The what?
Who I feel is in a pretty permanent alliance with you, atleast for the remainder of CK.
Children of the Fatherland: MP conversion game
- Thread starter King of Men
- Start date
-
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.
The what?
Who I feel is in a pretty permanent alliance with you, atleast for the remainder of CK.
Denmarks surprise naval attack on Alexandria led by one King Waldemar during the Crusade Gangbang 'round session 20, at a distance of about 4000 miles it was from roughly the same distance as the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour.
I is forever traumatized.
Never trust KoM! Never trust KoM! He plots against everyone! Even as we speak he is plotting against Persia! I've seen things.
[video=youtube;ZTzA_xesrL8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTzA_xesrL8[/video]
I've told you not to mix your tobacco.
Well, duh. The only reason ever for him not attacking somebody is the presence of an easier and more beneficial target.
..perhaps not everybody, all the time...but always somebody, and never the ones you expect!
If I was plotting against Persia, the logical time to attack would have been when he was fighting Russia, Denmark, and France, and would have been hard pressed to defend against a medium-sized power right in his back yard. Had I done so, Croatia might well have joined as well - I think OY was restrained mainly by the thought that, if he attacked Persia, I would take attack him - and against that coalition Persia would have had a hard time indeed. Better still, I might have expected to gain considerable rich land in the Caucasus through such an attack, being the best placed of anyone to expand my borders at the expense of Persian vassals; plus I could plausibly have argued that I would need extra land to defend myself against the inevitable attempts at revenge.
Untrue. There is a minimum threshold of easiness and beneficiality that must be crossed. For example, suppose I have only two options: Attack Croatia or attack Egypt; and suppose further that the combined easiness-benefit index of the Croatian attack is 100, and of attacking Egypt, 120. Now you may argue that I don't attack Croatia because Egypt is easier; but it might well be the case that I don't attack Egypt either because I require a minimum E-B index of 150. In this case my reason for not attacking Egypt is not that there is an easier target.
Which is not to say that, at any given time, I'm not plotting against any given realm. Just that my plots pay careful attention to risk/reward tradeoffs, including the long-term risk of pissing off all my neighbours. Remember the fate of Byzantium in TWBW, eh?
Untrue. There is a minimum threshold of easiness and beneficiality that must be crossed. For example, suppose I have only two options: Attack Croatia or attack Egypt; and suppose further that the combined easiness-benefit index of the Croatian attack is 100, and of attacking Egypt, 120. Now you may argue that I don't attack Croatia because Egypt is easier; but it might well be the case that I don't attack Egypt either because I require a minimum E-B index of 150. In this case my reason for not attacking Egypt is not that there is an easier target.
Which is not to say that, at any given time, I'm not plotting against any given realm. Just that my plots pay careful attention to risk/reward tradeoffs, including the long-term risk of pissing off all my neighbours. Remember the fate of Byzantium in TWBW, eh?
Lo and behold: the reason why I explicitly trust KoM. Add this fact to his ability to adequately gauge an enemy's capability, and you can predict (and thus trust) him.
That may entail trusting him to stick a knife in your kidneys at the most importune moment, but hey - there ain't no such thing as a free lunch, right?
Someone asked for the statistics. Basetax:
Provinces:
Code:
FATI : 396
PERS : 361
BOHE : 334
LEON : 313
RUSS : 311
DENM : 281
BULG : 235
MAML : 232
CROA : 194Provinces:
Code:
FATI : 150
DENM : 108
PERS : 104
RUSS : 103
BOHE : 91
LEON : 83
BULG : 80
MAML : 61
CROA : 58Fatimid Strong!
And yet in EU3 my economy is a mere 15% bigger than yours.
The fact that you swam past a crocodile once without it trying to eat you doesn't mean it wont be hungry next time. Perhaps it is waiting for a plumper target now, but that does not mean you should start trusting predators to always do so. Oddman thinks that with experience one can predict KoM's actions, I say that's how Steve Irwin went.
Last edited:
If you want to use that analogy, I can easily counter it with the fact he was killed by a stingray, not a croc. He had much less experience with stingrays, and it got him killed.
