|
I think Axum losing Egypt was implicit in Egypt being part of the Caliphate in the option that won the vote  .What has happened south of Egypt in the intervening years has yet to be seen.
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2015 20:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 18:55 |
|
|
dublish posted:Did we? I don't remember that one. I demand a recount. GSD posted:I think Axum losing Egypt was implicit in Egypt being part of the Caliphate in the option that won the vote Maybe Axum/Abyssinia can have more developed holdings and such? The Muslims keep Egypt, but the Axumites still remain as the wealthy and potent kingdom capable of waging war on their northern and eastern neighbours, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
It feels a bit silly that the Sassanids lose the entirety of their gains during the last game due to an invasion from an area that they already controlled.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
Thanatz posted:It feels a bit silly that the Sassanids lose the entirety of their gains during the last game due to an invasion from an area that they already controlled. Technically speaking, this pretty much describes what happened with Alexander and the Macedonians with the old Achemenid empire as well, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2015 22:00
|
|
|
Thanatz posted:It feels a bit silly that the Sassanids lose the entirety of their gains during the last game due to an invasion from an area that they already controlled. i think this is where examples from real history of the sassanids essentially making these same conquests and proving to have overextended themselves factor in. the fact that it occurred much earlier in this game than in real life i think is why the sassanids still exist at all. i think i voted for an umbrella of persian culture extending over the islamic world on account of the factors you mention, but this is what we went with and i guess i'd defend it as no sillier than the rest of this stuff edit: also i've been reading that christianity in asia book mentioned earlier in this thread. the 'church of the east' was very interesting and after the zoroastrians centralized their administration and became more nationalistic (in the book's telling) they suffered some crazy persecutions - but jews and christians were heavily overrepresented in professions like astrology and medicine, and many shahs lent the minority faiths support as a balance against the political power of 'their' religion's leaders. none of the shahs ever converted but the church of the east allowed him a role surprisingly alike to the caesaropapist emperor to the west, with input into church councils and both nomination and veto powers over the appointment of bishops and the patriarch in ctesiphon. nothing to change this scenario really but quite interesting oystertoadfish fucked around with this message at 22:10 on Jul 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2015 22:05
|
|
|
Judging by the picture way back when Ofaloaf ended the TW game, the Sassanids only had a tenuous hold on Anatolia and the Near East, and had stiff competition in the Levant from Axum. I think the scenario Ofaloaf is cooking up seems reasonable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
oystertoadfish posted:i think this is where examples from real history of the sassanids essentially making these same conquests and proving to have overextended themselves factor in. the fact that it occurred much earlier in this game than in real life i think is why the sassanids still exist at all. Eh, it's pretty different from the real life history. This is a war on 2 fronts, rather than 3. There isn't a simultaneous invasion from the khans of the east forcing the Persians to spread their resources thinner. The emperor of Persia also doesn't order the assassination of his best general, leading said general to rebel against the emperor, and causing a massive civil war. During the time Attila takes place, the Sassanids also faced invasions from the white huns and other nomadic tribes from the north and east who actually defeated the empire and forced it to pay tribute for a number of years, which doesn't happen at all in this timeline as the white huns don't exist. You also have the Persians basically just focus on seizing Anatolia, and destroying the power base of the ERE in Syria and Palestine. Which means that their over-extension is going to be significantly less. dublish posted:Judging by the picture way back when Ofaloaf ended the TW game, the Sassanids only had a tenuous hold on Anatolia and the Near East, and had stiff competition in the Levant from Axum. I think the scenario Ofaloaf is cooking up seems reasonable. The sassanids have held the same territory for 30 years, and the only rebellion they faced in Anatolia was a city controlled by their vassal. I mean this is 415.  This is 450.  It looks pretty stable to me. Obviously, the way it's laid out right now is the way we decided, but it does feel a bit clunky.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2015 23:49
