I may have missed a few things, but I think the article looks much more professional now. Update: I worked on eliminating references to the reader whenever possible and cleaning up elements of grammar and punctuation. It'll need lots of overhauling, so it'll have to be done incrementally and as such, please do not use that kind of tense or "first-person"-like tones. Someone fix this by not hindering the information but presenting it in a clear and crisp, professional manner, not some kind of casual forum speak. As a result there is a great deal more strategy involved as you expand your empire across the campaign map."Īnd this is only by glancing at the article. Castles will require less management than cities but as the game develops cities will become more important, but redeveloping castles will be costly so the transition will need to be carefully managed. On the other hand, you’ll have the money to buy off your opponents. Build lots of cities and you’ll have to rely on dubious militias or mercenaries to protect your lands. Build lots of castles, and your armies will be extremely potent. To put it simply castles emphasize the military, and cities the economic. They both offer advantages and it’s a question of balancing the use of your settlements to suit such factors as map location, proximity to possible enemy factions and whether the player adopts a militaristic or economic approach to expansion. "Medieval 2 introduces the option for players to develop their settlements either as a city or as castle. There are some points in this article that uses "you'll" and "we've". It's supposed to sound like a database, an encyclopedia, not a novel. This article, I believe, suffers from a bad case of tenses and points-of-views. DarthBinky 23:04, 20 November 2006 (UTC) Incorrect References to the Reader in General I also respectfully think that if you are going to claim it was an "in-joke" to include him and that this makes him different from other figures, you should provide a reference for that. Here is the MOS to which I am referring: WP:TRIV.
Note that the Manual of Style says that Trivia sections are to be avoided- so other "trivia" bits should be integrated into the article, not listed in a separate "trivia" section. This instinguishes(sp?) him from the historical generals found with other factions, such William the Conqueror for England.- Nachlader 18:10, 20 November 2006 (UTC) I relabeled that section as "Historical Figures" for now. El Cid was a mercenary to Muslim and Christian countries (thanks to his Castilian exile) after 1080 and is therefore not a general for Spain. Someone whith knowledge of this game care to clean it up?ĭoes that realy deserve Trivia? Plenty of other historical faces are in the game.ħ0.59.74.196 01:28, 20 November 2006 (UTC) El Cid was also in MTW1 as a rebel character and it is a bit of a 'in-joke' to have CA put him the sequel.
Cooperp1 19:38, 5 September 2007 (UTC) the strongest faction: opinions(open to all)Ĭompletely POV. Gh0ti-2 22:08, 7 August 2007 (UTC) I believe it is official, since the former total war games had a indication of the difficulty given in the description of the faction :) Mallerd 16:42, 12 August 2007 (UTC) Did they carry through this however to Medieval 2? I don't think I've seen it written anywhere whilst playing the game.
48 1.2 patch does NOT fix aging based on timescaleĪre the difficulty ratings given in the section on Factions official or just somebody's opinion? If it's the former, then a footnote would be handy, if not then it really shouldn't be there.43 Fair use rationale for Image:Medieval2 cover.jpg.
25 Stop abusing historical inaccuracies.24 Compromise on the Peter Englund comments.22 Swedish historian Peter Englund's review.21 Add "original research" tag to the "Historical inaccuracies" section.4 Incorrect References to the Reader in General.2 the strongest faction: opinions(open to all).