Choose-A-NES! (Vote for the next Alternate History AmenNES)

[Xen]

what are you talking about?: that post had nothign do with you, and if you bothered to go read (and understand) a history book on the subject, you see that I was right; instead youve got soem mini vendetta agiasnt me.

troll post reported, i hope they ban you.

 

[fantasmo]

Where did you get trolling from? All I said was that it was the first time I had seen you make an actually concise post. I've read posts that go into ridiculous amounts of detail, and that's what I was referring to. If I was going to troll you, I wouldn't bother posting a denial, in fact I'd probably be lying to mods right now, rather than typing this. Besides, my trolling would be much more insulting. What I posted was obviously a joke, I mean really, what kind of troll post would read like my post did?

 

[Chieftess]

Moderator Action: Stop flaming eachother. Xen, you're purposely fanning the flames by replying.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[das]

simpley put, it wouldnt; it only moved to carthage beyong a few coastal trade settlments because Rome broke its real empire in the med sea.

Xen, you might want to know that I know your opinion on this one, and wanted to share it with Amen. Supposedly, he too knows it.

Stop taking everything as literally, will you?

Anyway - everybody, Vote Rome Reborn!

 

[Xen]

oddly enough, I'd prefer it not be rome rebprn (perosnally) I've gotten entrapped in tot he pre napoleonic era of Azales NES, and if Rome reborn got out, I'd have to join as Rome in a heart beat but I dont want to have ot blanece two nes that I know I will enjoy playing in at the same time.

that said, if, by soem chance, Rome reborn dose coem out, make sure, qany map makers, that the capital is at Ravenna; I think its more likelly that it would re-becoem th eimperial capital by that point in time, rather then Rome proper.

if the no-rome option gets done, then make sure Eturia, and amnium are majot powers in italy, and that the Greeks are expeld- the samnites hated the greeks just as much as the Romans; if the samnites could stop (not conqoure mind you, but stop) Rome, then they woudl have no trouble pushing out the greeks.

as a last point, about carthage- to those who think carthage was destinted to be an empire; it was not, it kept its island empire status quo for years- even centuries, and made no attempt to conqoure anythign other then sicilly, because the greeks were being *******s; they expanded into Iberia solelly because they had no more med sea empire, and they needed raw resources- and more importantlly, man power for thier armies- no rome, means no ex-cart sea empire, means Iberia is free to develop its own nations, and empires.

 

[das]

Technically, Carthage DID try to conquer the Greek city states in Sicily, and were getting better and better at it. In an alliance with Etruscans, they CAN defeat them. They won't I think, conquer Iberia unless they get an ambitious leader and/or a very good reason (but who is to say they won't?).

Also, about the Samnites, I think they will try to conquer Rome anyway. And while they could suceed, they will be exhausted enough to fall to the power of the all-conquering Imperia. Epirus.

 

[Xen]

Technically, Carthage DID try to conquer the Greek city states in Sicily, and were getting better and better at it. In an alliance with Etruscans, they CAN defeat them. They won't I think, conquer Iberia unless they get an ambitious leader and/or a very good reason (but who is to say they won't?).

Also, about the Samnites, I think they will try to conquer Rome anyway. And while they could suceed, they will be exhausted enough to fall to the power of the all-conquering Imperia. Epirus.

1) I said they tried to conqoure sicilly (because the greeks were being asses )

2)if Rome dosent fall back tot he fold of the samnites, I would see it beign a senisble option for th eentir eLatin league t just merge witht he etruscan league; Rome actually had ocrdial relations with many etruscan centers at that time

3)remember; the samnities are in many ways just as, if not more tough then the Romans; they woudl fight a hell of alot harder, and in a fashion even more suited to the mountenous interior of Italy then the Romans did- I doubt the Epirians woudl stande a chance

besides epirus only came over because of Rome; theoretically, epirus woudl eb brough t by carthaginian agression in sicilly IF at all

 

[Amenhotep7]

Guys! Enough! This is a place for voting and discussing possible rules for the NESes. Not a historical debate. Use the other forum for that...

