Good point about the sprites - the ones in RTW were bad enough, but the distance filter that distinguished half decent sprites from blurry mess was another visual fiasco of M2TW.
Also worth mentioning is the extreme simplicity of gemeplay depth of TW in the campaign that essentially is the STW unify/conquer all, formula reapplied over and over in periods and situations were it does not really belong without any true addition in strategic depth. For instance country/kingdom logistics and campaign logistics remain mostly out of TW although in most cases they dictated conquest potential, military technology and approach as well as external politics. Some mechanics like the recruiting pools were inserted in M2TW that have potential to represent such things.
Experience suggests that the most advertised new TW features are the ones that offer a wow of 20 minutes and become the unsolved gameplay spoiler for ever and ever after that. The "sieges and artillery" in MTW, the "3D men and horse jumps" in RTW, and the "battle animations & finishing moves" in M2TW.
Half baked features that appeal to the eye and become gameplay killers since they pay little respect to the ways of the AI or to gameplay or to what the engine can support reliably from a gameplay perspective.
Naval and land battles will be a whole new world in this period that will need to be balanced gameplay wise and possibly not in the same way on top of develloping a new engine..
Anyway, by the time people will be bored with it they'll probably announce a newer, flashier and even more euphemeral game that will also be a "brilliant" idea to make, i guess.
Bookmarks