Are we assuming The Western Roman Empire and the Byzantine Empire are enemies or allies? If they were enemies I see no way the Byzantines could settle South America, as Rome would control the western part of the Mediterranean and thus the strait of Gibraltar. The only other way to get to open Ocean is to travel on the East coast of Africa, which would make the travel time very long and inefficient to access America. How about if the Byzantines are left to colonize South East Asia and Indonesia, much like what happened with Portugal?
GEM Alternate History Scenairio. No more Attilla, A whole new world.
- Thread starter cheesemijit
- Start date
Even if Rome and Byzantium are enemies, which I do not believe they are, they do not controll the Strait of Gibraltar, look at the map. It says the Moors controll Southern Ispania, being at war with Rome. Byzantium, being neutral, would be allowed to pass through easily.
It still seems unlikely they would be able to colonize there. I would assume the Byzantine Empire would go to war with the Roman Empire eventually, thus the open Strait of Gibraltar would be hard to get to. The Moors could also restrict the access out of the strait, or make ships pay heavy taxes to go through. The Moors would definitely take advantage of their strategic position. The only option I can think of is a united alliance between the Moors and the Byzantine Empire against the Western Roman Empire. Even then unless they could take control of the Mediterranean from the Roman Empire, it would still be an awkward area to sail safely. I realize there is the option where the Byzantines are in no conflict with anyone, but that seems unlikely with the different religions given to all three nations.
Well, Byzantium and Rome understand the balance of power, so they wouldn't openly declare war, knowing how catostrophic that might turn out to be. And why would it be unlikely? If they are in a 'cold war' with Rome, they'd want to immitate everything they can. 'New' land, with fresh resources and new allies would deffinatly appeal to them. And the Moors may tax them, or they might have a trade alliance (perhaps olives, ect. for safe passage) It seems like a reasonable idea to me.
Well Rome and Byzantine i think would be close as the two would only be different politically and religiously(as of around the 1000s) having a culture that is similar would tie them together. The relations i would believe would be neutral to friendly as the two have common enemies, were created off of the same nation, believe in similar ideas(mabye not in religion but in other aspects.), and besides China are two of the most powerful nations in the world.
Rome really doesn't have to worry about acces to the New World as they have Britain, France, and Northern Portugal and Spain to send ships out to the lands(resulting in them settling in Northern America.)
The Byzantines would have a tougher time gaining acess to the new world but i wouldn't say they aren't allowed at all to have it. I think they should have colonies(on South America.) as it creates a challenge for the Byzantines to manage an empire so far away and no easy way to acess it.(Unless you make allies of the Moors who would be displeased with the Byzantines due to the similarities with their Roman enemies.) I think the Byzantine's should be like the Portugese in that they don't completely abandon the New World but at the same time to save time and money they mostly expand into Indonesia and Australia.(In other words they might have Brazil lets just say.)
The way I see it the Romans have the challenge of having enemies(who are possibly at war with them) in almost every direction(cept east where the Byzantine's are.), the Byzantine's have the challenge of managing colonies in SA where if the Moors declare war news reaching the colonies take forever, China(both Song and Yuan) have the challenge of not being a unified China, etc. the list can go on and on but i think it's a good idea to definently give each civ some sort of challenge to make them appealing.
Rome really doesn't have to worry about acces to the New World as they have Britain, France, and Northern Portugal and Spain to send ships out to the lands(resulting in them settling in Northern America.)
The Byzantines would have a tougher time gaining acess to the new world but i wouldn't say they aren't allowed at all to have it. I think they should have colonies(on South America.) as it creates a challenge for the Byzantines to manage an empire so far away and no easy way to acess it.(Unless you make allies of the Moors who would be displeased with the Byzantines due to the similarities with their Roman enemies.) I think the Byzantine's should be like the Portugese in that they don't completely abandon the New World but at the same time to save time and money they mostly expand into Indonesia and Australia.(In other words they might have Brazil lets just say.)
The way I see it the Romans have the challenge of having enemies(who are possibly at war with them) in almost every direction(cept east where the Byzantine's are.), the Byzantine's have the challenge of managing colonies in SA where if the Moors declare war news reaching the colonies take forever, China(both Song and Yuan) have the challenge of not being a unified China, etc. the list can go on and on but i think it's a good idea to definently give each civ some sort of challenge to make them appealing.
cheesemijit
Prince
Remember though that this map starts in 1400 so i don't know how to represent their future colonies other than giving china a galleon with a settler on at the start.
I have started work on the actual map and all the cities in Europe and Northern Africa are done. I just have to edit the Civinfo's and i'm going to do that before working more on the map as i might do something wrong.
I have started work on the actual map and all the cities in Europe and Northern Africa are done. I just have to edit the Civinfo's and i'm going to do that before working more on the map as i might do something wrong.
Yea only reason i really spoke about colonies and such is kinda like to make a historical background for that time period in this alternate history(since 1400 has already occured in real time.) so that we can see whether the Chinese or Romans actually end up in America.
One feature which would be nice is to come up with a list of achievements that one would have to accomplish in a game. This would be like the RFC UHV's however not coded, just recommendations. Since there are over forty nations it might be better to just do this for the most major nations in this alternate history scenario.
Jabarto
Emperor
I was just curious, would there be a Holy Roman Empire in this alternate reality? Or any confederation of the Germanic states? Because I plan on making a Europa Universalis 3 mod based off this scenario - unless you have any objections - and I need to know how, if at all, the HRE should be represented.
Hrmm well the actual Holy Roman Empire where the Emperor was crowned as sucessor to the Fallen Rome doesn't exsist but depending on conditions the Germanic tribes may have some alliance with each other against Rome and Byzantine that could equal the HRE.
cheesemijit
Prince
I would say without the Hunnic migrations putting stress on Germany and the rest of europe the Current Germanic Tribes (Saxons, Franks, Vandals, Visigoths, Ostrogoths) would have remained seperated due to diffferent enemies and slightly different cultures.
The Only historic nations that develpoed around europe are the Moors, Vikings and Kievan Rus'. Possibly the Finns and Swedes are quite historic too but with more pressure from more barbaric tribes and less civilised culture to be observed it takes them longer to develop into their historic state by 1400.
The Only historic nations that develpoed around europe are the Moors, Vikings and Kievan Rus'. Possibly the Finns and Swedes are quite historic too but with more pressure from more barbaric tribes and less civilised culture to be observed it takes them longer to develop into their historic state by 1400.
cheesemijit
Prince
Would you like me to post screenshots so you can take a look and see things that might need changing or just let me work through it asap?
what turn is the year 1400?
what turn is the year 1400?
cheesemijit
Prince
Current Civ List, heres a Key. The Civ Ajective is the most important as thats what Dynamic Civ Names Uses.
Civ Description, Short-Civ-Description, Civ Adjective (Placeholder Civ)
I do need Leader Placeholders and Names too.
this is Marathon so i think 200 is too early. the one for 1500 is like 653
Civ Description, Short-Civ-Description, Civ Adjective (Placeholder Civ)
Spoiler :
I do need Leader Placeholders and Names too.
this is Marathon so i think 200 is too early. the one for 1500 is like 653
cheesemijit
Prince
I will have to test the civ names to see if the dynamic's work, i found out a way to show dynamic civnames in the scoreboard, i will post it here seperately later but you could probs search it and find it as i posted it somehwere else, i find it much better.
What i definately need now is Which Leadheads and Leadernames for each civ. I can think of a couple.
Civ: Leaderhead, Leadername
Rome: Julius Caesar, Pontifex Maximus
Byzantium: Justinian, John VIII Palaiologos
Moors: Hannibal, Abdullah
Vikings: Ragnar, Eric of Pomerania
Franks: Louis, Charles VI
Vandals: Brennus, Wenceslaus
I Need this if u want some proper leaders, for now i'm just putting leader of...
Populations Might be Tricky, But i think i will just use the 1500AD Improvements and then Put Pops to 1 or 2 under max.
TADA! i have put all the cities with their owners and right names on the map. I have edited the WBS and put civnames and leaders for the first 15 or so. have a look and feedback. Next Up is Religions then Techs then Wonders then Improvements then Populations then Buildings then Units then testing then changing things possibly.
View attachment GEMAH 1400AD.rar
Is everyone alright for me using Islam to represent Pagan and Judaism to Represent Orthodox. Perhaps Hinduism for americas?
What i definately need now is Which Leadheads and Leadernames for each civ. I can think of a couple.
Civ: Leaderhead, Leadername
Rome: Julius Caesar, Pontifex Maximus
Byzantium: Justinian, John VIII Palaiologos
Moors: Hannibal, Abdullah
Vikings: Ragnar, