I am sorry about your war. Let yourself recover and then coordinate your attack with a larger enemy (perferably carthage). Though it is advisable to have carthage go in first and crush them and then you follow behind and take all the provinces.
1. So instead of advancing our borders we made sure that someone else kept theirs. That is not helpful. It would have been better if we had taken, say 4 provinces from Bosphorus and 4 provinces from Pontus and let the Selucids gain 2 or 3 provinces from Carthage. - Next war, we could be more powerful and more ready to go and kick the pants of the Selucids. OR Taken 4 more provinces from our two previous victims and let Selucids take another 2 or 3 provinces. EDIT: I don't know how many provinces either of them has, but this is the general idea.Surgünoglu said:SonofWinter, your point is taken yet you misunderstand the nature of our intervention.
It was a war for our own gain. That this goal was not wholly attained does not change the facts that:
1. We went to war to limit Seleucid advancement.
2. Serving Carthage helps us maintain pressure on those who threaten us.
It was no political war. We fought as independents. Keep the rhetoric down.
If I understand correctly, if we did not want to risk a 3-way war we could only declare on Seleucia or the Bosporans. We chose the former to "protect" Carthage.Woad-Warrier said:Why Didn't You Declare War On Pontus??! :<
Dakk said:If I understand correctly, if we did not want to risk a 3-way war we could only declare on Seleucia or the Bosporans. We chose the former to "protect" Carthage.
I lavish your nomination and high praise, but alas I only got the intellect of half an emu, the strength of a forum troll and the cunning of the HOI AI.Woad-Warrier said:I suggest new leadership is needed, someone with the intellect of an elephant, the strength of a bull, and the cunning of a leopard.
Dakk said:Oh, and I'm known to assassinate my advisors to lower my bad boy score...
It tested our warriors, it didn't wreck our economy, and it maintained the current balance of power. It kept the current world power in check. If you don't see that as a sensible war, then no-one will be able to persuade you. More wars than you know have been fought to maintain stability.
It is stated in post #650.Chief Ragusa said:That is not stated in post 10. Pontus and Bosporan were allied when they took out the Armenians.They've had plenty of time to grow to dislike each other simply because of those lone provinces behind each other's lines, so to speak. Bosporan may have common cause with Macedon in taking down Pontus.
King said:... The Bosporan Kingdom is allied with Pontus war with them probably means war with Pontus. Pontus is of course allied to both so if Pontus is the one we attack then we are probably going to be at war with 3 powers.
Yes, it actually helps reading the postsSonofWinter said:I just re-read all some of the posts. I now realize that we have this guy to blame for this war. We should have declared on the Bosporan Kingdom and actually gained something from both them and Pontus, instead of this fiasco with the Selucids.
From now on, you are not to speak in council. [You have been exiled to a penal colony. Your shame is irreversible.] (See jeering crowds.)
Editorial note: Be glad we are not playing Rome, or there'd be a curcifixion in your future. :rofl:
ElectricEel said: