Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Who wants Rome 2?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Show only dev responses
pirro said:
A mechanic that makes no sense, as I have already said. But hey, if you want to put modern concepts, I want Dinosaurs. Shooting lazers. And giant lizards. It'd be called Dinosaurs vs Giant Lizard along with fantasy greece :p
Too bad the athenian democracy wasn't nothing like what it is said :p Really, it wasn't even a democracy when they didn't care about who voted or not, it was an oligarchy- A democratic one, if you want, but I'm from that school that thinks that Greece is so full of myth, BS and, overall, is overrated, that thinks that it wasn't that good and that we should take another look on it.
Click to expand...

What's wrong with that gameplay mechanic? It works just fine in Europa Universalis IV and it could be easily used to portray for example Greek leagues. I would like to have more serious and elaborate answer about the cons of that mechanic than attempt to turn this whole discussion to joke about dinosaurs and lasers.

And BTW I'm familiar with Ancient Greek political systems and their development during the centuries, so I don't know what you hope to achieve by telling me that Athenian political system had occasional oligarchic tendencies, besides underlining the fact that you don't like Greece.
 
pjnlsn said:
Perhaps the Greek culture and political systems are 'overrated' but they're a lot more unique than anything else at the time, and unique and inventive enough that they ultimately were spread across continents, by various means.

And athens was a Democracy (most of the time), in fact it was more of a democracy than most states today are. That's to say, it was, except during those periods where it's nature subverted itself, a Democracy without safeguards against, say, effective rule by an oligarchy. But a Democracy it was and there were precious few of those at the time.
Click to expand...
They were not unique, they were a civilization (not even that, because a etolian had nothing to do with a corinthian, for example) with their characteristics as everysingle culture.
Also, the phoenicians spread even more, but they were hated by the romans. Had the roman hated the greeks...
Their literature, their religion? Barely original. Most of it are copies of better sumerian works or a direct copy from the luwian mythology.
Ok, then the roman republic was da best republic eva, although it's barely considered a democracy :rolleyes: They were not always ruled by an olygarchy, after all.
And you know what does "demokratia" mean in greek? Yeah, demagogy. Why? Because letting those morons from the farms and such rule was awful. And this came not only from a Makedonian, but also from whoever Pseudo-Xenofons (I'm not writting that made up english name) was, most likely an athenian.
it is so awesome to think that Athens was a democracy, but it wasn't. Twas an oligarchic republic
 
Olaus Petrus said:
What's wrong with that gameplay mechanic? It works just fine in Europa Universalis IV and it could be easily used to portray for example Greek leagues. I would like to have more serious and elaborate answer about the cons of that mechanic than attempt to turn this whole discussion to joke about dinosaurs and lasers.

And BTW I'm familiar with Ancient Greek political systems and their development during the centuries, so I don't know what you hope to achieve by telling me that Athenian political system had occasional oligarchic tendencies, besides underlining the fact that you don't like Greece.
Click to expand...
That it makes no sense during greek times.
I actually like the hellenistic times. I'm bored of that "Spartan cool guys, Athen is the best" that still lives in the colleges and popular belives
 
pirro said:
That it makes no sense during greek times.
I actually like the hellenistic times. I'm bored of that "Spartan cool guys, Athen is the best" that still lives in the colleges and popular belives
Click to expand...

How coalitions work in Europa Universalis IV is in my opinion much more realistic way to portray how many ancient defensive alliances worked, than cascading alliances mechanism of Europa Universalis: Rome or EUIII. What in your opinion makes the mechanic unsuitable to ancient times?
 
Olaus Petrus said:
How coalitions work in Europa Universalis IV is in my opinion much more realistic way to portray how many ancient defensive alliances worked, than cascading alliances mechanism of Europa Universalis: Rome or EUIII. What in your opinion makes the mechanic unsuitable to ancient times?
Click to expand...
Like we say in spanish "No mientes a la bicha" :wacko: Cascading alliances was the worst idea ever.
During acient times people didn't care about other people. Before the battle of Salamina, the peloponese cities didn't want to fight and the coalition even dissapeared when Athen was occupied. Why would they fight for people that can't help them? They thought it was a better idea to fortify in the istmus of Corinthus. That can't be done with the coalition system.
Also, the coalition didn't form because of Persia, but because some cities joined Persia and their enemies took the chance to destroy them. For example, if Corfu was destroyed, then the Corinthians would leave the alliance. Their only goal was to destroy their fiercest enemy. Another example, the boeotians were glad Athens was burned down. They didn't care if then Sparta and Corinth were burdned down too, they survived their vile enemies!
Leagues could be represented by the coalitions mechanic. And I doubt it because (technically) the leader was chosen.
 
