Personally, I am against it. Opinions and sources will invariably diverge in some points. The way I see it, too many people participating in the decision-making only slow things down. If its up to me, the decisions will be made by me and the team. After the beta release, feedback from the public will be most welcome. After all, that's the purpose of betas
Thank you very much for your insight and images. I made the research and provided the references for the Ragusa model, which was then brilliantly made by Miszel. I used a miniature I have of present day Dubrovnik, plus images I researched all around the internet, including the two in your post (Bernard von Breydenbach, Peregrinatio in terram sanctam, 1485; and View of Dubrovnik. Konrad von Grünenberg, Pilgerreise von Konstanz nach Jerusalem, 1486). Hrobatos, a very competent historian of our team (and who is also a Croatian) provided some more insight of what parts should not be in our timeframe, such as the short, thick outer walls added some centuries later for protection against cannon fire. He agreed with the model concept. These are some other pictures we used:
Ideogram of Dubrovnik. Jacopo Filippo from Bergamo, Supplementumchronicarum, 1490
Drawing of the model of Dubrovnik on the St. Blaisesculpture dated mid-15th century, Wendelin Boeheim
(Dubrovnik painting, for reference of city organization and layout pre-1667 earthquake)
That being said, my point is that there was a lot of research put into it and I stand by that model. While the merlons would indeed be accurate, the strat models are not supposed to be extremelly detailed and I think it looks excelent already.