Hattori clan. Why?

[Kagemusha]

I agree completley. Chosokabe, christian Shimazu or Mori can be the unifier of Japan or shogun. But a ninja clan?

But Shimazu Clan was not Christian. ;) I agree that Hattori was rather obscure and never rose to anything other then being Tokugawa vassal, but maybe the problem here is similar to the naming convention of the agents.The faction is simply Hattori Clan because the name is somewhat known, while for example Iga Monto would be a better and more historically accurate name,which the faction is quite likely meant to represent in reality.

[Vlad The Impaler]

But Shimazu Clan was not Christian. ;)

Yeah, Otomo and Omura were christians, but I said like that thinking to the game and that the most southern clan is much more interested to convert to christianity than let's say Date or Uesugi due to commerce with christians.;)

[Revolting Friendship]

I was looking to those maps and I see no Hattori clan. They played a minor role...

Depending on what date you look at, all clans are minor at some point, retainers at some point. Just because a clan played a minor role historically doesn't mean that must be so in an alternate time-line. That's what these games are about, recreating history.

but if you look at the maps starting from 1525 you'll observe that most clans survived in a way or another.

Depends up to what point you're reffering to. Few of the names present on that map survived as daimyô past the unification, but it's true that most clans survived in some way.

It's a strategy game, not a role play game.

If I've understood CA correctly, it's going to be a little bit of both? And I certainly don't mind that.

this does not mean that it is a new clan. even Hideyoshi based his power on Oda remnants. Applying Revolting logic it would be absolutly normal to have an Akechi clan because he also has its chance to become a big daimyo.

No that's exactly what it does mean, and yes the game should work like that if it were to properly model the sengoku jidai. If they add at least one clan where one can preform the iconic sengoku act of gekokujô, I'm totally happy about that one oppertunity, and that's why I'm not gnashing my teeth over the addition of a "ninja-clan". I'd love for CA to pour in another 40 minor clans figuring as vassals and retainers of the bigger ones, because that would make Shogun 2 more Sengoku Jidai. Do you catch my drift? The problem isn't that they added 1 small clan, the problem is that they didn't add more.

It's a game about warlords and Hattori was just a retainer, he, his ancestors and his heirs.

And the most typical, outstanding and interesting sengoku-warlords were those who rose from obscurity and internal conflict and carved out a destiny for themselves. This is how I want to play this game, that's why this issue doesn't bother me.

Please don't bother yourself to give me history lessons. I am practicing ninjutsu and I am interested in Japan history since 1993 so make a count.

What matters is not what you do in your spare time but what arguments you bring to the table. I can't give heed to your knowledge if I feel your arguments are flawed. The reasons why Hattori shouldn't be added into the game isn't because they were a "ninja"-clan, or a small clan, or never were independent, the only reason if any should be that there are no other clans of similar stature represented, as a case of fairness to all the other smalltimers. I think this is kind of a silly reason, and as previously stated I'd rather have 1 than none, and if it's the black PJ-squad, fine. I don't care. I don't have to train shuriken-hurlers if I don't want to.