• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
kind of like forcing a vassalage relationship no?

like many of the clans back in sengoku, to mention one, we have the Mouri family, where Takamoto was a hostage of the Ouchi's to secure Motonari's obedience.

But, what i'm curious about is, is it possible to have the clan refuse to obey just because you took a hostage? we have an example in history, Matsudaira Hirotada refused to "submit" and play along Oda's side when Oda Nobuhide captured Takechiyo but Hirotada refused and insisted on formalizing his alliance with the Imagawa and in a sense, he had forsaken his son in favor of the clan's survival.

So, I think it'd be a nice tweak, having a hostage, but the enemy decides not to give in, and in turn, you have the chance to kill the hostage or keep him as a measure to pressure the enemy, but that won't always guarantee the result.
 
OK, yes, both samurai and ashigaru units have inherent firepower in the form of archers (not to mention guys throwing rocks and maybe the rare Chinese firearm :) ) and will take part in the fire phase. This is verified both by the instruction manual and the game itself.

Presumably Inf do more damage than cav in the fire phase and arquebusiers are the games cannons...
 
Presumably Inf do more damage than cav in the fire phase and arquebusiers are the games cannons...

Could be the case. Now that I think about it, one of the later versions of EU3 introduced (tiny) fire values for infantry to fix the exact pointless fire phase problem I mentioned. Suddenly those 6-fire generals weren't quite useless in the 1400s, even if 6shock was still much better.
 
Is it possible to capture an enemy character leader during battle, as recently announced as a CKII possibility?

No. But there are battle events that can wound or maim you, or give you a new positive traits connected to your martial skill.