Historical Accuracy: How Important Is It to You?

[Steppe Merc]

Historical acuracy is as much about oppinion as fact. Much of the minutia that people argue about (stirups for example) have been documented both ways over the years. The important thing is to:

Opinon? What? It's not about opinon. There is proof about stirrups not being around until the Avars introduced them to the West, or at least not widespread.
It's about fact, not opinon. Sometimes people disagree how to interpret facts, but it doesn't make it an opinon question.
You could say "I think that Romans were supermen who could beat every enemy and everyone else sucks", but even though that is your opinon, you're still wrong.

If you ignore the first 2 to be more "historicly acurrate" the only people who will play are the masochists who play Romanians in WW2 games.

Historical accuracy improves the first two, not lessens them.