pirro said:
Really, it wasn't even a democracy when they didn't care about who voted or not, it was an oligarchy- A democratic one, if you want, but I'm from that school that thinks that Greece is so full of myth, BS and, overall, is overrated, that thinks that it wasn't that good and that we should take another look on it.
Click to expand...

someone here doesn't know what he's talking about and should better stop making factless statements :)
 
pirro said:
They were not unique, they were a civilization (not even that, because a etolian had nothing to do with a corinthian, for example) with their characteristics as everysingle culture.
Also, the phoenicians spread even more, but they were hated by the romans. Had the roman hated the greeks...
Their literature, their religion? Barely original. Most of it are copies of better sumerian works or a direct copy from the luwian mythology.
Ok, then the roman republic was da best republic eva, although it's barely considered a democracy :rolleyes: They were not always ruled by an olygarchy, after all.
And you know what does "demokratia" mean in greek? Yeah, demagogy. Why? Because letting those morons from the farms and such rule was awful. And this came not only from a Makedonian, but also from whoever Pseudo-Xenofons (I'm not writting that made up english name) was, most likely an athenian.
it is so awesome to think that Athens was a democracy, but it wasn't. Twas an oligarchic republic
Click to expand...

I wasn't just referring to Greek colonization, but to the spreading of their culture, first explicitly by Alexander the Great and then in a slightly diluted form by the Roman Empire.

But i'm pretty sure that the Greek city states had a large collection of unique political systems, as well as a very unique culture. Indeed, for a very long time, Greece in general was the intellectual center of Europe and the near east. Many important accomplishments in Mathematics, Architecture, Philosophy and Art came from Greece.

And yes, Athens was definitely a Democracy, however one feels about those. I will say that it is true that there are some downsides to letting the common people vote if the common people are uneducated and very poor. Still, a Democracy (most of the time).
 
pirro said:
Like we say in spanish "No mientes a la bicha" :wacko: Cascading alliances was the worst idea ever.
During acient times people didn't care about other people. Before the battle of Salamina, the peloponese cities didn't want to fight and the coalition even dissapeared when Athen was occupied. Why would they fight for people that can't help them? They thought it was a better idea to fortify in the istmus of Corinthus. That can't be done with the coalition system.
Also, the coalition didn't form because of Persia, but because some cities joined Persia and their enemies took the chance to destroy them. For example, if Corfu was destroyed, then the Corinthians would leave the alliance. Their only goal was to destroy their fiercest enemy. Another example, the boeotians were glad Athens was burned down. They didn't care if then Sparta and Corinth were burdned down too, they survived their vile enemies!
Leagues could be represented by the coalitions mechanic. And I doubt it because (technically) the leader was chosen.
Click to expand...

There's nothing in the coalition mechanics per se which wouldn't work. If you want people betraying the coalitions then just look how it's done in MotE, there you can join to coalition and betray it the first chance you get and dishonor the call of arms. The best aspect with the mechanic is that it can unite states which are hostile with each other against the common enemy.

diegosimeone said:
someone here doesn't know what he's talking about and should better stop making factless statements :)
Click to expand...

Well, Athenian state had occasional tendencies towards more oligarchic form of goverment, like the coup of the four hundred. Other than that I think he is using oligarchy as synonym to timocracy.
 
pjnlsn said:
But i'm pretty sure that the Greek city states had a large collection of unique political systems, as well as a very unique culture. Indeed, for a very long time, Greece in general was the intellectual center of Europe and the near east. Many important accomplishments in Mathematics, Architecture, Philosophy and Art came from Greece.

And yes, Athens was definitely a Democracy, however one feels about those. I will say that it is true that there are some downsides to letting the common people vote if the common people are uneducated and very poor. Still, a Democracy (most of the time).
Click to expand...
Nope, maths and such were mostly oriental, not greek. Architecture... that's taste, I don't really like classical architecture, and tecnichally the minoan architecture was more advanced... (and I prefer it)
We want it to be a democracy, and ofc during some little periods it was (and not really in a strict sense, there is hardly anyone from the common people in an important charge but during a few years during the V century, and even then it is almost impossible), but most of the time it was controlled by a few families and rich people or there was a tyrant imposed by the Antigonids, by Lysimachus, by Pontus...
 
