What would you like to see in shogun2 Totalwar Multiplayer?

[Swoosh So]

Ok my list:

Chat Foyer

Famous general units with abilities that have a cooldown.

Classic maps from shogun totalwar remade in addition to new maps (shogun maps were great keep the layout and update with new graphics)

Map Editor and ability to download maps from the host of a game.

Yari cavalry mechanic - fastest of all the cavalry and excellet vs cavalry weak vs infantry even swords.

Ability to create tournament subrooms in the the chat foyer.

Chance of heavy fog games like in the original shogun.

Ability to make a clan in game and have a clan chat channel.

More advanced grouping functions.

Nagashima remade!

Maybe ability to host best of 3 matches with 1 shot on defence 1 shot on attack and the final game if undecided random side. will think on this and maybe edit.

Make muskets like they used to be and hit alot of units camped behind the target.
Give musket troops in a tree line an advantage (when in a shootout) like in shogun1 as it adds so much to the maps having to capture forrests to gain an advantage on the map.


More spam to come

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

From what I posted at the Wolves forum -

Perhaps we should offer real trophies in 1v1's tournaments to draw more people into them. I'm going to do a tourny like this and offer a small trophy as a prize on STW2.

I also think there should be a custom uniform editor so you can edit the uniforms of your troops. It could be uses with clans so they can feel more attached to their armies.

[AMP]

While I doubt any of this will be heard it's always fun to throw in a wish list of things you want in with game you like or hope you will like.
Here is a few off the top of my head that I would like in.

These I really agree with Swoosh

Foyer - A nice lobby chat and being able to make your own chat rooms with friends/clan mates etc...

Downloadable Maps - Able to download maps when joining a game that is custom made without having to exit out of the game (wanted ever since stw days)

Famous Generals - Having your generals stand out more would be nice, but as long as they aren't OP ofc.

Here is some of mine and some might sound crazy, but it is my wishlist and only that.

Camerafreedom - I remember getting this in STW after sometime and I hope it's in STW2 because I don't know how people can stand playing zoomed in so close all the time especially in MP!
We got lucky finding it in STW and when I played World in Conflict people had to mod it in cause it wasn't in by default! Camerafreedom is something that should be a standard to have in a RTS like this.

Group Movement - I remember in STW you could use Alt with your army grouped and change the facing plus be able to moving in that direction at the sametime. I didn't experiment much in the NTW demo,
but it seems you have to start at the end and drag across to advance in a different direction which is a worse way to do it. It would be nice to have that back in STW2 if it isn't there already.

Dragging Lines - I hope the dragging lines gets fixed where sometimes in STW and NTW demo if you start at a certain location it goes all crazy and you could end up wasting to much valuable time trying to setup a unit.
This happens in areas that are tight, on trees and bridges and this issue should be looked at.

Running - I always wanted this ever since STW to have a one click run option that you can toggle off and on. The having to either double click or hit the R after you issued orders gets old.
I don't know if you can or not in NTW, but it would be nice to have in STW2 after all these years... just small things like that make life easier. :)

Share Control of Units - Not many people would like this, but I think it would be cool to have as an option to share control of your units or give some to your ally etc.

Observation - Be able to watch games in play along with MP campaigns (which I hope is in) which players can disable if they don't want others to watch.

Multiplayer Campaigns - Not just 1v1s either I mean at least up to 4 players because to me 1v1 doesn't sound very multiplayerish or epic at all.
Also allow Clan Campaigns where you control one faction with your entire clan and bigger battles you can have multiple clan mates control armies or army in the battle.

