I don't know like you but this new, aspect of the game worries me. I wonder how it will be executed. This is now popular due to the success of total war games but to be honest total war series is poor if you looks at it from the right angle. Turns stretches to eternity, AI does some weird stuff, it is wide open to exploits, diplomacy does not work, AI do not have such thing as an economy, it makes units from the air even if it has not the necessary buildings and does now worry about such details as upkeep, and so one and so one. These games are popular for some reason but I tell you that I have enough and I doubt that I will buy any another "great" underdeveloped, overambitious AAA total war title for 60€ just because battles look nice.
I would rather like some simpler but easier to control and correct, if needed campaign. Just think about this, the game comes out and there are some exploits and/or some other stuff that needs to by fix. So developers are spending time on rethinking and changing stuff that can generate some other problems. I would rather like that they spend time on some other things that trying to fix an overcomplicated system, especially when the studio is not the largest. Do you remember how long we have been waiting for patches in the first game? Such stuff is great, yes, but only when it works and I would rather like to buy and play some game that does work.