Quote Originally Posted by Orda Khan
Ah yes, quotes can be very misrepresentative when only part of the whole quote is used.
The second quote used is part of my reply to Historical Accuracy, which is a far cry from the discussion about SPAM armies and more realistic/believable.
Feel free to bend my words any way you want

.....Orda
More realistic/believable?
What constitutes realism if we disregard the authority and authenticity of Historical sources and state that historical accuracy is an utopia thus justifying the promotion and preaching of FALSE misconceptions that diminish and insult the intelligence (or whats left of that) of the audience?
If historical accuracy is impossible due to alleged ambiguity and non creditability of sources then there is NO ground to challenge the so called "SPAM" armies since the evidence at hand is not credible or reliable.
Meaning that, as I said before, an army of Onagers, Urban Cohorts and Praetorian Cavalry has full "realism" backup since there are NO reliable sources to show that this army is product of someones imagination.
But if one accepts the Historical FACTS as preserved today and tries to align the online gameplay to represent the picture that we have in hard evidence and sources about the warfare at that period IMO a decent level of enjoyment/education/and development of tactical thought will be achieved.

Hellenes