I'm more of a snake in this scenario. Exciting, but ultimately harmless if you put on your sunnies.
On Religion and Secularism in Iberia until 1350 AD
It is impossible to place the philosophical developments in Arabic Iberia in context without knowledge of the great philosopher Ibn Rushd (1126-1198), known in Western circles as Averroës. Arguably the most important pre-Renaissance Iberian thinker, Ibn Rushd is known in wider circles as the founding father of secular thought in Western Europe. Ibn Rushd's translations of Aristotle and his reconciliation of those works with Islam form the basis of his later work, in which he advocates the emancipation of science and philosophy from theology, thus breaking the religious monopoly on metaphysical truth-finding. This concept first diffused throughout Muslim Iberia, though it did not achieve wide-spread popularity. Several factors served to bring greater secularism into the political reality of Iberian society in the first decades of the 14th century, where before Muslim dogmatism, already more flexible than contemporary Christianity, was the leading school of thought.
Iberia was never a stranger to different religions. Jewish presence in Iberia dates to before the Roman Empire; with that Roman Empire came Catholicism, though it never took root strongly enough to become dominant, in part due to Visigothic and Vandal invasions, bringing their own Pagan religions. Through the succession of governing bodies of Iberia in the first millenium, life remained relatively good for Iberian Jews, until the conversion of the Visigoths to Catholicism in the 7th century. With Muslim conquest of the South in 711 another religion was added to the mix, stopping short any chance of Catholic domination, and preventing the Jews from persecution. During the golden age of the Caliphate of Córdoba, the three religious groups coexisted in harmony under Islamic overlordship. Catholic power increased again with conquests of Islamic taifas the by the small Northern kingdoms in the Time of Troubles, until most of Iberia was united under the rule of Barakat Dhu'l Nun (1098-1174) following the Treaty of Milan in 1169 (also known as the Fiat). The result of this treaty was a tolerant Islamic government ruling over Iberia, including a significant amount of provinces inhabited by a Catholic majority. The result of all this religious intermingling taught the Iberian people that there are more versions of the truth. Ibn Rushd formalized exactly that sentiment in his works.
When Usama Dhu'l Nun (1227-1271) succeeded his grandfather Da'ud (1187-1254) to the throne as Sultan of Al-Andalus, the long-standing Fatimid Shi'ite influence on the religion of the Iberian peninsula finally found expression. Usama issued decrees declaring all Al-Andalus Shi'ite, a stance that ruffled feathers among the mostly Sunni elite as well as among Dhimmi craftsmen and traders. Unable to unite in opposition under the banner of a single religion due to religious disunity, they embraced the works of Ibn Rushd and advocated lessening of any religious influence on everyday life as well as politics. Things came to a head in 1279 when Sultan Mansur Dhu'l Nun (1257-1279), devout Shi'ite and fervent proponent of Usama's decrees, died under mysterious circumstances* and was succeeded by his brother, Sa'id (1258-1301), a simple and practical man with little interest in religion. Under influence of the Andalusian nobility he allowed the courtly power of the imams to wane, and when his son Hakam (1276-1320) returned from time spent at the Bavarian court he was allowed to remain Christian, as he had converted while spending time there. The second change of rulers' religion in a short period further cemented the cause of Averroism among the elite as well as to populace, causing widespread acceptance of a divide between church and state. Hakam's 1312 decree stipulating that every man is free to choose his own religion effectively made Al-Andalus the first truly secular state in Western Europe.
* Official contemporary sources state he died of a mysterious illness in only two days. In view of the medical evidence this is extremely unlikely. Personal correspondence of those close to him reveal him as a deeply troubled man, torn between his temporal responsibilities and his especially strict interpretation of Shi'a Islam.
It is impossible to place the philosophical developments in Arabic Iberia in context without knowledge of the great philosopher Ibn Rushd (1126-1198), known in Western circles as Averroës. Arguably the most important pre-Renaissance Iberian thinker, Ibn Rushd is known in wider circles as the founding father of secular thought in Western Europe. Ibn Rushd's translations of Aristotle and his reconciliation of those works with Islam form the basis of his later work, in which he advocates the emancipation of science and philosophy from theology, thus breaking the religious monopoly on metaphysical truth-finding. This concept first diffused throughout Muslim Iberia, though it did not achieve wide-spread popularity. Several factors served to bring greater secularism into the political reality of Iberian society in the first decades of the 14th century, where before Muslim dogmatism, already more flexible than contemporary Christianity, was the leading school of thought.
