Shogun 2: Total War confirmed, will have hero units and siege battles

YES

YES x2.

You know what they say:

War never changes!

Total War has always used a rock-paper-scissors mechanic. Infantry beats cavalry, cavalry beats archers, and archers beat infantry.

That's not really true in these games, Harusame. For instance, spear infantry should win against cavalry, but might not depending upon the defence skills and armor value of the infantry, and also whether they are charged from the front, side, or rear. Too many variable to consider it a rock-paper-scissors game such as Endwar.

On Bigdownload they said that the AI will be programmed after The Art of War by Sun Tzu, which is THE book about conflicts and their solution, so if they do that right it should be freaking awesome.

Ha, Shogo 2 would be sweet.

I'm looking forward to Shogun 2, but I wish they would use Japanese dialog with subtitles, it just seems silly when they speak English.

Personally, I'm continually pulling for a Ancient Total War set in the ancient Middle East, with Sumerians, Phoenicians and whatnot.

I guess that could be interesting, but imagine... Tanks! lol

Other than being the world's first professional military?

You're in the minority on that one Breakerchase. The Roman empire had an extremely important military history.

And also Rome: Total War was dope.

A large part of Rome: Total War's popularity was its engine, and the accompanying mods. RTW modding is still more active than the recent TW games.

@ Discotheque

Yeah, if you're looking at it from a Eurocentic point of view. The East was as equally important in military history and while I prefer Three Kingdoms TW over Shogun, it's the only game in the series that hasn't made the transistion to 3D.

That's not quite true. The Eastern nations have a very poor military history. The concept of the professional military was a European invention that transplanted its way over to Asia, but never really took hold even today. Outside of Western nations, militaries still utilize the citizen-conscription method using masses of poorly trained and disorganized men as the main body of the army. With a few exceptions, armies in China and Japan, even as recently as the 19th century, were made up of citizens that only picked up weapons when war time came. Once the battle was over they returned to their day jobs.

Most of the Asian military concepts were transplants from the European continent through trade routes or military expansionism. The most notable being martial arts, the supposed Asian tradition, is founded in Greek Pankration, which was founded possibly around 2,000 B.C. It wasn't until Alexander did the concept of complex infantry combat that utilized both armed and unarmed forms make its way to the Asian continent.

The Greeks were the first to utilize a trained fighting force and engage in military tactics. It was also the Greeks that invented the idea of war machines and chemical warfare and Greek Fire is the precursor to gunpowder in China (the Greeks were using combustible explosives as early as 900 B.C. and even had flamethrowers in the 5th century B.C.) since China wanted something that could match the invention.

It was Rome that came up with the idea of the paid military and mixed unit tactics.

One of the few military innovations that could be truly be attributed to an Asian culture are both Mongolian. One being the recurve bow (unmatched until the invention of the American recurve in the 20th century) and the other being blitz combat.

The reason military history is Eurocentric is because the overwhelming majority of military advancements are European or of European-descended people (American for example). Study of Asian, African, or pre-colonization Americas in military terms is pointless considering nearly every military tactic and tool used by these cultures was being practiced for centuries or even millennia prior in a European nation, assuming the invention or innovation ever made it to them at all (see professional fighting force, which most Asian nations with exception of S. Korea and Japan have really figured out). There's something to be said when it's rarely disputed that a post-Marian reform Roman army from the second century B.C. could easily dispatch a feudal era Japanese army from the 16th century A.D. due to superior training and equipment (Japanese troops typically used wooden armor and lacked war machines and were farmers and artisans, not professional soldiers). That's a particularly good reason why study of Asian military history isn't all that worthy

Wow LaughingTarget. You just blew my mind

@LaughingTarget

Asian military history not worthy of studying? Come on now, that's like saying so should never depict the French as protagonists due to their poor track record in history.

Colonel John Boyd would like to differ if you think the military history of Asia is worthless.

And also, the People's Liberation Army of Communist China is not a conscript force. In fact it is a capable professional force able to exploit the weaknesses of an enemy that relies on American style Effects-based operations principles that everyone assumes is the end-all military doctrine of recent years.

@LaughingTarget

AHAH you are indeed a laughing target, aren't you? Your eurocentric views are ridiculous and I'm sure half if not all the people here would agree.
You probably don't read or listen enough to Asian Military history or any Asian history at all to have all that biased "knowledge" of yours.

Try understand the Mongolian invasion shattered the Western Culture, superb military strategies that out combated any strategies the Western Culture had to offer. Also, the Mongolian forces were minute compared to Western forces' large quantities.

Try understand that the Chinese dynasties and history were famed for its outstanding technology, structural dominance and military abilities. Great Wall of China anyone?

Lastly, the Japanese military histories and its culture IS one of the most popular of them all. I don't know where your getting poor information from of how these soldiers were all farmers and artisans...but you should realise the katana and all its other branches of samurai swords were the most vicious and powerful of all weaponry in that time.