Quote Originally Posted by Grifman
Yes, it's functional for the most part, not looks.



By something other than gameplay, that's obvious.

Fact of the matter is, we already have three Hellenistic empires - the Macedonians, Greeks, and Seluecids. I assumed CA felt like that was enough. Hence they took the Ptolemies and made them classical Egyptian. Is it historical, no. Does it add variety? Yes.



No, what's makes you say that? Gameplay is how you play the game that makes it fun. And whether you have historically accurate Ptolemaic units has nothing to do with gameplay.



Not unless you're creating strawmen for yourself to knock down. And we know how easy that is :)



I believe the term is "dumbed down" not "dumped down". CA is making a "game" not a true "historical simulation". They've taken some liberties for the sake of gameplay, fun, variety, etc. You may not agree with them on everything - heck, I don't. But I'm not going to run them down either. The game is reasonably historical, and it's definitely fun. I'm not going to get all pedantic on them about their portrayal of a couple of factions. YMMV.

So I guess that the ignorant dominant fantasy is coming first after comes "gameplay" and historical accuracy last...

Hellenes