Fade out Effect - In STW this was annoying when you had an army in wooded areas you couldn't see your own army or watch the fighting very well in the woods as well as dragging lines.
Trees should fade out so you can see your units more easly, but of course only x amount of distance cause you know you're in the woods.
Also you should be able to start dragging a line on a tree and not have it go all crazy and stuff. (so annoying)

That's all for now and remember I don't know how much has be improved cause I only played the NTW demo and only a little of ETW.
I hope STW2 MP really dose get a lead role cause I'm a big MP player and I enjoy more melee fighting over the gun battles. :)

[Tomisama]

Three grouping improvements I would like to see

1. Saveable grouping along with army configurations, so you don’t have to rebuild groups every time you play.

2. Super grouping; the ability to nest sub grouped divisions into super groups, without loosing their sub group distinctions.

3. Stable grouping; keeps groups together and tabbed despite losses to them, even down to a single unit.

(The idea being “once grouped, always grouped” unless changed by the commander.)

[Shibumi]

Most def a flat map...

Mirrored maps...

A system so you can defend one match to then attack the next, with scored outcome over both games (for sieges and stuff, if they can make them interesting).

[Tomisama]

With all of the possible configurations of hardware and connection service, I understand that some players can only play smaller configuration battles.

But there are many players who do have a considerable investment in equipment and connections, that want to play full size map configurations with fewer players that the maximum setting.

Currently in Napoleon if you chose a 4v4 map, and take less players (say a 3v3) the map redline automatically shrinks to the 3v3 size.

My request is that listed map sizes actually reflect the map size you will get, regardless of the number of players you chose to play with.



Edit: Below The NE corner of Homestead 4v4 with 8, 6, and 2 players.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Making a balanced map does not necessarily require a mirrored map, this where the true art of game map making comes in.

Also using terrain naturally to enclose the map by natural barrier and limited size off roads that all but eliminate any red line abuses.

We had such maps before the Rome’s open vista style linking panoramas, and with Japan’s hilly terrain I hope we can get back to what was

[Shibumi]

Well, I do not really trust CA to have the skill and ability to balance maps without mirroring. Do you?

I am by no means suggesting all maps be mirrored, just that we have some clear tournament maps for the more competetive players, to adhere to the esporters.

[Tomisama]

Well, I do not really trust CA to have the skill and ability to balance maps without mirroring. Do you?

I am by no means suggesting all maps be mirrored, just that we have some clear tournament maps for the more competetive players, to adhere to the esporters.

I am truly puzzled by your posts.

I didn’t say anything about the first one because I didn’t want to get into any kind of an argument, and I do not now!

But when you slam CA’s ability, I have to say something.

I have every game and every map they have ever made, and they absolutely have the talent and ability to create anything you can imagine.

In fact in the current game (Napoleon) we have flat, mirrored, and balanced maps, as we have had for every era game.

As far as choosing Total War maps for competitions, I am the author of the largest, most successful, and continuously running competitive team competitions in the history of all of these games.

Now that does not mean I know everything, but I have been testing and reviewing maps for contests for a long time.

Can you please explain a bit more; perhaps you are referring to an absolutely barren flat field?

But please reframe from disrespecting the people and work of Creative Assembly, who are the source of all that we have in Total War are gaming.

The results of their innovativeness, skill, and hard work, is only reason that this forum exists in the first place, and the only reason that we are even here talking about anything at all.

And I am sorry that I it may appear that I am putting this all on you personally, because I am not really intending that.

It is more of the voicing of a general complaint against CA bashing, Steam and Sega bashing, it has to stop!

We are effectively biting the had that feeds us, and there is absolutely no sense in that.

I hope you understand.

Now, is an absolutely barren flat field (ironing board) what you are after?

[Shibumi]

Yes, there should absolutely be a barren flat field map. Just like in Rome or Medieval TW.

Not the most visualy appealing or strategicly challenging, agreed, but will adhere to some players (and adds to tactical choice for any player).

About CA's skill I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

About maps, I have a hard time seeing how a non-mirrored map can be completely fair for both sides. Maybe you could explain? Sure, for the average gamer they could probably make maps that are even enough to pass, but if you want to esporters you will have to go the extra lenght to strive for fairness and balance.

You think CA has a good record on multiplaying? I think the best was in Rome, still, the pricing on many units were way, way wrong (can be added as a wish to the new shogun game, please consider pricing for units for multiplayer, do not base it on the single player experience, except of course maintainence costs).



