going to be corralled into something as a consumer that exists only to limit my freedom especially when the products coming out are of worse and worse quality.

Kagemusha
06-15-2010, 00:56
I didnt play Medieval 1, when it came out I still continued playing shogun for like 2 years. It was just so good and satisfying. Off course it always ended with me fighting against endles hordes of shimazu or hojo troops, but still it was great. :)
Sometimes I just had key provinces of the enemy rebell by using endless hordes of spies, then sometimes I assasinated their lords and heirs and other times I just bribed them, but most of the time it was cruel fighting^^. I never rushed the enemy (Except the Hojo, when playing as takeda) and tried to get my hands on key regions and then waited for chances to imrpove my lands, when the other daimyos fought against each other. In Shogun the Ki never only focusses on destroying the player and I had the feeling that diplomacy was much easier and reasonable.
Mongol Invasion on the other hand was kinda lame...^^ No diplomavy, no geishas, the mongols not beeing able to built up the provinces they took, so mostly when playing as the samurai the mongol invasion just bleed out, before even taking whole of kyushu.

By the way, it was my golden Age of gaming back then. Having played Zelda, MGS, FFS starcraft etc. I was just stunned by the scale, sound and style of shogun. It was the peak of my gaming history. :)

By the way, do you think there will be a Mongol Invasion addon or additional campain?^^

Im betting that there will be a Korean invasion /Imjin war extension, which should be great with Ming troops and all the neat Korean weapons like Hwatcha rocket launchers and turtle ships.

General Malaise
06-15-2010, 02:10
It would also be nice if they added more religious options this time beyond just Christianity and Buddhism. Say, for instance, Shinto/Folk Belief and Confucianism. Even better would be different schools/temples of Buddhism and perhaps a conflict between the Catholic Jesuits and Protestant Christians. However, I kind of get the feeling religion won't be a presence at all this time (although I hope I am wrong).

Tuuvi
06-15-2010, 04:42
I never played the original shogun, but I did play RTW and M2TW, and I think the thing I would like to see most is better battle and campaign AI. In the campaign AI it would be really cool if the AI had the ability to think in the long term and set long term goals as well as think in the short term.

I would also like to see an improved, more in depth and more realistic diplomacy system. In RTW and M2 the diplomacy consisted of sending a diplomat over to a faction, clicking a choice and seeing if the AI accepts. In S2 I would really like it if the diplomacy consisted of actual negotiation, the ability to coordinate attacks with your allies, conduct trade, etc. If done right diplomacy could become a very important and fun part of the game.

Family politics should also play a big role in the game, because AFAIK they played a huge role in Japanese politics. It would be cool if all FM's would marry FM's from other clans in the game, and the player could attempt to set up these marriages. Of course this could become tedious so I think that marriages should also be able to happen on their own without player direction. However, if a feature like this were to be implemented I think it should not use agents like in M2TW.

seienchin
06-15-2010, 09:57
It would also be nice if they added more religious options this time beyond just Christianity and Buddhism. Say, for instance, Shinto/Folk Belief and Confucianism. Even better would be different schools/temples of Buddhism and perhaps a conflict between the Catholic Jesuits and Protestant Christians. However, I kind of get the feeling religion won't be a presence at all this time (although I hope I am wrong).
Shinto was neglegtable in Sengoku jidai. It became something like a religion in the 19th. century, when the new japanese state was founded.
The folk believes were kind of a mix between shinto, buddhism and lots and lots of superstition. People were afraid of crossing bridges for examples and the kawaras (The rock and sand ground around japanese rivers) were unclean ground, where lots of outcasts lived.
Having superstitiousnes in the game would be great. :)
Confucianism is not quite a religion and for most sengoku daimyos it wasnt as important as it became in the edo jidai.
But there were a lot of different buddhistic schools. If you could choose between them it would be interesting.


PS: There were no protestant christians in japan.

ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
06-15-2010, 16:52
I wish they will add a actual ladder/ranking system for MP like they had in the first one. I think this will make the game very interesting.


I also think they should do something that if your army wins a major battle, there should be a record of all major battles they won, so they can try to "cover themselves in glory" type of thing.

Tera
06-15-2010, 18:12
I wish they will add a actual ladder/ranking system for MP like they had in the first one. I think this will make the game very interesting.


I also think they should do something that if your army wins a major battle, there should be a record of all major battles they won, so they can try to "cover themselves in glory" type of thing.

