re: indian longbows: they're definitely NOT on par with good quality reflex composites. for example, a good (not exceptional) quality turkish or mongol composite bow (of course, those 2 are probably the pinnacle of composite bows) had greater range and power than your average english longbow (which is clearly superior to a cane longbow). i really don't see how or why would a cane longbow be better in any way (other than cheapness and ease of use) than a reflex composite bow from the steppe. and i don't see how the fact that the bow was a well respected weapon in indian society factors in. the japanese also revered the bow and used longbows, yet their bows pale in comparison to pretty much every composite bow out there. it's also worth noting that a steel self bow is worse than an equivalent wood self bow because of the properties of the material (less of the "spring" force is transferred via steel) and were probably a social symbol or whatever more than anything else (the main (only?) advantage is that the steel bow requires waaaaay less maintenance and were more "resistant" to weather changes. although it's waaaaaay more dangerous when it breaks). another thing worth noting in the longbow vs composite is the arrows. in EB's timeframe the vast majority of steppe arrowheads were of bone (bronze became dominant only very late in the EB period, if not even later) and while i have no sources on what the indian used for arrowheads, i wouldn't have trouble believing that most of their arrows would have iron/steel tips due to the advanced metallurgy that was a prominent feature of the area for quite a long time. and it's reasonable to assume that the longbow arrows were heavier (although considerably slower), just like their english "counterparts". btw i completely agree that the indian longbowmen should be significantly cheaper (besides the sword, i don't see anything that would justify such a hight price)

re: falxes: from a purely realism/historical standpoint it makes no sense to have them be AP since the forward-curving tip was the only thing capable of doing that (and very likely the main reason why the romans reinforced the helmets). unfortunately, the very simplistic nature of the TW engines doesn't lend itself well to recreate the dynamics of combat (especially the overly simplistic AP thing. let's face it, the falx would be next-to completely ineffective against something like the Dosidataskeli or the Grivpanvar... and giving it the AP would make them overly effective against such units. which is very unrealistic but perhaps a necessary "sacrifice"?) so i wouldn't have much objections against the falx getting the AP because, let's face it, there's only a handful of units in the EB roster that have adequate limb protection against the weapon (although those same units would suffer the most vs the falx due to the bollocks RTW implementation of AP).
another thing to consider: if the falx really was such a fearsome weapon, why did it "die" with the dacians (assuming that later polearms weren't inspired by the falxe)? why didn't the romans use it (considering they were wont to adapt and use tech that was "better")?

btw, the AP attribute does not take 1/2 of the armour in consideration. it actually adds (armour-1)/2 to the attack. just sayin...