1) I'd agree with the team vs team approach, but the trouble would be that as both sides would be unsure of their footing, they'd both go on the defensive. You need one controlled side in order to get things moving.
2) The teams need to get a better briefing on how to use their units. It can be amusing (like with the testudo example, notice they didn't mention that special ability in subsequent games), but more often than not it's frustrating when you see their plan going to ruin because their obsessing about getting their one archer unit a clear LOS because they don't know they can fire over the heads of their own troops. They need to be briefed better on ancient warfare as well, their understanding tends to be based on what they've picked up of medieval warfare and they treat their cavalry like C14th fully armoured knights and their archers like English longbowmen.
3) I was disappointed by the post-game "What really happened..." why do we have to settle for just block-bashing when there's a bloody great graphics engine going begging. Keep the experts moving the blocks, fine, but reconstruct the crucial scenes in the RTW engine as well so we can cut in between the two.
4) A bit more effort could be made in making the generals look more individual, less generic.
5) Finally, how about a comedy episode full of examples of things like the phalanx shuffle, a town square firing squad and suicidal red-line skirmishers? I'd love to get the reactions of the historians on those...
Or how about a team of RTW veterans? We can watch them eat their own egos as their army goes down in flames as both generals insist on micro-managing to their own battleplans and the lieutenants try to wrest the control of the keyboards away from the controllers because they think they can do it better.
Bookmarks