They already said the ladder/ranking system is coming back!

Hax
06-15-2010, 20:56
As one of the few Buddhists on these forums (and I guess, the only Shingon Buddhist around) I hope a good representation of the different souhei employed by the various Buddhist sects and a good way to represent the power and wealth of say, Koya-san and the general influence of the different sects in Japan.

Gambatte o-kudasai :bow:

Swoosh So
06-15-2010, 22:32
I hope to see the return of the Yari cavalry and their role in the game, excellent v other cav but weak except on the flank vs infantry, They were a great unit in stw good at balancing things out and stopping cav from being to powerful. And always keeping you on your toes with your horse archer units as the yari cav were the fastest. I loved that.

General Malaise
06-16-2010, 03:38
Shinto was neglegtable in Sengoku jidai. It became something like a religion in the 19th. century, when the new japanese state was founded.

This is a very odd thing to claim, that Shinto was negligible at any point during Japanese history. The Emperor's authority stemmed from the fact he was (and still is really) considered the high priest of the Shinto religion. This is like claiming the Pope is negligible in the middle ages of europe even if the Pope didn't rule in the same way a king did.

I'd like to see more involvement with having to curry the favor of, or at least make it look like you are, of the Imperial family more as well as the peasants, and building/maintaining/defending Shinto shrines could be an interesting way. In the original you could conquer Yamato and the emperor claimed to support you but that was about it and it disappointingly didn't seem to have much effect.


The folk believes were kind of a mix between shinto, buddhism and lots and lots of superstition. People were afraid of crossing bridges for examples and the kawaras (The rock and sand ground around japanese rivers) were unclean ground, where lots of outcasts lived.
Having superstitiousnes in the game would be great. :)

This is another reason religion should be more of a factor. If you have say, christian troops, then perhaps they should suffer less of a morale penalty over crossing bridges as they've converted away from "pagan superstitions". Of course, you'd have to balance this out with something else gameplay wise which I can't really think of at the moment.


Confucianism is not quite a religion and for most sengoku daimyos it wasnt as important as it became in the edo jidai.
But there were a lot of different buddhistic schools. If you could choose between them it would be interesting.

Confuciansim is very much a religion, at least as much as Taoism is in the sense there are some schools and traditions almost solely focused on rites and others mostly only concerned with secular philosophy although Confucianism at its core was a mix of both, much like Pythagoreanism.

Anyway, the point I'm making here again isn't so much what happened exactly (otherwise you'd be playing a historical narrative with almost no choice) but the possibility to do things yourself that other daimyo may not have done. Religion has always been wielded as a political weapon by ruling classes so having so more options on how to do that that still fit the setting well even if the the years are slightly off would be great with me.

Monk
06-16-2010, 04:22
I'd like to see more involvement with having to curry the favor of, or at least make it look like you are, of the Imperial family more as well as the peasants, and building/maintaining/defending Shinto shrines could be an interesting way. In the original you could conquer Yamato and the emperor claimed to support you but that was about it and it disappointingly didn't seem to have much effect.


I like the sound of that. Maybe a loose mission system as well, gaining support from the Emperor by weakening Rivals or taking care of the people. :yes:

quadalpha
06-16-2010, 04:40
Am I the only one who liked the Risk-like campaign map? Advantages:

- It can be balanced. A more lucrative province can have more neighbours, which makes it harder to defend. You can also have key strategic provinces that would shorten your lines, etc..
- It allows more variety in battlefields; you never know exactly the kind of terrain you'll be fighting on.
- It just feels more powerful to be moving armies between provinces, rather than micromanaging the tile they're sitting on.

General Malaise
06-16-2010, 07:07
I loved the Risk campaign map myself but they'll never go back to it out of fear of "looking backwards". I myself found every campaign after MTW1 tedious and repetitive. People claim there's more freedom on the 3d map, but they're just blinded by the visuals. Mechanically, there's nothing you couldn't just abstract onto a 2d system (like saying, choosing the point of attack into the province and indicating it with arrows, and having armies positioned differently in the province map based on that). The 2d map is simple and manage-able (both for the player and the AI) where the 3d one is endless micro and actually ends up conflating battles into sieges rather than opening up more options.

darius_d
06-16-2010, 14:24
Generally, just 2 wishes
- that CA allow some popular requests for advanced playing as an option and not just waste them only because it doesn't fit beginners.