 

[Xen]

Guys! Enough! This is a place for voting and discussing possible rules for the NESes. Not a historical debate. Use the other forum for that...

no, no- you brought this on your self, by merelly askignt he question :what alternat ehistory NES do you guys want"; then you go fuirther and ask what tangents might be had, and then go on to list several "possibilites"; well, while I cant predict how an NES will be played, history is incrediblly obvious in what woudl have happend; another main power would arise in italy; either Eturia or Samnium woudl complete the conquest, as they and the Romans had been the big three attemtpign to unfiy the penininsula, and drive out the greeks for soem time; carthage woudl contineu with its trade empire, spain woudl be left aloen to develop its own true powers, and the greco-macedonian states woudl continue quibbilign, until internal revolt byt he greek city states, and repressed people brought all but egypt to its heels; egypt would then go on the slow pace of creating a new hellno-egyptian culture, that wasnt all that attractive to anyone, and unless a new, civlized, orginized, power arose in italy, gual or spain- regions that had vast amounts of both all minerals, resources, and man power- the status quo coudl very continue, ruleing out any imperial mabition sby the wild card "Julius Caesars" strew through history

 

[das]

You might be interested in the idea that Epiriotes might try to conquer Syracuse instead for the trade benefits.

The weakness of many of your arguments is that you seem to assume there was only one POSSIBLE reason for Carthage expanding into Iberia. Or Epirus into Italy. They can always find another reason. They can, as previously said, have an ambitious and capable leader; or they might be bloody annoyed by the pirates/raiders; or they might want to control more trade; or they just don't agree with the Iberian religious practices; or the Iberians insulted a prominent senator's mother; or they harbored a political exile; and so on.

Darn it, it would seem Rome Reborn is losing the elections...

 

[Xen]

thats the stregth of my argument; you have to remember, if any of those other reasons where reason enough, then epirus woudl have invaded italy long before, and ditto with carthage into Iberia; but the fact maintians itself; carthage wasnt expansionist beyond its needs to control the balence of med sea trade, and lackignt hat, have a resource base upon which to produce trade goods

boilign it all down, the underlineing reason fro any of the carthaginian exploits is the carthagninans didnt care abotu conquests- the cared about trade routes comign into carthage- vast empires dont help this; it isntead makes a giatn free trade zone, which decentrlizes all but the best tradeing positions, and even they are subject to frequent change, and obviouslly, larger empires have more expenses, and more threats which require money to deal with; not exactley somthign a trade based nation wishes to have mind you; so while carthage coudl indeed have its ambitious rulers- as history shows, the carthagnians own greed woudl get the best of them; thier stingyness knew no bounds, even when Rome was at the gates of the city.

Epirus is a different matter;they wished to have an empire in south italy; the Romans were an excuse to invade it, Epirus was already active byt hat point, in SIcilly; however, the samnites woudl beat the crap out of them; even the greeks said thatthe samnites must have spartan blood in them, a testiment to thier fighting prowess.

 

[das]

Ahem. Epyrus was busy consolidating itself, that was why it did not invade earlier. And as for Carthage, here's another point - they MIGHT eventually become interested with conquests. Or maybe they will try to do that to counteract Massila.

Also, for all their formidability, the Samnites happen to have eventually lost. Pyrrhus, for example, was no idiot. It would have been quite likely that he would have pitted Etruscans and Samnites at each other while gathering strenght and consolidating South Italy.

 

[Xen]

Ahem. Epyrus was busy consolidating itself, that was why it did not invade earlier.

wrong; Pyrrhus was actually on the throne at a point in time when it was the most shakey- many people felt that he didnt have a legit claim to it.

And as for Carthage, here's another point - they MIGHT eventually become interested with conquests. Or maybe they will try to do that to counteract Massila.

massalia was a trade hub that put profits directlly into the Carthaginians hands, and out fo the hand so fthe etruscansl; all at the Carthies not having to defend it from the Guals.

that said, multiple centuries of history dont lie; tbhey set a standar dpresedent that even when forced to change, Carthage was unwillign to do; one might blame it on culture, considering that thier phonecian forefathers were never known for thier military exploits either.