Please do explain how you can guarantee complete balance if map is not mirrored?

As far as choosing Total War maps for competitions, I am the author of the largest, most successful, and continuously running competitive team competitions in the history of all of these games.

With all respect, it's not exactly WOWs numbers of participants we talk about here. MP in TW has been a sidenote at best. If they want to sell more games, they must make the game pleasing for the esporters. Hopefully balancing getting that bunch (for sale statistics) while still keeping the single player intellectualy challenging.

[AMP]

They should make a little of everything when it comes to maps or at least make sure we have a map editor. I remember the completely flat map made back in the day for STW which was good for being 100% fair for both sides. It's good for competitive matches, but you could also play on an unbalanced map with each player/players attacking and defending once and it's just as fair and just have the winner if it's 1-1 be the one with the better k/l - kill worth/loss worth ratio (that's unit worth not kills/losses).

This isn't much different from when I played in tournaments in World in Conflict. You had 2 round matches where each play both sides once and if it's 1-1 winner was declared by best time (in STW2 it could be kill worth/loss worth). You also had best of 3 where if it's 1-1 the team with best time picked what side they wanted to play for the 3rd round, but in STW2 I know people would just pick defender. So 2 rounds (1 attack 1 defend) works better for unbalanced maps in STW2 and best of 3 would work better on flat maps.


Now for some more wishlist spam of mine. I only played the NTW demo cause the gun powder era play isn't my thing, so if I mention something that is already in it just means I'd like for it to be in STW2 as well and not forgotten about.

Kill worth / Loss worth - Along with showing kills and losses you should also have this to display the actual worth of units lost and killed. I remember in MTW in bigger battles people would be like "wow look at all my kills" forgetting about what they really killed or routed off the map and the fact that MTW has different unit sizes unlike STW where it was all mostly 60unit sizes, but even that only helped justify bragging about kills/losses to a certain point. Every solider in a unit should have a certain value that gets you your kill worth and loss worth at the end of a match.

Hit Points Viewable - If a unit has hit points I would like to see how much.

Option to disable enemy moral - I liked it old school where you couldn't tell your opponents moral it made it more interesting for me anyway.

FFA 2v2v2 3v3v3 -While not very popular I always wanted to play battles like that, but I know a lot hate them cause of the double teaming.

Shared Deployment Zones - I remember a lot of people asking for this in STW and MTW to able to just have one big deployment zone for your whole team to deploy together instead of each with their own circle.

All Cav can dismount and mount - Any cavalry unit can dismount and mount or at the very lest be able to dismount.

Friends list and Clan list - One that isn't by steam, but that is built into the game lobby... something similar to World in Conflict setup with this.

Player Stats - All players have stats wins,losses,dcs, and tournament wins etc.. that we can view by clicking on their name in the lobby or game room.

Spot Saving - Not many RTS have this right except for automatch setups with mates in some RTS games. If you have a custom game open or mp campaign game you should be able to save a spot or spots for friends or clanmates. Nothing more annoying than having that spot or spots fill up only to kick someone out that won't leave or not be able to host until they are all ready to join. This happened often in STW and other RTS games I've played, so annoying.

Test Room - Be able to test unit matchups against each or run different scenarios by yourself and not needing 2pcs or a friend. :)

Watch Replays with Friends - While not needed in games that aren't competitive if STW2 ever dose get very competitive or a future TW this would be nice to have. To be able to go to a room and upload a replay to everyone and start it where everyone is viewing it together and can point out stuff etc would be cool. We did this a lot in World in Conflict by making sure everyone had a replay of a match and we all loaded it up to a certain time and started by saying "go" heh.. it was a pain in the butt though sometimes when someone needed the replay or we needed to pause and go again, but in the end it was worth it if you wanted to win a tournament. Having a room for everyone to go to and watch it together with options to pause and start again and point out stuff on the map which everyone could see would've been so much easier and fun as well.