Olaus Petrus said:
There's nothing in the coalition mechanics per se which wouldn't work. If you want people betraying the coalitions then just look how it's done in MotE, there you can join to coalition and betray it the first chance you get and dishonor the call of arms. The best aspect with the mechanic is that it can unite states which are hostile with each other against the common enemy.



Well, Athenian state had occasional tendencies towards more oligarchic form of goverment, like the coup of the four hundred. Other than that I think he is using oligarchy as synonym to timocracy.
Click to expand...
I've never played MotE. But can you just leave it if you feel like it, even if you are at war?
Timocracy as in "goverment of the most valued/ with the best reputation?
What I meant is that most of the times, when not always, the archontes and such were nobles and the common people had 0 power.
 
pirro said:
I've never played MotE. But can you just leave it if you feel like it, even if you are at war?
Timocracy as in "goverment of the most valued/ with the best reputation?
What I meant is that most of the times, when not always, the archontes and such were nobles and the common people had 0 power.
Click to expand...

In MotE as long as you're not someone's satellite you can make separate peace with your enemy.

Timokratia as dedined by Solon in his code of laws, where society is divided to four classes: Pentakosiomedimnoi, Hippeis, Zeugitai and Thetes, and where wealthier social classes have more rights than the lower ones.
 
Olaus Petrus said:
In MotE as long as you're not someone's satellite you can make separate peace with your enemy.

Timokratia as dedined by Solon in his code of laws, where society is divided to four classes: Pentakosiomedimnoi, Hippeis, Zeugitai and Thetes, and where wealthier social classes have more rights than the lower ones.
Click to expand...
Oh, ok. "timao" is "to consider good" if my greek classes served me for something and I couldn't associate it with Solon. My bad. But yeah, I meant that.
OT. I find english transcrptions rather funny. Most of the time they make up words and letters :p
 
pirro said:
They were not unique, they were a civilization (not even that, because a etolian had nothing to do with a corinthian, for example) with their characteristics as everysingle culture.
Also, the phoenicians spread even more, but they were hated by the romans. Had the roman hated the greeks...
Their literature, their religion? Barely original. Most of it are copies of better sumerian works or a direct copy from the luwian mythology.
Click to expand...

The Greeks you mean? What makes Sumerian literature "better" than Greek?

Regarding Luwian, etc I really don't see how shared themes and forumulae among various Indo-European mythologies somehow makes one any the worse than another.
Ok, then the roman republic was da best republic eva, although it's barely considered a democracy They were not always ruled by an olygarchy, after all.
And you know what does "demokratia" mean in greek? Yeah, demagogy. Why? Because letting those morons from the farms and such rule was awful. And this came not only from a Makedonian, but also from whoever Pseudo-Xenofons (I'm not writting that made up english name) was, most likely an athenian.
it is so awesome to think that Athens was a democracy, but it wasn't. Twas an oligarchic republic
Click to expand...

I personally don't care how states of the time compare to contemporary ones, nor do I have any inclination to "fault" them for not adhering to some modern political perspective, though I think you'd have a hard time arguing that self-described democrats and/or republicans of the day were somehow not democrats and republicans on the basis that they were not "sufficiently democratic enough". What could democracy have been at the time apart from a system run and/or advocated by its proponents?
 
Cliges said:
The Greeks you mean? What makes Sumerian literature "better" than Greek?

Regarding Luwian, etc I really don't see how shared themes and forumulae among various Indo-European mythologies somehow makes one any the worse than another.
Click to expand...
It was, at least, more original. It's nopt better per se, they didn't have famous writers, but it was pure in some sense. The greek literature, specially the novel, ahd nothing original.
Again, I didn't say that their mythologhy was worst, but it wasn't unique and faboulous and overall, better.
Than a democracy is suppoused to allow everyone to participate in the voting and in the ruling
 
pirro said:
It was, at least, more original. It's nopt better per se, they didn't have famous writers, but it was pure in some sense. The greek literature, specially the novel, ahd nothing original.
Again, I didn't say that their mythologhy was worst, but it wasn't unique and faboulous and overall, better.
Than a democracy is suppoused to allow everyone to participate in the voting and in the ruling
Click to expand...

You got so many things wrong it's not even worth to reply to you man. Do a proper research on what you're arguing about before saying all these things.

Start from the part where Greek language is not original. The fact that you can trace EVERY Greek word to an initial root word and that ALL words are connected numerically and words of the same source/element are related with eachother is something that doesn't exist in any other language in the world. And that my friend, is original and unique.
 
diegosimeone said:
You got so many things wrong it's not even worth to reply to you man. Do a proper research on what you're arguing about before saying all these things.