|
|
|
Thanatz posted:It looks pretty stable to me. That's because it's Attila TW and that game seems to be terrible at simulating the problems a large empire that isn't the Western Roman Empire would face in expanding that wide. Keeping together such an empire is a balansegang of epic proportions, and we haven't even dealt with Hepthalites or anything like that. Then there are things like different proselytizing religions like Manichaeism and Christians, and now Islam, encroaching and making trouble for Sassanian administration. I think Ofaloaf's scenario is more than fair considering that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
it's definitely a decision not to follow the results of attila literally, that's the crux of the argument here i think. i can't honestly remember what we did with the folks who should've been invading the sassanids from the northeast, i can't really comment on that also i found A Clue re: merdifex' first language Merdifex posted:balansegang
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
So... Merdifex is what? Norwegian? That's not exactly the kind of Slav I was expecting. Considering it isn't.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 23:51
|
|
|
Merdifex posted:That's because it's Attila TW and that game seems to be terrible at simulating the problems a large empire that isn't the Western Roman Empire would face in expanding that wide. Keeping together such an empire is a balansegang of epic proportions, and we haven't even dealt with Hepthalites or anything like that. Then there are things like different proselytizing religions like Manichaeism and Christians, and now Islam, encroaching and making trouble for Sassanian administration. I would disagree. Multiple empires conquered swathes of land on par with the amount that the Sassanids took over the course of the game, in a similar or smaller time periods. The establishment of Persia as an empire happened on a similar timescale, and within 30 years, had expanded to include both Egypt and Anatolia and then held both of the regions for the following 200 years. The biggest destroyer of massive empires tends not to be disorganized revolts so much as power struggles among the ruling classes. In the real timeline, Persia fought on 4 fronts at once, had their best general side with the ERE, and then a massive civil war broke out. For reference, for the 4 years before the Muslims invaded, 10 different people had been crowned and deposed as the rulers of Persia, and the war with the Byzantines had only ended 3 years prior to the Muslim invasion. It just feels a tad bit silly to me that over-extension nearly 200 years prior to the rise of Islam is the cause of the decline of the Sassanid empire to the caliphate in this alt history. Also, Zoroastrianism was a proselytizing religion at the time, and was financed and backed by the state as a means to promote a singular national identity. The degree to which this proselytization occurred shifted radically depending on the zealousness, and power of the individual emperors. Diploid posted:So... Merdifex is what? Norwegian? Maybe his family moved to Norway?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
Let's not speculate Merdifex's life for the sake of slav memes
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2015 06:44
|
|
|
Thanatz posted:I would disagree. Multiple empires conquered swathes of land on par with the amount that the Sassanids took over the course of the game, in a similar or smaller time periods. The establishment of Persia as an empire happened on a similar timescale, and within 30 years, had expanded to include both Egypt and Anatolia and then held both of the regions for the following 200 years. The biggest destroyer of massive empires tends not to be disorganized revolts so much as power struggles among the ruling classes. In the real timeline, Persia fought on 4 fronts at once, had their best general side with the ERE, and then a massive civil war broke out. For reference, for the 4 years before the Muslims invaded, 10 different people had been crowned and deposed as the rulers of Persia, and the war with the Byzantines had only ended 3 years prior to the Muslim invasion. It just feels a tad bit silly to me that over-extension nearly 200 years prior to the rise of Islam is the cause of the decline of the Sassanid empire to the caliphate in this alt history. That's an overtly simplistic take on what can make an empire fall. But the main point I want to make here is that Ofaloaf's scenario is relatively realistic, based on the fact that the Sassanids would have previously faced pressures from within and without, and ultimately lost a huge portion of their territory. I think a few others would agree with me that A: TW does a pretty bad job of emulating the pressures the Sassanids faced historically. I think it would be really difficult to hold on to Anatolia, even if not being pushed back by the Greeks, they were pushed back by the Arabs in this scenario. It seems reasonable to me that the Islamic expansion would be a death blow to Sassanid suzerainty over Mesopotamia and Anatolia. I don't know how they would have defended Persia proper, but that's what people voted for. As for Zoroastrianism, that depends on what you would define "proselytizing religion" to be. But historically, the Persians would rather remove the non-Zoroastrians from their clay, or persecute their religions, stop them from spreading rather than actively try to make more people Zoroastrian.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2015 06:52