Also, for all their formidability, the Samnites happen to have eventually lost. Pyrrhus, for example, was no idiot.It would have been quite likely that he would have pitted Etruscans and Samnites at each other while gathering strenght and consolidating South Italy.

no, he wouldnt- he woudl have no more success getting the etruscans- even greater enimies of the greeks then the samnites- to go agiast samnium, as he did to get them to go agiasnt Rome, or even get anyoen under Roes real lif edominion who wasnt Greek to rebell- you underestimate the sheer hatred the Italians had for the greeks during those times, and sheer haughtyness of the Greeks agaisnt any "inferior" peoples, the Italians included- Pyrrhus may have been no fool, but he wasnt all that smart either.

 

[blackheart]

Here's the weakness in all of your debates:

IT DIDN'T HAPPEN! ​

That's right. Anything could have happened, but it didn't. That's the thing about history, there's always unexpected twists and turns. Like why did the general of the Roman army bunch his troops together when fighting Hannibal? Why did Spartacus try to return to Rome? Etc.

 

[Xen]

Here's the weakness in all of your debates:

IT DIDN'T HAPPEN! ​

That's right. Anything could have happened, but it didn't. That's the thing about history, there's always unexpected twists and turns. Like why did the general of the Roman army bunch his troops together when fighting Hannibal? Why did Spartacus try to return to Rome? Etc.

A)no, your very wrong; not anythign coudl have happened; this is history based off an alrerady existent tangent; thie ris a set number of possibilites; though the total number is infinite, its only well intot he future where you can say "anythign coudl happen"- as it is, th elines are already very well, and clearlyl drawn, all one needs is a history book, and th epatience to read and understand those lines to be able to see what they are.

B) unexpected twists and turns only go so far- unexpected twists and turns dont change enitre cultures (even mohammed didint do that), nor do they erase centuries of racial hatred in one fell swoop

C)the Romans bunched up thier troop sbecaus eit was a standard tactic, adopted by the idiot they put in charge

D)spartacus never tried to return to Rome (hell, thiers no evidence he was ever in Rome itself, nor even ledgends that say he was); he tried to escape Italy, and the empire alltogether, but somhow the Idiot crassus pulled out a hard won victory before Pompey could reach them, and actually win a battle with little cost to Roman lives

 

[erez87]

ANYTHING could have happan xen. At any time... There could even be an astroid falling on where Rome just befor the second punic war creating a strong Carthage udner a genius miliatry man the would probably burn down Italy and Carthage will than have both Iberia and the islands and maybe even a burned Italy. ANYTHING could have have happand.

 

[Xen]

ANYTHING could have happan xen. At any time... There could even be an astroid falling on where Rome just befor the second punic war creating a strong Carthage udner a genius miliatry man the would probably burn down Italy and Carthage will than have both Iberia and the islands and maybe even a burned Italy. ANYTHING could have have happand.

no, anythign cannot happen!

its the same world we lived in, except for the fact that the smanites won= somthign that was actually a very likelly occurence

just because one thing changes DOSE NOT, NOR EVER WILL mean the entire universe changes as well.

 

[erez87]

If Rome wouldn't exist. Than western civilization wouldn't exist. The wold of today would drasticly change.

 

[Xen]

If Rome wouldn't exist. Than western civilization wouldn't exist. The wold of today would drasticly change.

wrong; Roman culture isnt all the different from Etruscan, Oscan, or even Samnitic culture for all that matter; western civlization still has a very healthy home in the other Itallic cultures, and that assumign latium itself- the prdiginator of Roman culture, didnt exist either, because Rome and latium are not one in the same thing.

no, no take out Rome, and your merelly have a vaccume for th edominat power in italy, and thierfore the med sea (by simple virtue of Italy;s geography, resource richness, and it scentral location in the med sea) that woudl get filled up by another Italian power; if that power chooses ot epxand italy, however,. is an open question.

 

[North King]

I doubt the Samnites would expand past Italy or even internally. They were warriors, yes, but they also had a bunch of rivals who were probably more than strong enough combined to stop their spread. There is little reason they should start expanding, and even if they did, then the Greeks would probably get involved, with drastic consequences due to the fact that Italy would now be very divided.