Start from the part where Greek language is not original. The fact that you can trace EVERY Greek word to an initial root word and that ALL words are connected numerically and words of the same source/element are related with eachother is something that doesn't exist in any other language in the world. And that my friend, is original and unique.
Click to expand...
LoL. How can you get the original root from a indoeuropean word when we don't know how it was?
How can you make such an statement when we don't even know if we know every single word from every greek dialect?
How can you still, in the XXI century, defend that the greek language is pure? :rofl:
What is that numerical thing? I've never come across such a thing in my years of classical studies (I went for latin, but still I had to study greekm which I loved, btw)
1st, we don't know every single ancient greek dialect
2nd, the byzantine greek is full of latin words.
3rd the nowdays greek is more related to the byzantine greek than to epirote or corinthian or boiotian greek.
Anyway, this is OT, open a thread in the history forum and I'll move there.
 
pirro said:
It was, at least, more original. It's nopt better per se, they didn't have famous writers, but it was pure in some sense. The greek literature, specially the novel, ahd nothing original.
Again, I didn't say that their mythologhy was worst, but it wasn't unique and faboulous and overall, better.
Than a democracy is suppoused to allow everyone to participate in the voting and in the ruling
Click to expand...

I think that one would have to consider that Greek drama, philosophy, etc would be be considered unique and fairly original examples of literature vis-à-vis the rest ancient world. Any language has its own sounds, versification, and so on that lend it its own character. Now, somehow there has been a recent mania for Persia-I guess on the basis of something having to do with a lack of slavery (?), but I never understood how praising this or that society means having to denigrate others. Maybe even some people prefer the Mesopotamian epics to Greek poetry or even the Persian system of government; and I'd have to leave that as mostly a matter of individual preference. But I would have hardly ever thought that Classical (or earlier) Greece would need special pleading in terms of being considered worthy and notable as a culture of some merit!
 
pirro said:
LoL. How can you get the original root from a indoeuropean word when we don't know how it was?
How can you make such an statement when we don't even know if we know every single word from every greek dialect?
How can you still, in the XXI century, defend that the greek language is pure? :rofl:
What is that numerical thing? I've never come across such a thing in my years of classical studies (I went for latin, but still I had to study greekm which I loved, btw)
1st, we don't know every single ancient greek dialect
2nd, the byzantine greek is full of latin words.
3rd the nowdays greek is more related to the byzantine greek than to epirote or corinthian or boiotian greek.
Anyway, this is OT, open a thread in the history forum and I'll move there.
Click to expand...

i give up... can't save everyone.

When did I talk about the modern Greek language?
 
Cliges said:
I think that one would have to consider that Greek drama, philosophy, etc would be be considered unique and fairly original examples of literature vis-à-vis the rest ancient world. Any language has its own sounds, versification, and so on that lend it its own character. Now, somehow there has been a recent mania for Persia-I guess on the basis of something having to do with a lack of slavery (?), but I never understood how praising this or that society means having to denigrate others. Maybe even some people prefer the Mesopotamian epics to Greek poetry or even the Persian system of government; and I'd have to leave that as mostly a matter of individual preference. But I would have hardly ever thought that Classical (or earlier) Greece would need special pleading in terms of being considered worthy and notable as a culture of some merit!
Click to expand...
I'm better, I don't praise any civilization :p My knowledge on Persia is about zero and I'm not really interested on it.
The greek philosophy was good, but useless. Nobody cared about philosophy but some bored elites. Had it its merit? Yeah, sure, but it wasn't the Gretatest thing in the universe ever. Alexander couldn't be more uninterested on the theories of his tutor, for example. And the people of Athens didn't care about what Socrates, Plato or Gorgias was saying at the time.
The literature? It was good, but it was not the best and that's objetive. I love Loukianos of Samosata, but I hate Plato and Herodotus (he was a joke of a historian, he's as reliable as a monkey with a gun). Most of their themes were not original from their culture but were common in the indoeuropean world and, specially the hellenistic literature, had a great influx of persian, mesopotamian and even indian influence.
 
diegosimeone said:
i give up... can't save everyone.

When did I talk about the modern Greek language?
Click to expand...
I've talked about "classical" greek. Are you a genious and now you know every ancient greek dialect?
Go publish such a dictionary, for there is none with dorian words, for example.
But yeah, your supremacist (and kinda nationalist) arguments are better.
Also, are you seriously arguing that classical greek is not an indoeuropean language?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back