|
I'm kind of confused as to why you all seem to think the Sassanids are in a weak position. They've held basically the same area for the past 30 years, and the one province that has fallen to rebels was Nicomedia which was held by Arran. And in that time Zoroastrianism has spread throughout the majority of Anatolia. It looks like they are happily consolidating their position after they crushed the ERE, and I really don't see them falling to internal disputes. And with Egypt having been invaded by Axum, and the White Huns seemingly not existing in this alternate universe, there really aren't that many fronts left to destabilize the empire like it was in the real world.
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 02:50 |
|
|
 I kind of like the diversity of cultures in vanilla CK2.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2015 21:25
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Huh, I wonder how the Immortals got that title, and not the king of Persia. Like I didn't even know Holy Orders could win crusades.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2015 23:14
|
|
|
GSD posted:A zoroastrian crusader state is wonderful. That would explain why I had never seen it. I haven't had a computer that could play CK2 since before Rajas of India came out.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2015 23:24
|
|
|
Rejected Fate posted:The Holy Realm of the Immortals is the best thing ever and they are now my favourite realm. Obviously the Sassanids have become stagnant and corrupt, and must be replaced with an immortal Immortal empire.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2015 01:20
|
|
|
Alikchi posted:This is a Good Thing because how is Ofaloaf going to fill 700 years of CK2 with interesting things if we don't lose hard every once in a while? Plus the Christians being weaker can only make the Immortans stronger.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2015 21:49
|
|
|
dublish posted:King Gabriel needs to be wiped off the map for his betrayal of the Arian faith. Don't worry. The Immortans are coming.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
Rejected Fate posted:Welp, better prepare for a Zoroastrian Levantine. I agree. Let's convert to Zoroastrianism. Orthodox is still playing for the losing team.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
willing to settle posted:I wonder about a Zoroastrianism going forward. Wasn't it a fairly elite focused religion? And I wonder how much Muslim peasants and whatnot would actually be really interested in converting to this very Iranian faith. I imagine there would have to be significant reform pressure in the Zoroastrian world (and indeed there were people that did try to reform it in history) to make it more populist. It's rather hard to describe Zoroastrianism in terms of conversion and in how it appeals to converts due to the relationship between the church and state at this time. Persia was an absolute monarchy, and barring a few exceptions, the church's power was tied to how pious the Emperor was. With some Emperors, non-Zoroastrians could face oppression, barring from public office, and potentially death. With others, the Emperor married a Christian and his son was also a Christian. Generally, the Emperor just went with whatever was expedient, and was quite content to play the long game. They would build new cities that would function as economic centers for a region, and then bring in colonists, and build new temples. Then they would just sit back, and wait for the religion/culture to diffuse. In areas like the Caucasus, this led rural communities to begin practicing a variation of Zoroastrianism based on a combination of it with their traditional religions. In this timeline however, the relationship between Islam and the Caliphs threatening from the south is going to give the Zoroastrian church more power as both the church, and the state would be collectively threatened by Muslim invasion/conversion. In the Immortal lands in particular, the state is literally an organization of the church, and I'd expect that there would be little tolerance for non-Zoroastrians.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2015 02:06
|
|
|
dublish posted:It's a sign. Zoroastrianism This victory has placed a Zoroastrian power base on either side of the hated Umayyads. They shall be crushed between the African Azerbaijani hammer and the Persian anvil.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
Lord Cyrahzax posted:The world has been consumed by heathens and heretics! God has abandoned us, His ungrateful and rebellious children! Do we not deserve it? Have we not seen the warnings, the signs?! There is no hope left, no salvation, only the rule of heathen tyrants on earth, and the rule of Satan below. That is all that awaits humanity! That is such druj. Ahura Mazda protects and guides humanity as the light of truth reaches the unbelievers. The heretics spread within the Christian lands merely show the follies of the religion.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2015 21:07
|
|
|
Hitlers Gay Secret posted:Y-you bastard! You tricked us! We voted to blob in France. What did we all think was going to happen?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:
But pagan beliefs are better than the Christian death religion.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2015 00:33