|
|
|
Late to the party, but what happened to the remaining bits and bobs of the ERE? Independent Greek states in Achaea or the islands/colonies with dreams of restoring the Roman ways would be nice, perhaps a with a imperial pretender dynasty or two. These would the areas with the least Slavic migration and they can't much care for a Patriarch or Empire under the Slavic thumb. Looking forward to seeing the final scenario.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2015 09:51
|
|
|
Merdifex posted:
Well this universe's Sassanids faced a far lesser amount of threats than ours. Instead of multiple bloody civil-wars, war with the ERE as well as pressure from the north AND THEN an Arab invasion they faced multiple local insurrections (likely a lot less bloody and costly than the civil wars) and presumable pressure from the north still occasionally (although maybe less in this timeline due to turkic migration west). Due to having a lot more of their manpower still available and most of their military intact, when the Arabs came and fought they were only able to push them back to Baghdad. This is a universe where the Sassanids were able to hold onto their power far more effectively. I don't see why it's hard to imagine them keeping Persia proper.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2015 11:58
|
|
|
So what's the ethnic makeup of (former?) Gothia? Is it the Germanic icing on Romano-Gallic cake of OTL, or were the superGoths more resistant to assimilation?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2015 16:36
|
|
|
Raserys posted:Let's not speculate Merdifex's life for the sake of slav memes if i'd remembered we were making him a slav-meme i wouldn't have brought it up, sorry
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
Good news is that it wasn't that hard to get Gothmod at least working with the Horse Lords update. Having it load up and having everything working properly and polished are two different things, though, so I gotta toy with this thing for a little bit before I'm confident it's fit and ready for proper LP playage.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:Good news is that it wasn't that hard to get Gothmod at least working with the Horse Lords update. Having it load up and having everything working properly and polished are two different things, though, so I gotta toy with this thing for a little bit before I'm confident it's fit and ready for proper LP playage. Not to be a pest, but how's progress on this so far?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 01:32
|
|
|
The new expansion is probably taking some time to learn how to mod correctly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 04:40
|
|
|
Fox Ironic posted:Not to be a pest, but how's progress on this so far? Ofa is pretty far along, he just has southern India, Abyssinia, and some counts to finish up. At least when it comes to the title history.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 04:43
|
|
|
Fox Ironic posted:Not to be a pest, but how's progress on this so far? I think it's all a matter of adding titles for Quebec, Old Great Bulgaria, People's Republic of Bulgaria etc.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 11:33
|
|
|
Mr.Morgenstern posted:Ofa is pretty far along, he just has southern India, Abyssinia, and some counts to finish up. At least when it comes to the title history. Yeah removing all of India is gonna be the hardest part, but I think the speed increase will be worth it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 15:06
|
|
|
THE LESBIATHAN posted:Yeah removing all of India is gonna be the hardest part, but I think the speed increase will be worth it. That was supposed to be a secret, THE LESBIATHAN.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
Mr.Morgenstern posted:That was supposed to be a secret, THE LESBIATHAN. You know, I don't know which of one you to believe and as a result have no idea whether India will be making it in or not, which I'm guessing is intentional. Well played 
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 20:24
|
|
|
India is actually an archipelago in this timeline.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
India and Scandinavia have swapped places in this timeline.Fox Ironic posted:Not to be a pest, but how's progress on this so far?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 21:31
