Well, guys I wonder how many of you care really about the historical realism of the game. I do and it kind of bugs me to find many flaws. I understand that it is very hard to be completely accurate, but I get really ticked when things are manipulated the wrong way. I mean one thing is to omit something and another is to change it completely. You are probably wondering what I am talking about so far. I'll give you some examples.
For instance, I really don't understand why they decided to put the people of Novgorod as a fraction in Early. I know it is not playable, but still. If you want to add a fraction in that part of the map just so it is not empty, and if you are targeting the Russian market with the game, put Kievska Rus there. That state was really developing at the time and in fact was the first Russian state, far more powerful than any of its counterparts in the north. In fact had it not been for the GH, Kiev would probably still be the hinterland of a Russian nation to this day. It was only because of the GH that Moscow came to a rise up in the north forested areas away from the steppe and the Mongols. Novgorod was a later rival to Kiev before the Mongol invasion but they lacked the political strength of a unifying Russian state, although they were very powerful economically.
Another example is Byzantium. By 1204 the Latins(Crusaders) had sacked Constantinople and established a Latin empire around it connected with the other crusader states in the middle east. That event is of a great significance. It dealt a death blow to Byzantium, compared to the one Rome had when it fell. There were numerous Byzantine states and not just one - Epirus (around Thessaloniki, Greece), Nicea, Trebizond and others. All fighting for recapturing Contstantinope and claiming the unifying role and dominating the rest. In fact during that time (early 13 century) the most powerful state is the Bulgarian one. I know a lot of you will think I am biased, because I am Bulgarian, but this is not the case here, because history is based on facts and any of you who are willing to spend even 30 mins in research on the net will agree with me. Bulgarians fell to the Byzantines in late 11th century after having a successfully established a state in the 7th that was a major rival to Byzantium on the Balkans, claiming to be a unifier for the see of Slaves in the region. After a successful revolt in 1185 the Bulgarians reappeared and got to dominate the whole peninsula by 1230. They were still a factor up until 1396 when they fell to the Ottomans. In the game they are merely represented with one unit and that region, giving one star to your general-governor. I think they do deserve to be at least a non playable orthodox fraction in Late and High. No disrespect to the Polish, but their state came to be a player a bit later, only when the Ottomans had overrun The Balkans, reaching Moldavia and Crimea and the Hapsburg to the West, and after the withdrawal of the GH.
Another tick is the Turks. I don't even know why they are called Turks. Yes, they are of turkic origin, but it would be better to call them Seljuks. And with all my respect (I know I'll get some replies here) they were a not that important until late High and Late when they formed the Ottoman empire. I haven't played them in Late but that is when they really need to be a really powerful fraction if not the most powerful.
I think I got carried away a bit, hopefully I'll be forgiven I understand that the game cannot be completely accurate and am still grateful for a great game with a great replay value. That's what mods are for after all. I am really interested in being a history researcher for one of you great Modders so, I hope I get noticed here. Also, I am new, so hi everybody . You guys are doing a great job with this site, I meant all of you junior and senior members out there. Keep up the good work and dedication