- I also wish CA borrow proven ideas from competition - namely from Magitech (titles like Takeda 3 or Strength and Honour 2). I mean their superior strategical/tactical concepts for campaign.

Specifically though:
Campaign
- characters' traits and preferences decide choice for strategic decisions - so player still has a choice but more limited.
It's like engagement in war, evolution of diplomatic relations, direction of economic development, etc.. The decisions are influenced not only by daimyo's preferences but also by power struggle between internal factions within his clan - family members, highest ranking generals, respected samurais and heroes, court officers, family teachers, etc. - all of them having their own views, ambitions and preferences, too (and loyalty level...), their influence depended on their position. It's working great in Magitech games.

- supply lines to be added (plus attrition)

- no more city growing, just developing and upgrading their specialization - big and small cities typically exist at any moment of the history, no need to artificially grow cities!

Battles
- timed and fully customized reinforcements - allowing attempt of surrounding enemy from behind or to counter such manouver by enemy (another great idea from Magitech).

- more than 20 units in battle, but obligatory grouped in no more than - say - 10-12 tactical groups for better tactical control and for more historical accuracy in army composition. Also to allow more complex manouvers (like pincer movement).

Multiplayer
- possibility to set predefined limitators of army composition - for example max koku to spent on army, maximum experience allowed for each unit type, maximum and miminum number of specific unit types, etc. (unless already exist in Empire/Napoleon - I didn't buy it).

Hooahguy
06-16-2010, 20:05
- more than 20 units in battle,

judging by early screens, this looks unlikely.

Hax
06-16-2010, 20:16
Shinto was neglegtable in Sengoku jidai. It became something like a religion in the 19th. century, when the new japanese state was founded.
The folk believes were kind of a mix between shinto, buddhism and lots and lots of superstition. People were afraid of crossing bridges for examples and the kawaras (The rock and sand ground around japanese rivers) were unclean ground, where lots of outcasts lived.
Having superstitiousnes in the game would be great. :)
Confucianism is not quite a religion and for most sengoku daimyos it wasnt as important as it became in the edo jidai.
But there were a lot of different buddhistic schools. If you could choose between them it would be interesting.

Shinto existed way before the 19th century, what you're thinking about is called State Shinto or Kokka Shinto. By no means it was negligible, rather, it was not political. The political connotation Shinto got was after the Meiji Restoration in the 18th century.

When it comes to folk beliefs, I don't think I've ever heard something about people being afraid of crossing bridges. Of course, bridges had a very spiritual connotation to them, but being afraid of doing so? I don't really think so. Don't forget that Shinto as a religion hardly has a moral system; it's borrowed from Confucianism.

Speaking about the different Buddhist sects, if we're talking about Sengoku Jidai-era Japan, we have these:

- Koyasan Shingon-shu (Mantrayana esoteric sect; main figure is Dainichi Nyorai (Mahavairocana Buddha); sported their own souhei; fully based around the Wakayama-province (with some influence in Osaka, I believe) and owned large tracts of land. Also an elitist sect)
- Tendai (Related to Tiantai of China; based around Mt. Hiei, also sported own souhei. Not as much an aristocrat sect as Shingon, but still quite elitist)
- Nichiren-shu (Founded by Nichiren Daishounin, Kamakura period; very popular amongst the merchant classes; I'm unsure about whether they sported souhei, but I do think so. Had quite some influence during our period)
- Jodo-shu (Pure Land; main figure is Amida Butsu (Amitabha Buddha); very popular amongst the lowest classes of society; sported own souhei)
- Jodo Shin-shu (True Pure Land; main figure is Amida Butsu; very popular amongst the lowest classes; sported own souhei and often clashed with Jodo)

I might have overlooked one or two here.

General Malaise
06-18-2010, 01:11
I don't get why everyone wants more than 20 units per stack. Are you really going to be able to keep track of all them efficiently? More importantly perhaps, will the AI? I thought the 16 per army from Shogun was plenty (especially with huge units and multiple armies), and probably contributed a lot more to the tightness of the AI and MP in it compared to the rest of the series.

Particularly as the maps don't really get any bigger you really just end up running out of space to maneuver properly with so many units. If you want that many a system like Takeda uses with reinforcements placed at different positions coming in during different phases of battle would be better, or even break up a battle map into multiple mini-maps. Tons of units at one time is just more of this shallow "wow-factor" visually in my opinion.

seienchin
06-18-2010, 13:22
This is a very odd thing to claim, that Shinto was negligible at any point during Japanese history. The Emperor's authority stemmed from the fact he was (and still is really) considered the high priest of the Shinto religion. This is like claiming the Pope is negligible in the middle ages of europe even if the Pope didn't rule in the same way a king did.

Confuciansim is very much a religion, at least as much as Taoism is in the sense there are some schools and traditions almost solely focused on rites and others mostly only concerned with secular philosophy although Confucianism at its core was a mix of both, much like Pythagoreanism.

Anyway, the point I'm making here again isn't so much what happened exactly (otherwise you'd be playing a historical narrative with almost no choice) but the possibility to do things yourself that other daimyo may not have done. Religion has always been wielded as a political weapon by ruling classes so having so more options on how to do that that still fit the setting well even if the the years are slightly off would be great with me.

Well, the Emperor had nearly nothing to say in Sengoku Jidai and him beeing the high priest of shinto AGAIN is something that came to importance in the meiji times. Off course it is something that roots in the yamato time, but still shinto isnt a continous religion with rules and followers like buddhism. Shinto was always there, but not always an important institution. ;) Buddhists had real power and the thinking of the ruling samurai class was highly influenced by buddhism.
Confucianism is a religion, but not in Japan. ;) There it was a theory about how a govermnent and society should work and it was most important in the edo times.
Anyway I agree that having more choices would be great. ;)

@Hax
Im studying Japanese at the university and I had a course about common believes in sengoku Jidai. Bridges were considered crossings to the afterlife. Still today in many parts of japan, people do not put there chopsticks on there rice bowl like building a bridge, because its considered to bring bad luck.
In many parts of europe there were small statues or crucifix at bridges to protect you from evil too.^^
Anyway I would be glad if you could make wild drinking parties with your retainers. Jesuits coming to japan stated, that japanese were really really hard drinkers. ^^

Hax
06-19-2010, 00:35
Im studying Japanese at the university and I had a course about common believes in sengoku Jidai. Bridges were considered crossings to the afterlife. Still today in many parts of japan, people do not put there chopsticks on there rice bowl like building a bridge, because its considered to bring bad luck.

I did know about the spiritual importance of bridges, but not about fear of crossing them and them being passages to the afterlife. I will rely on your academic experience on this :bow:

Gregoshi
06-19-2010, 04:39
As long as the religious choices have a tangible impact on the course of the game, I'm all for it.

darius_d
06-19-2010, 23:33
@ General Malaise


I don't get why everyone wants more than 20 units per stack. Are you really going to be able to keep track of all them efficiently? More importantly perhaps, will the AI? I thought the 16 per army from Shogun was plenty (especially with huge units and multiple armies), and probably contributed a lot more to the tightness of the AI and MP in it compared to the rest of the series.

Particularly as the maps don't really get any bigger you really just end up running out of space to maneuver properly with so many units. If you want that many a system like Takeda uses with reinforcements placed at different positions coming in during different phases of battle would be better, or even break up a battle map into multiple mini-maps. Tons of units at one time is just more of this shallow "wow-factor" visually in my opinion.

It's quite simple. Indeed, micromanaging of 20 units is already too much to play effectively from tactical point of view. Yes, there are shortcuts etc, but it's not very elaborated. It's just getting clickfest.
So I see a lot of sense to forcibly group units into separate tactical groups to keep it all about battle experiance reasonably tactical.

On the other hand, 20 units is not enough to play in historical way, epsecially to simulate historical battles. So it's all about unsufficient historical accuracy in units diversity in composition of armies. With 20 units it's impossible to simulate even 1 roman legion, not to mention full army.

But what I actually suggest is to find a better way to introduce historical compositions within battle engine, compared to what is now, it doesn't really have to mean more units. edit: for example soldiers in 3D battles could symbolise a real-life like number of forces engaged.

So I ask for it now, even if they don't introduce it in S2TW, perhaps there will be a way in the following title.

Gurkhal
06-20-2010, 19:20
While Shinto like that may not have been all that politically active as a single power, Japanese mythology and cult practices related to the Kami were to my understanding still important in that period to the Japanese population. If my mind isn't wrong there were for example both shrines constructed to the Kami by samurai warlords.