That's all I got for now and more to come in the future. :)

[Swoosh So]

Quote from amp "Option to disable enemy moral - I liked it old school where you couldn't tell your opponents moral it made it more interesting for me anyway."

LOL amp sounds like u want morale switched off which i know you dont :) you just want it to be hidden rightso you cannot see the opponents morale in battle..

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

FFA 2v2v2 3v3v3 -While not very popular I always wanted to play battles like that, but I know a lot hate them cause of the double teaming.

AMP,


You can 8 man FFA'S on RTW/BI. Presume you know this. After all, you looking at the man who singlehandly fought over 500 games on my own map, Warman's Death Field on RTW, winning at lest 55% of them, about 1-2 dozen of them FFA's.


And don't eve get me started with my old school map, Castle 2_5_2on Viking Invasion, played 200 times on that map since March 2004, and included a 7v1 match once I did!

[Gregoshi]

Since it has been brought up, CA/Sega bashing/flaming is a no-no. We don't allow that behaviour between patrons and we extend that courtesy to CA & Sega. Criticism allowed as always, but keep it civil, constructive and informative.

[Tomisama]

To be able to go to a room and upload a replay to everyone and start it where everyone is viewing it together and can point out stuff etc would be cool.

Works well with my favorite new idea.

What I would really like to see is "unlimited spectators of live games” (recorded is certainly good too).

No interaction with the games themselves, just a stream out available to as many as wanted to see what was going on in a particular game.

A spectator’s only chat (of only that game) sounds good also.

Maybe with a host selectable delay for competitions?

[AMP]

Swoosh, yeah you're right it dose sound like that, but you got it right I just don't want to be able to see the enemy moral same goes for him not being able to see mine. I liked it like that, so at least an option to toggle that off before a match in the settings of a game would be nice to have.

Warman, I know I said anything in my wishlist that is in already in the TW's I would like to make sure they have it in STW2 as well. I didn't play much RTW only loads of STW and MTW and it was always 2 teams attacker and defender. :(

Tomisama, Yeah that'd be pretty sweet to have cause I remember in World in Conflict people wanting the same exact thing. You had a cap on spectators and you had chat for them, but it was pretty crappy. If STW2 MP were to be pretty competitive or a future TW lots of people would like to watch the experts play in real time and replays and go over them with friends or clanmates, your ideas would fit nicely with that. Normally if it's not very competitive people don't wanna watch anyone only log on to play a few games and log off for the day, but I could be wrong, so it'd be nice for them to throw it in to see how many people would use it. :)

Another thing to add to the wishlist...

Spacebar showing units endpoint as ghost - In NTW demo I only saw arrows, so what happened to the ghost of the unit where it was going to end up after you gave it a move order? Well it use to show dots of the unit anyway, but a faded ghost of the unit would be better because I worked with that A LOT in STW and MTW. It might be in NTW, but it didn't show it hitting the spacebar (only arrows ) and I was a little shocked. I hope it's in STW2 cause it's a very useful tool to setup advancing units.

[Tomisama]

I’m not very bright I guess, but I don’t understand how it can be say that these games are not competitive. Over at the Clan Wars Competition (CWC) we have been able to put together multi-partner team (3v3 and 4v4) competitions for every era from Viking to Napoleon, with never a shortage in applicant Clans. We mostly have best 2 out of 3 game knockout tourneys, and have had hundreds of Clan teams in membership, and I am sure individual team players in the thousands (ya I know those are only big numbers for Total War games ).

This last contest (still in process) was limited to 32 three player Clan Teams fighting through a five round Swiss format (every team plays in every round), in a two battle point scored competition. The top eight Clan teams are now in a best 2 out of 3 final knockout round playoff for the title of Clan Wars XXVI Champions.

Maybe we just don’t know better???


Two more wishes for the list:

It would be great to have a time coded function added to the replays, and the ability to fastforward and reverse, or at least go to a particular point in a battle (time referanced) to review the action.

