So I've probably mentioned this before and maybe it's me being a military buff(and former military), but I get annoyed when media gets really simple details wrong. Wrong Rank that doesn't match a characters uniform, wrong terminology used within the context of the story, etc. Shit you could easily get right by doing cursory research.
So Expeditions: Rome gets one of those, despite trying very hard to get the Roman military stuff correct most of the time. At the end of the first Act, there's a big Finale where you're trying to take down the enemy leader in a fortified city, and lead a multi-pronged ASSAULT against the enemy positions that brings the whole thing up into something like 4 parts. The battle itself is actually quite nicely done(ie one team stages a frontal assault to get the enemy's attention while another team sneaks over the walls and starts destroying the catapults that are zeroed in on bridge the rest of the army has to cross to enter the city) but the thing that annoys me is that it's referred to a SIEGE.
And for those who don't understand what the difference is, while an ASSAULT is an active attempt to take a fortified position(such as a castle or fortress), whereas a SIEGE is basically surrounding said position, cutting off all supply and waiting those inside to either give up or starve. Sieges aren't sexy, they're long and boring for everyone(though the people inside get to enjoy watching their food slowly run out) but it's very safe for the attacker because then they don't risk getting their forces chewed up trying to breach or get over a series of walls, but for some reason media loves to use the term SIEGE when it's actually an ASSAULT.
Also, along a different tack, the game, set around 70 BCE, introduces Greek Fire as an ancient form of incendiary grenade to use on the battlefield, mostly meant to be used against Roman Soldiers(but you can capture some for yourself). Unfortunately, it's about 700 years too early, first having been introduced in the 7th century CE, by the Byzantines(or as they would call themselves, the Romans). So way too early and by the wrong faction to boot. There's fudging the dates and then there's pulling in an invention from a different era entirely(not unlike if Leonardo Da Vinci somehow invented the gatling gun in fiction because he'd done some sketches of a volley fire guns IRL)
Thank you for attending my TED talk.