Empire: Total War is a good game in the eyes of some people, and a bad game in the eyes of others. However, if you followed the release of Empire 2, you will know that many features CA said would be in Empire were not. Everyone can agree that Empire could be better. I have 5 reasons CA should do Empire 2.

5. Demand
One of the most obvious reasons to make a game. CA has made a #2 of all of their original games so far. (Shogun - Shogun 2) (Rome - Rome 2) (Medieval - Medieval 2). Then there is Empire. If you look around Total War forums, you will see that plenty of people want Empire 2.

4. Update Gameplay with *some* changes from Rome 2
Ok I think if you have played Rome 2 you have noticed that there are a few....bugs....in the game, as well as the infamous money ploy of saying stuff will be in the game that isn't (why is there a faction pack that is free? because it SHOULD have been in the game on release). I think Empire could do with Sea + Land battles, amphibious invasions, and all the "good" things Rome 2 brought to the series.

3. Add in the things they said they would add in.
For example. "Cental Asia" "South America" "French colonies in Africa"
Africa wasn't even its own theater, it was a hurried add-on to Europe at the last minute. Now this isn't CAs fault, it is SEGAs. The rush 99% of Total War games.Talking soldiers with actual moving mouths, slavery, the ability to build colonies, a working family tree, battlefields that are an exact replica of the campaign space two rival armies are standing in, the ability to make a faction declare war on a third party faction, AI generals who have different tactics and unit preferences, military marches being played by soldiers when marching on the battlefield, forts that are all but impenetrable, troops that are different from one another, the ability to capture enemy artillery, realistic and brutal combat (blood, dying and dismembered soldiers), injured moving men, fully destructible battlefields, ships that can ram other ships, multiplayer that includes player leagues and ladders as well as completely new gameplay modes were all said to be in Empire.

2. They didnt really finish Empire.
Empire is still *somewhat* buggy (not a lot, but some times). For example, I know CA was dying to put in more units (all the units current in look the same!). The Ottomans and Persians needed more units (they have a really small roster) and I think they would have liked to have put more playable countries such as denmark, italy, and the mughals. also there were 4 factions removed from empire, some type of Khanate (the wilderness on the east side of the Caspian Sea), Tuscany (Northwestern italy, buffer between italian states and venice), Swiss Confederacy (swiss wilderness) and also Mecklenburg (which is in NTW).

1. Imperialism
What better than the #1 to be what the game is actually based off of. In Empire, your "empire" sometimes (most of the time) only had action on at most 2 Theaters (French rarely invade India, British dont do anything in Europe, ever, Spanish dont go to india, Dutch dont do anything in india and usually have the most fighting in Europe). So why not add the whole world? Sure, it will take a long time to add in the entire world and a province for every area (no one liked the "wilderness" that was switzerland and the central US), but once it done the map will be AMAZING. Think of it, Spain could actually do something in their colonies rather than defend florida (it would be sweet if when South America was in Spanish rule, revolutionary armies would be there, and Brazil would 99% of the time have a peaceful emergent event) It would open up many new countries to play as. The germans/prussians could actually fight in africa, Russia could be the international powerhouse it is know to be. it would be great