Iberia was never a stranger to different religions. Jewish presence in Iberia dates to before the Roman Empire; with that Roman Empire came Catholicism, though it never took root strongly enough to become dominant, in part due to Visigothic and Vandal invasions, bringing their own Pagan religions. Through the succession of governing bodies of Iberia in the first millenium, life remained relatively good for Iberian Jews, until the conversion of the Visigoths to Catholicism in the 7th century. With Muslim conquest of the South in 711 another religion was added to the mix, stopping short any chance of Catholic domination, and preventing the Jews from persecution. During the golden age of the Caliphate of Córdoba, the three religious groups coexisted in harmony under Islamic overlordship. Catholic power increased again with conquests of Islamic taifas the by the small Northern kingdoms in the Time of Troubles, until most of Iberia was united under the rule of Barakat Dhu'l Nun (1098-1174) following the Treaty of Milan in 1169 (also known as the Fiat). The result of this treaty was a tolerant Islamic government ruling over Iberia, including a significant amount of provinces inhabited by a Catholic majority. The result of all this religious intermingling taught the Iberian people that there are more versions of the truth. Ibn Rushd formalized exactly that sentiment in his works.
When Usama Dhu'l Nun (1227-1271) succeeded his grandfather Da'ud (1187-1254) to the throne as Sultan of Al-Andalus, the long-standing Fatimid Shi'ite influence on the religion of the Iberian peninsula finally found expression. Usama issued decrees declaring all Al-Andalus Shi'ite, a stance that ruffled feathers among the mostly Sunni elite as well as among Dhimmi craftsmen and traders. Unable to unite in opposition under the banner of a single religion due to religious disunity, they embraced the works of Ibn Rushd and advocated lessening of any religious influence on everyday life as well as politics. Things came to a head in 1279 when Sultan Mansur Dhu'l Nun (1257-1279), devout Shi'ite and fervent proponent of Usama's decrees, died under mysterious circumstances* and was succeeded by his brother, Sa'id (1258-1301), a simple and practical man with little interest in religion. Under influence of the Andalusian nobility he allowed the courtly power of the imams to wane, and when his son Hakam (1276-1320) returned from time spent at the Bavarian court he was allowed to remain Christian, as he had converted while spending time there. The second change of rulers' religion in a short period further cemented the cause of Averroism among the elite as well as to populace, causing widespread acceptance of a divide between church and state. Hakam's 1312 decree stipulating that every man is free to choose his own religion effectively made Al-Andalus the first truly secular state in Western Europe.
* Official contemporary sources state he died of a mysterious illness in only two days. In view of the medical evidence this is extremely unlikely. Personal correspondence of those close to him reveal him as a deeply troubled man, torn between his temporal responsibilities and his especially strict interpretation of Shi'a Islam.
I'm more of a snake in this scenario. Exciting, but ultimately harmless if you put on your sunnies.
Meh, I intend to spend most my remaining time converting Italy and preparing for conversion. You and KoM can quibble over your snakepit as best you wish, I would prefer not to have to wade, in and suspect Fivo/vR are not terribly interested in doing so either.
As for the cuddly Andalusians; Averronian Heretics all! Repent or ye souls be damned!
This would be fine, if that were what you actually what you do. Yet with me, you were creating conflicts of interest where none existed.
I stated REPEATEDLY my policy on the Andalucian land (to give it to Oddman after he and I had talked). You ignored this. It's a little annoying to be told that you ignoring me is my fault because I should have told you my true intentions.
And "not negative" is a very, very long way from "positive".
Then you need to think about why people have come away from interacting with you thinking you are dishonest and not a true friend.
fasquardon
Oh hey, I can actually join in on this convo with a vested interest now. Apparently Frosty says we have no conflicts of interest. Yet he refuses to make friends. Thus he is dishonest and not a true friend.
Thank you Fasq for necromancing that discussion.