And a feature that I miss from earlier games is the ability to program way-points with the caps-lock key, so you can send units on complex missions without need to re-order every direction change.

[Swoosh So]

Just my thoughts a map can easily be balanced without being a mirror of itself and i would tbh be dissapointed if i had to fight on mirror maps.

[AMP]

Total War is competitive, but for me the competition was in STW and MTW:VI because of balance. I only played a little RTW and MTW2 same with ETW because balance was off the charts in some areas. To see some people say unit selection takes skill makes me laugh and sad at the same time... you never heard that in STW. There is a reason why a lot of good players quit after VI, but only a few will understand why.

I just hope STW2 is well balanced so the competitive lvl can rise and competition can grow. If I lose or win I want it to be more so cause of my skill on the battlefield and not unit selection. I wanna see what people call skill and balance uploaded on youtube as well. :)

I like the replay ideas because that's exactly what we needed in World in Conflict when going over replays with mates.

I never used way points much because you were limited to what you could do with it. I want to be able to make a unit walk here, run there, and setup formation like this... or else I won't bother with it just like all the other RTS way points.

I'll take all kinds of maps and would like to play an unbalanced map in tournaments as well cause all you need to do is switch sides and if it's 1-1 the winner is the one with the better k/l ratio.

Lots of time yet so lets hope they at least add something good to the MP. I wanna be surprised.

[Sp00n]

TBH without a foyer I won't play, I've been playing a lot of Napoleon over the last few weeks and in general the experience is awful, you get kicked with no reason, players host clan only a lot of the time, players are rude, people slag you off in game etc. I find it quite amusing that people said the foyer from Shogun was bad in terms of idiots, the latest game with no foyer is just as bad if not worse so give us back what we had 10 years ago please.
In terms of balance its not great and nearly every battle is a turkey shoot with players running for the best angles and the odd cav charges mainly with lancers to negate your oponents cav. There is some skill in it but in general the battles take forever and are mainly all the same, no variety at all also army selection is extremely important.

A lot of players left MP because Rome quite frankly was awful in MP unbalanced and buggy as hell and it destroyed the community from the first 2 games. I'm quite worried at the amount of units stated for Shogun 2 being 40ish, the original had 12 which was what made it more balanced online, even with Naval and Seige units thats going to be some step up in terms of units which puts us possibly back in the dreadfully unbalanced mess of the last 4 games.

I hope not I really do.

[Tomisama]

As presented above by Shibumi:

can be added as a wish to the new shogun game, please consider pricing for units for multiplayer, do not base it on the single player experience

And alluded to by Spoon:

I'm quite worried at the amount of units stated for Shogun 2 being 40ish, the original had 12 which was what made it more balanced online, even with Naval and Seige units thats going to be some step up in terms of units which puts us possibly back in the dreadfully unbalanced mess of the last 4 games.

The crux of the problem is that Multiplayer has always been a derivative of Singleplayer, made worse now by the illusion that “more is better”.

Multiplayer pricing, army configurations, and maps, need to be considered and designed separately for Multiplayer use alone.

That is the only way you will have a true competitive balance.

Then once that is perfected, apply that understanding to Singleplayer design to get the very best game that can be created (and the best AI).

Games are about competition; people versus people or people versus machines, it is all about the quality of the competition.

And designing from highest level (people versus people) is the correct order of successful game design.

And more is not better, only better is better, and in the long run this will prove out in sales.

We are swimming in a world of choices, but it is not the choices we are after, it is the best product; in this case the highest quality competitive game you can produce!

[Hunter KIng George]

I agree Spoon...Foyer is a must! I still play MTW/VI from time to time, and I still love it. With the few players that show, we have a blast chatting away while more peeps show up.

I would like them to also go back to the old chat system in game was so easy!!! Press "T' to talk to everyone in game or "Y" for allies only. Simple.

