Inspired by the Roman skin thread's discussion on accuracy, I thought I would go ahead and ask this. Why are there no onagers or balistae in EB? I and Malrubius talked about this to a small degree. I mean, the Romans DID have onagers and balistae during the period of the late republic and early empire. If this only reason that EB cuts these out, wouldn't it be more historical to add them after one of the reforms? That is what we have the reforms for, to update the Roman war machine, right?
And even if you are dead set against onagers, the Greeks developed the catapult around 400 B.C. The onager in vanila is more like a catapult than a onager. Wouldn't it be more accurate to simply rename the dang thing and have it be more historical? It's not like a big machine that throws rocks or large arrows is unhistorical or beyond the scope of antiquity, weither it be a onager, catapult, helopolis, or balista or any number of other war machines.





Reply With Quote