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:India and Scandinavia have swapped places in this timeline. Uh excuse me? I'm an expert in history and I can tell you right away this is not on. India is in India's place for a reason, it was historically in Asia which is why Alexander the Great went there. You really have problems if it's suddenly north, the jungle environment is not good. And there would be an influence on the Attila segment. No bones about it this is a dumb move.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
Polar elephants though
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 22:12
|
|
|
Hitlers Gay Secret posted:Polar elephants though I think those are technically called 'mammoths'.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:I think those are technically called 'mammoths'. Don't be silly, those died out centuries ago. it's not that my internet died right after I made that post and couldn't edit it in time nosire
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 22:16
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:India and Scandinavia have swapped places in this timeline. You should. If one of the pagans reforms their religion currently, it can really mess them up. They'll also probably address the mongols not invading anything after they've shown up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 03:00
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:Pretty nearly done with titles histories, got the most pertinent events crunched out, and I (and some helpful goons!) have been obsessively running observer games of the mod every night since I started working on it, so I'm pretty confident it won't run into a persistent CTD a century into the game. Mostly at this point I'm just wondering if I should wait for the current beta patch to become a proper patch before starting or what. Any screenshots of the world you can share? TTBF posted:You should. If one of the pagans reforms their religion currently, it can really mess them up. They'll also probably address the mongols not invading anything after they've shown up. Will they adjust how easy it is for nomads to pillage and destroy holdings? Merdifex fucked around with this message at 05:12 on Jul 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 03:16
|
|
|
Merdifex posted:Will they adjust how easy it is for nomads to pillage and destroy holdings?
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 05:19
|
|
|
TTBF posted:So it does take twice as long to burn a holding to the ground. The patch went live and it makes it take four times as long - the amount of damage, gold and tech points is halved, and the cooldown is doubled.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 11:37
|
|
|
Any word on Gothmod?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2015 21:48
|
|
|
Here we go! Chapter 16: Early Medieval Gothia The World in 769 The land of the Goths in the 8th century was a conflict-ridden land. The Amalings had led the Ostrogoths into Roman Gaul in the 5th century after briefly rampaging across Italy, then conquered much of the region and settled the Goths in as the new lords of the land while the Roman Empire burned elsewhere. Centuries on from their initial triumphs, the Amaling dynasty grip on power slipped. The direct line of Amaling rulers descended from old King Vithericus broke, and the son of an Amaling noblewoman and local Gothic magnate had seized the Gothic throne in Lugdunum.  Not all agreed with the end of Amalingian rule, however. Some northern rulers in Belgica had rallied around a distant relative of the Amaling kings as their liege, in opposition to the new dynasty in power in Gothia. To the west of Gothia, meanwhile, another nobleman had taken advantage of the fragmenting Gothic realm to proclaim himself King of Aquitania, separate and independent from Gothia proper. Where there was once one united Gothia, there were now three separate realms.   These Gothic kingdoms weren't the only inhabitants of Gallia, either. To Gothia's northwest, a Norse adventurer had seized much of Armorica, turning it into some sort of Northman's-land, a Normannia. To the south, the descendants of old Gallo-Roman aristocracy still reigned supreme. The Kingdom of Septimania dominated these lands, but petty rulers in Tolosa and Arvernia had thus far remained independent of the court in Narbo.   Gaul's neighbors to the southwest and southeast were both Rome, of a sort. To the southwest lay the Carthagennan Empire, the remains of the old Western Roman Empire, ejected from Italy itself. They had first kept their court as close to Italy as possible, in the Sardinian town of Caralis, but later emperors moved the imperial court to the Iberian port town of Carthago Nova. To the southeast lay the Holy Roman Empire, where the Bishop of Rome, hailed as Emperor by the remains of the Senate of Rome, ruled most of the Italian Peninsula.   