[Shibumi]

May I hasten to say that I in no way meant all maps should be mirrored or even fair. I might not have made myself quite clear about that. I do not however see why some maps should not be, and would also like the addition of these being clearly marked as such, ie, labeled "tournament map" or whatever tag comes to mind.

40 units seem too much to command IMHO. It sure works in single player where you can pause at will, but in multiplayer? I get a headache just thinking of controlling 40 units on a battlefield.

I even remember how I in Rome TW by choice usually would go for 12-14ish units in a 12,5k game, as microing those well worked better than having a full 20 units. So yeah, 20 seem to be the maximum units controllable (maybe even 16 like in Medieval TW).

Does anyone think 40 units would add to the depth of the game? I am unconvinced. Unit formation, grouping and pathfinding will have to be loads better than in previous games for that to work well. But then, maybe CA has made it work?


Lobby, communication and so on... I expect the game to meet the normal standard of modern games when it comes to this. Anything else would just be a disappointment.


About the cost of units, just as Tomisama said, costs should be separate for MP and SP, as this is a big issue that has wrecked CA's rep on the major scene of multiplaying in the past. It is hugely important that there will be no need of "player agreed on rules" limiting the choices, in order to balance the game. I hope we can all agree on this.

I would wish the game was in itself balanced enough so players can go wild picking armies. You want heavy artillery and almost no cavallery? Sure, you could make it work, and no opponent would complain about the fairness.

Very hard to make this work given the sheer amount of factions and units, but then you guys seem to have a lot of faith in CA's ability :p


And as a sidenote: I have yet to hear how a non-mirrored map can be 100% balanced.


As the gaming industry looks today, MP is a huge factor when people decide what games to buy. Previous multiplayer games have now started to have a singleplayer campaign added on (BF bad company comes to mind), whereas singleplayer games are equally expected to have a functioning multiplayer part. Most gamers just do not buy a game if not, the expectations of what a game delivers has became huge lately.


Straying off topic, MP is also hugely important for another reason, pirates. Many would just illegaly download SP games, CA has had huge problems with this in the past. Multiplaying is, however, way more tricky / impossible to hack in the same way, as you will need a MP account to play. Just another reason why a functioning MP is of major importance today.


Gregoshi, was that aimed at me? I do not believe I am CA bashing, but then I am no fanboy either, applauding like a Duracell Bunny. The game serie has had strong points and weak points, I prefer to be honest about the weak points in order to get them fixed. And I try very hard to be constructive, I hope you noticed.

I know I questioned CA's ability, but to bear in mind they have done some glaring misstakes in the past. Releasing the game with a passive AI in M2TW comes to mind (something half a hour of beta could have sorted). Other misstakes like that too, but let's not dwell on it.

So no, I do not 100% trust their competence.

With that said however, the idea for the game is utterly brilliant, and if they can take all the good stuff from the previous games and use the knowledge earned in this new game, it can easily become game of the year. But let me remain a bit sceptical untill we see what we get at release.

I for one keep my fingers crossed, oh, and we return to ancient Japan, a culture I absolutely love. Who knows, if they pull it of you might count me among the Duracell Bunnys :)

[Tomisama]

And as a sidenote: I have yet to hear how a non-mirrored map can be 100% balanced.

(I am not sure 100% was in the origional question.)

Every feature on a map has negative and positive strategic values relative to the deployments involved.

As long as those values equal out for both opponents; the map can be considered balanced without necessarily being mirrored.

The major unbalancing is usually unequal height in deployment zones, or quicker access to positions of height advantage for one side or the other.

But this is only related to units with height advantage attributes, and I am not sure that we have that any more.


Several people above have mentioned that the simplest solution to any perceptions of imbalance is to swap sides, so I did not think your question went unanswered.

Thought certainly not a perfect, as it may present the need for a tie breaker, we have used it for seven years now with no complaints.


I’m no ebunny either; but do understand an ounce of inspiration will accomplish more than a pound of criticism.

