To heck with "artistic freedom". How many players are going to spend how much time poring through those rules pages wondering "why the heck are these buildings a different colour to those buildings"? (And make no mistake, we're not talking a "subtle shading difference" here.) What a mind-bogglingly stupid idea (whoever's idea it was). If you're going to do idiotic things like that then FFS explain your idiocy to the people who are buying the module. For stupidity it's right up there with "let's not include overlays so people can't play the scenarios that require those overlays"* and "let's give some counters special-coloured IDs and not explain why". I love the CdG2 package overall but honestly MMP must have collectively been drunk or high during some important planning meetings for this one. Proof-readers might have to take some of the blame, too, for apparently not asking what are clearly very obvious questions (unless the questions were asked and they were ignored).
* [which of course is combined with the Tapio-worthy idea of "they're essential, so we'll charge extra for them -- and here's the best bit -- we don't even know when we'll bother to make them available"]
Bruce, sticking up for MMP on the map piece here. They pored over that map and had Nadir make many changes. That one wasn't changed because we all thought it obvious they couldn't possibly be anything else. Literally dozens of people looked at those maps in both playtest form and now. You are the only one to mention it. The only one since people have been receiving it over the past month and a half or so.
Now because I wanted to be fair about this. I went back to the original playtest version and all the wooden buildings are indeed one color. So I suspect those buildings were missed when switching over to the new shading. That they were not changed was either missed or noted as not being noteworthy. No more, no less. MMP may decide it merits errata, but it does not merit charges of stupidity by a long shot. It is not any different than any other piece of errata in that sense.
I'll inform MMP in the event they are not following this conversation and if they think an errata should be added, I'm sure they will put one out.
As for the overlays, not involved in the decision cycle on that, so nothing to add or subtract there. I get why people are pissed on that point, and I
suspect it may have had to do with bumping the price even higher, but I am merely speculating.
Edited by moderator to replace profanity in quoted text.