Between Gothia and the two Romes lay three different Christian faiths. The Goths had been converted to Christianity in the late 4th century by Ulfilas, an Arian priest, and so the Goths had taken their Arian form of Christianity with them on their migrations, and introduced it to the populace in Gaul. The Bishop of Rome, hailed as the Pope by his followers, was the head of the Catholic strain of Christianity, which held the Pope to be both the supreme spiritual authority and secular leader of Christians. The Carthagennan Empire and other Roman(-tic) realms followed a form of Christianity theologically based upon the 4th-century Nicene Creed and the influence of Roman state authorities. This Roman orthodoxy, this Orthodox faith, was fairly widespread across the Mediterranean, outside of Italy and the heretical Orthodox-derived Donatist realms of North Africa.  Aside from the Carthagennans, the other great Orthodox power, and indeed the other great Roman realm, was the Byzantine Empire, the remains of the old Eastern Roman Empire. The Byzantines had lost much land to Arab and Persian invasions, and their sense of loss was compounded when Slavic foederati succeeded in seizing the imperial throne for themselves, leading to the peculiar situation of a self-proclaimed Roman Empire in the east that was neither actually Roman nor really an empire.  To Gothia's east and the Byzantines' north lay the realms of Attila the Hun's successors. Although the Huns themselves had not survived into the 8th century, many of their old tributaries and vassals lived on, and had settled in across much of Central and Eastern Europe. The Alans proper reigned along the banks of the Vistula River, and Sarmatians still rode across lands west of the Volga. Pressed west by these Huns' successors, some Slavs had migrated further into Germany, settling in former Saxon lands. A notably adventurous Slav, one 'Kirur' of the Wends, even went north into the territories of the Danes and made himself a lord in those lands.   Britain, to Gothia's immediate north, was in anarchy. Romanized Britons had initially managed to unify the British Isles by force of arms, but their forays into Gaul had been defeated by the Goths, and then they, in turn, were subjected to Gothic Arian missionaries spreading the Word of God in their homelands. Fractured by religion, with Pictish and Irish peoples still eager to cast off their Brythonic conquerers, Britain eventually exploded.  In the midst of this tumultuous world was King Thiudareiks II Triarius of Gothia. The result of a tryst between the Duke of Divio's brother and the daughter of the Amalingian King Mundus, the bastard-born Goth was legitimized by his father shortly after his birth. Upon the death of the childless King Sigisvult, Thiudareiks was pushed by his family as the best candidate for the Gothic throne, and succeeded in winning the support of noblemen present at the court in Lugdunum.  Crowned in late 768, Thiudareiks' first concern was securing the House of Triarius' newfound hold on the throne of Gothia. For that, he needed a legitimate heir, and for that, he needed a wife, and with that, Thiudareiks had the first minor political crisis of his reign. Arianism, while popular amongst the Gothic nobility, was not widespread outside of Gothia and southern Britain. The only eligible Arian princesses for marriage were the king's own cousins- and while such marriages were not unheard of, they were not approved of in the same way they were in Zoroastrian realms in the east. To gain a suitable wife, Thiudareiks had to marry outside the Arian Christian faith.  Ultimately, geopolitics played the pivotal role in the Gothic king's decision. Orthodox Septimania lay directly south of Lugdunum, and being so close to the capital, could easily serve either as a dear ally or deadly foe of Gothia. Envoys of King Thiudareiks approached the Gallo-Roman ruler of Septimania, Maximianus Druentanus (also known, in the vulgar Gallic tongue that was beginning to distinguish itself at this time, as Maximiien Druentane), to see if he would let his youngest daughter, Sofia, be Thiudareiks' bride.    After a period of consideration, Maximiien agreed, and with that, King Thiudareiks won a wife, won an alliance, and won a strong beginning to the House of Triarius' reign. 
Ofaloaf fucked around with this message at 09:00 on Apr 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2015 02:10
|
|
|
The Byzantines still aren't as absurd as the (real) Holy Roman Empire, which was neither Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire At least they were actually East of Rome, making one part of their name correct.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2015 02:21
|
|
|
Off to a wonderful start. Will you be posting a link to this mod? I really want to try out this scenario.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2015 02:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 18:55 |
|
|
The big blue blob is dead. Long live the big green blob!
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2015 02:25
|
|