But I now see your comment in a different light, thank you for explaining

[Shibumi]

Some players prefer perfect balance. So why not toss in a couple of maps on their behalf? If you do not like mirrored maps, you can just not play them. I for one would fight most battles on more normal maps for the strategic challenge, however, the E-sporter in my would also like some completely fair maps.

The two-match system is fine, as an addition. Just like mirrored maps would be an addition. It is not a fully functional system though. Partly because time is a factor, and not everyone want to play two matches in a row all the time (I often pop in and play one match to clear my head before I continue with work, would not want to be forced to sit out two). Also, if you dont like th opponent you might not want to be stuck with him for yet another match all the time.

There is an old saying: Your current problem is caused by your current way of thinking.

Thus I would argue against something being good just because it has been used for 7 years, get my point?

Why not acomodate both E-sporters who want to pop in quickly for a fast ladder match on a 100% balanced map, as well as desktop generals who want to duke it out on random maps over a series of games :)

It would not take much to implement all of this suggested, and the more options available, the better, imho.

[Gregoshi]

Gregoshi, was that aimed at me? I do not believe I am CA bashing, but then I am no fanboy either, applauding like a Duracell Bunny. The game serie has had strong points and weak points, I prefer to be honest about the weak points in order to get them fixed. And I try very hard to be constructive, I hope you noticed.

Shibumi, it was not directed at you. However, Tomi used the phrase "slam CA's ability" in reference to your post, which prompted me to post a reminder about courtesy. We need not be fanboys blind to problems of the series, but we should strive to be respectful in our disagreements with CA and each other. That is all.

[Sp00n]

I'm not too concerned about the balance on maps, the original didnt have mirrored maps until they were user created if I recall, we used Totomi for a long time in 1v1s which in general favoured the defender due to its small central hills .
CA seem to give us one flat map these days anyway so I won't be expecting anything different, a foyer and fairly decent unit balance ie spears kill cav, spear weidling cav kill cav, swords kill spears and please dont over power the muskets thats all I ask for please.

[AMP]

Spoon, don't worry if STW2 is balanced and fun to play online as long as us oldies stick together we'll be able to slap around most of these trash talking kiddies. That maturity lvl is becoming the norm now of games, so us more mature older folks just need to stick together and we'll have some fun. :)
40 units if it's for each faction is a lot and will have me abit worried unless it's divided by eras early, mid, late early... which I hope not. It might be each faction has a few units of their own which is fine as long as you have caps. There is even talk of the doing downloadable units that you pay for... :(

It looks like you still control 20 units on the field which is alright I guess. I do have to laugh at all those people that said they can control all their units at once in the heat of battle going at normal speed... I have yet to see that in ANY of the vedios I watched of people playing MP. I could do it in STW when the game slowed down from someones connection or pc which I didn't mind in the heat of a battle against someone because it gave me more time pull off my tricks and place every unit where I wanted it at the right time. Slow speed is how I won a fair amount of 2v1 and 3v1 battles and this is the game slowing down NOT a low FPS which a lot of people don't know the difference.

Maps maps maps lets have them all unbalanced hilly to flatter mirror maps because it doesn't matter if you don't like the map don't play on it... pretty simple. Myself would like to play best of 2 or 3 matches on randomly generated maps and units having true LOS and have key points to take on the map, but that's me and I know that will never happen. I'll take whatever they can muster up map wise.

[Swoosh So]

Id agree us oldies have to stick together thats why in shogun2 you should be called Wolf_Amp :D

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

Id agree us oldies have to stick together thats why in shogun2 you should be called Wolf_Amp :D

Why does every username sound good with that tag behind it!

[AggonyDuck]

To me as a clan leader, the most important part is a functional chat lobby. Without one, the clan's and the clan-based community struggle. It makes recruiting hard, organising friendly games with other clans almost impossible and it completely removes the feeling of a community. What has been the unique thing about Total War MP has previously been the small and tightly-knit community. Now all that is lost and the social aspects of Total War are almost non-existant. So please, implement a functional chat lobby.