Not I wouldn't advocate Shinto as a seperate religion beside Buddhism and Christianity. However due to the syncretic nature and fusion, to my understanding and I could of course be wrong, between Buddhism and the practices regarding the Kami I think that building shrines devoted to these and gaining traits regarding their worship would be nice.

Gorky
06-21-2010, 22:09
leadership:

the number of an army is depend of general's leadership: it is develope with experience

fire arrow:

fire bow is fire up wariors...?! i think not, but it fire up wood construck: buildings, catapult, wooden wall

capture war machines:

(low quality soilders has the ability to use machines, if they could capture it, they can turn it to the enemy)

castle:

you can only use healthy man in the army, use farmer to make wheet/rice, educated man to profession (money make), and dealer to trade

ReluctantSamurai
06-22-2010, 22:27
I've always liked games that implement a system for leaders. Think of all the great conquering armies throughout history.......they had great generals leading them....and not just by field expertise, but with charisma, as well.

Hearts of Iron, for instance, has a system somewhat like that suggested by Gorky...the army size your general can control is related to skill-level. You can place more units in an army for a particular general, but he will have little or no control over units beyond his capabilities. That makes advancement experience related, and adds uncertainty to the battlefield with uncontrolable units.

Devastatin Dave
06-23-2010, 04:33
Not sure if this has been mentioned yet but.... NO STEAM!!!!

drone
06-23-2010, 15:07
Not sure if this has been mentioned yet but.... NO STEAM!!!!

It has. :yes:

Lechev
06-24-2010, 06:36
The following are my wish-list :-

1) A 3D map of feudal japan which shows all the provinces (see attached link )
http://http://www.maproom.org/00/05/sub1/1.html

2) Recruitable ronins and an option for those conqured fractions' general be either executed or released to become ronins if they refuse to serve their new lord.
3) Ikko Ikki uprising especially around the regions from the province of Kaga.
4) Options to choose heir
5) Better market access to arquebus ( and price ) and western naval techology if the fraction leader is a Christian himself or welcome Jesuit priests in his dormain
6) Political marriage carry a certain weightage to the leader's prestage and honour. Breaking such alliance will affect the leader's political credibilities
7) No legendary Geisha units ( please! )
8) To capture Kyoto ( and remain captured for a number of turns ) as one of the main criteria to win the game. Other fractions during this time will either declare war openly of form coalitions.

My list is not complete, maybe you guys have a better idea?

Swoosh So
06-24-2010, 19:56
A multiplayer chat foyer

pevergreen
06-25-2010, 05:52
Not sure if this has been mentioned yet but.... NO STEAM!!!!

Didn't they already confirm steam?

I got sick of the steam vs anti steam argument back at the launch of ETW. I really don't want another one in every thread. If it starts, maybe we should have a thread solely for it? :tongue:

caravel
06-25-2010, 14:03
I got sick of the steam vs anti steam argument back at the launch of ETW. I really don't want another one in every thread. If it starts, maybe we should have a thread solely for it? :tongue:
It's on topic with "So what would you like to see in S2TW?". Just ignore, and do not respond to the "anti-steam" or "pro-steam" posts if they annoy you.

:bow:

Viking Prince
06-26-2010, 02:18
The following are my wish-list :-

1) A 3D map of feudal japan which shows all the provinces (see attached link )
http://http://www.maproom.org/00/05/sub1/1.html

2) Recruitable ronins and an option for those conqured fractions' general be either executed or released to become ronins if they refuse to serve their new lord.
3) Ikko Ikki uprising especially around the regions from the province of Kaga.
4) Options to choose heir
5) Better market access to arquebus ( and price ) and western naval techology if the fraction leader is a Christian himself or welcome Jesuit priests in his dormain
6) Political marriage carry a certain weightage to the leader's prestage and honour. Breaking such alliance will affect the leader's political credibilities
7) No legendary Geisha units ( please! )
8) To capture Kyoto ( and remain captured for a number of turns ) as one of the main criteria to win the game. Other fractions during this time will either declare war openly of form coalitions.

My list is not complete, maybe you guys have a better idea?

I agree on the Ronin. All provinces should be ruled by a clan. Ronin were really Samurai that lost their lands when their side lost a strategic battle. Not really the same as European mercenaries, but similar.

As to the Ikko Ikki uprising -- uprisings in general should be a much greater risk when taxes are high, the daimyo dies, a battle of a certain size takes place, garrisons are weak, etc.

Rather than options to choose an heir -- I would prefer to see the actual leaders not necessarily die on the field of battle -- even if their province is lost. Often even losing the battle, the leader would remain with reduced wealth after submitting to the other leader. Not quite a European vassalage, but close. On a related note, I would like to see more clan members appear as generals and in the line of succession. Also related -- a provincial governor for each province. It can be a clan member, a submitted clan leader, or even a samurai that has served the clan with distinction.

I agree the Geisha was a bit of cheese. I hope the heros are not simply a single man taking on the world either. Give us a hero that leads a unit and has a moral and honor modifier when in command.

As to victory conditions -- I hope the elimination of all clans is gone. Let submission be the criteria. If all the Daimyos submit to a clan leader, he becomes the new Shogun.

Another aspect I would like to see is a seperation of the religious temple warriors from the province military. If we no longer have the risk styled map, we can have more interplay between the religious temple soldiers, the provincial government, and the castle towns. This means that factions can split. This means that uprisings can grow quickly if the temple throws its weight behind the lower class samurai or the provincial governor.

Give me castles, castle towns (town outside the castle walls), merchant towns (with ports), and more population centers within the provinces.


I would also like to see coalition leadership break during a battle with a unit(s) changing sides.

Gurkhal
06-26-2010, 08:34
This post got a bit large but I hope you’ll be able to get through it 

1. That every province is occupied by Clan from the start is a dead given. This I do not however hold much hope for since I'm convinced that the game will be more or less a re-make of Shogun in this regard. Although if I'm proved wrong in this I will be happy like a little girl.

2. Better naval technology for Christians I also agree with. I also hope that at least some ships will feathure sails, and more importantly guns, as it goes.

3. I totally agree that you shouldn't need to physically conquer 100% of Japan, but that submission should be enough. And that the AI would be less "fight to the death!" in every situation, but rather submit himself, and maybe raise a rebellion later. I think this would also be a somewhat good idea for multiplayer as well since it would add more dimensions, and also not give the winner a reason NOT to simple exterminate every faction/player he can.

4. Geisha wasn't something that I was really that angry about, although perhaps make them somewhat less über. Maybe simply have them as an agent that can't be killed by spies in cities etc. but can only die at the hands of a ninja or other geisha due to, maybe, "the protocol that you aren’t socially allowed violence against a geisha".

5. Since we're having it small in a small area I to would like to be able to see both a regional capital and outlying castles and towns around it that can be conquered/raided or defended. The ability to construct real castles, not just camps, on the strategic map is something that I would really like to see.

6. To be able to take a look at the tactical map when you are standing on the strategic map. This would make it possible to check how the ground where you are, before the tactical battle begins.

7. Something that I would like to see would to get away from the 20/16 unite limits on armies. These limits are ok on the tactical maps, but I somewhat miss the great battles from Shogun and Medival 1, when there would be wave after wave of troops entering the field. Why not keep this effect, and more or less make armies be able to be as large as they want? As unites gets wiped out or flees, new reserves are brought in. Naturally huge armies would be very slow and so would give smaller armies the opportunity to more or less run around their enemies on the strategic map. Another problem this could solve is that I find that the AI is often rather easily beaten, especially in sieges, and so the opportunity to call in more waves might give it some stamina, rather than having a bunch of stacks running around with piecemeal attacks on you.

8. That the game can be modded and modding tools are released. I’m pretty certain it’s already been said this won’t be the case, but I’d still like to see it happen and you never know for sure.

9. Good diplomacy, and the ability to interact with your allies and vassals as well, maybe getting the opportunity to attach their unites to your own armies, and reversed. If submission would be possible it would be great if the AI vassals will possess more brain than half a strawberry and not rebel “just for the hell of it!” (unless you’re a real asshole of an overlord, of course).

10. That the non-Buddhist cults and mythologies of Japan aren’t forgotten in favor of only Buddhism. While Buddhism should of course be mentioned due to its importance in the period, and that such temples and monasteries should be constructible, I think that shrines devoted to various Kami should also be available. Maybe also some reference towards the syncretism between indigenous Japanese cults and mythology with the Buddhism would be played up.

The prospect of a religious dimension to the war between Christianity and Buddhism-Shinto (I use the term Shinto as a gathering term for the cults and mythology around the Kami in this post) would be very interesting, as well as various Buddhist schools if possible. Hopefully this would come with an extensive building tree regarding religious buildings that could be constructed, ranging from missionary stations for the Christians to Cathedrals and from smaller shrines of the Buddhists-Shinto to massive fortress-monasteries. In short I’m hoping for a lot of depth into the religion-part of the game. Traits and ancillaries are also of course something that I dearly would like to se.

11. An expansion over into the Imjin War http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imjin_War. This could either be a separate campaign or that when you have taken over Japan, or at some set time like 1590, the map opens up with the Korean peninsula and a Korean faction that is aided by a stream of Chinese troops from across the border to the north when the war begins.

aimlesswanderer
06-27-2010, 05:16
This post got a bit large but I hope you’ll be able to get through it 

2. Better naval technology for Christians I also agree with. I also hope that at least some ships will feathure sails, and more importantly guns, as it goes.

5. Since we're having it small in a small area I to would like to be able to see both a regional capital and outlying castles and towns around it that can be conquered/raided or defended. The ability to construct real castles, not just camps, on the strategic map is something that I would really like to see.

7. Something that I would like to see would to get away from the 20/16 unite limits on armies. These limits are ok on the tactical maps, but I somewhat miss the great battles from Shogun and Medival 1, when there would be wave after wave of troops entering the field. Why not keep this effect, and more or less make armies be able to be as large as they want? As unites gets wiped out or flees, new reserves are brought in. Naturally huge armies would be very slow and so would give smaller armies the opportunity to more or less run around their enemies on the strategic map. Another problem this could solve is that I find that the AI is often rather easily beaten, especially in sieges, and so the opportunity to call in more waves might give it some stamina, rather than having a bunch of stacks running around with piecemeal attacks on you.


I agree with your other ideas.

I must admit that I am not interested in the more sophisticated naval battles. I'd actually like to have the option of going back to the simple autocalc, and focus on the land battles. I do hope to be pleasantly surprised by the naval combat, but don't expect it.

The problem with having heaps of outlying towns and such which can be captured is that the AI will likely send an endless stream of 2 unit armies to pillage them, which is just a complete waste of time. Perhaps only provinces with historically important natural or human resources or strategic locations could have a proportionate number of extra towns/farms/mines/castles/ports. So a province with no important resources should have only the "capital" castle/town, and most provinces will only have between 0 and 2 extra places. That way the number of extra things you have to defend is more limited. In ETW the hordes of tiny armies running around ever single turn doing exactly the same thing and getting killed off in exactly the same way was just infuriating. :furious3: The number of times I fought exactly the same battle in exactly the same place against exactly the same opposition who did exactly the same thing and got massacred in exactly the same way.... all that frustration and wasted hours!:furious3:

Ideally I would like the AI to be smarter, and thus on higher difficulties it would need less "bonus resources" to build massive armies with in order to be competitive. But previous experience suggests otherwise, though I can hope.

Furunculus
06-28-2010, 14:20
mod support.

ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
06-29-2010, 19:33
Custom Samurai Armour editor

Gregoshi
06-29-2010, 20:47
Custom Samurai Armour editor
Not if that samurai in the awesome, custom armour is going to be dumb as a stick. :laugh4:

Daveybaby
06-30-2010, 15:47
What i'd really, really love to see shipped with S2TW is: new patches for the original STW and MTW to make them playable (reliably) on modern machines.

I'm looking forward to S2 immensely, but still i'd love CA to do this - maybe as a gift for all of us who've supported them from the beginning.

andrewt
06-30-2010, 20:12
Didn't they already confirm steam?

I got sick of the steam vs anti steam argument back at the launch of ETW. I really don't want another one in every thread. If it starts, maybe we should have a thread solely for it? :tongue:


If you think it's bad here, check civfanatics. Almost every thread is either a Steam whine or by people whose self-esteem is wholly based on if their country is included in the game as a civ. I got completely sick of that forum.

Akka
07-03-2010, 15:13
A decent AI is of course on the wishlist since the very first iteration of the game.

But the thing I'd like to be reassured about is the dynamics of the fight. I still have nightmare about the lethargic and ridiculous MTW2 fights, with slow, ponderous and apathetic movements, cavalry charges that barely make a soldier move, and unit clashes that resulted in five duels in the middle and hundred of men nicely waiting for their turn.
Especially afraid they do the same crap again as the lack of moddability makes it dubious it'll be possible to correct it if it happens.