So what would you like to see in S2TW?

[Kagemusha]

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]

I have a bad feeling, it will be Napoleon: Total War, but with Shogun sprites

[johnhughthom]

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]

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]

Non-invincible Geishas.
Warrior Monks!
No anime/manga.
Units have different heraldry depending on which province they are recruited from.
Warrior Monks!

[Thermal]

Oh, almost forgot...

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

[andrewt]

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]

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]

Most vital is a return to the Risk type campaign map
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]

• Better AI
• Risk-style campaign map
• Fewer unit choices (thus better balancing)
• 4 season years
• Moddability
• No Steam/SecuRom

[A Nerd]

• 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]

1. Better battle AI
2. Better campaign AI
3. Modability
4. No invasive securirom

[drone]

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]

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]

Non-invincible Geishas.
Warrior Monks!
No anime/manga.
Units have different heraldry depending on which province they are recruited from.
Warrior Monks!

Indeed.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

- return to the Risk style campaign map;
- no Steam or SecuRom.

[caravel]

- 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]

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]

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.

Bigger engagement box sounds like a good idea.

The game will be on a new engine.

Good, I dislike the Empire engine.

[Kagemusha]

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]

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]

Sod flexible. Give me 'works' & AI knows how to use it.

[Subotan]

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.

[Sp00n]

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]

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.