|
|
|
Rodyle posted:The goings on of some foggy nowhere in the north shouldn't be our concern when civilization itself is under assault from Papists and Persians Mesopotamia is where civilization was born. It's hard to consider what the Goths have as civilization when it merely attempts to replicate the collapsed and deceased Roman Empire.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2015 07:54
|
|
|
Raserys posted:Just noticed the huge dent that the Umayyads took out of the Persians. Where are the Immortals when you need them? Given that ruling dynasty has switched, I wouldn't be too surprised if the Umayyeds have been nibbling off rebellious dukes.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2015 23:28
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:It really depends on who does one first I think. I haven't bothered to check the priority for a jihad against Mesopotamia, but if the the Umayyads launch one, which they are likely to win at this point, they might cripple the Persians enough that they won't be able to effectively strike back. I'm not so sure. Defending against foreign infidels is one of the quickest ways to unite a realm together, and the Persians still control most of their best provinces while the Ummayads have lost Egypt. Unless there are massive ongoing rebellions, a Jihad will just make all the vassals support the shahanshah . Plus a great holy war for either Zoroastrianism, or Islam isn't likely to create an amazing amount of additional troops on the part of the attacker. Isn't Islam at this point basically just the Ummayads, and a kingdom in Anatolia? And it's not like Zoroastrianism has any other states beyond the Persian Empire since the Immortals fell. Though a jihad has equal odds of being called against Egypt as it does against Persia, so who knows which way that will go.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2015 00:58
|
|
|
Ikasuhito posted:Holy Rome is best Rome, they just have learned that its better to just to sit back and avoid all the craziness of the clashing blobs. Ctesiphon is the only holy city that anyone actually needs. All these Romes are the work of Angra Mainyu. Also, I'm still holding out hope that all the pagan religions reform for minimal Christian power in EU4.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2015 20:51
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:One thing I haven't been showing much but which drives me to not sympathize with pagans is that the Germanic and Celtic pagans both can raid, and have raided, and all they goddamned do is raid, and holy poo poo I cannot go one month with Karl's Band of Irritating Drunkards gallivanting down the Channel, sacking Rotomagus and then slapping their dicks around Paris. Look, you become France, you get raided by pagans. That's a part of life. If you wanted to be safe from pagan raids, you should have gone south, and converted to Zoroastrianism.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:Charlemagne marched into Saxony and burned down a tree because one too many Norsemen looted Orleans for 40 ducats. Charlemagne doesn't even exist in this universe. The pagan religions will crush the cross!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2015 01:11
|
|
|
ZearothK posted:To me too. Or even better, our blob could get back to it's roots, and join the raiders.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2015 05:37
|
|
|
The Vandadid are the hands of Ahura Mazda. They shall sort out the heathens.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2015 00:16
|
|
|
Luhood posted:My beautiful Slavic Germania, ruined! Curse you Swabia! Mali is also looking like it might have a shot at reforming. At least I think that's Mali?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2015 03:54
|
|
|
oystertoadfish posted:random thought: did constantinople ever fall? i remember the eastern empire had a rough time in the first part of this mega-lp, so maybe it did. have islam or zoroastrianism threatened them like they did in real life in the 7th, 8th, and 9th centuries? following that history would be kind of interesting, although apparently not interesting enough for me to do myself No, it didn't. The Zoroastrians had crushed the ERE, and were on the border of Constantinople. And then over 100 years later, the Muslims spontaneously came into existence, and pushed Iran out of Anatolia back to their starting territory during the time skip.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:It must be done at sword point. Carthago Nova must be purged of its arrogance. Lots of things need to be purged from this Earth. Especially the not-Karlings.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
GSD posted:We need less romes. Who needs Romes when you have Ctesiphons. The Immortals will make everything right again. You'll see.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
And this is why you don't let the player be France.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 02:50 |
|
|
AdventFalls posted:There are worse things for us to be. Like France. I'd say Russia but I don't think there's be an a LP of Eastern Europe yet. We are the French kingdom running the Roman Empire. We are literally the worst thing this game could ever have.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2016 23:59
|
|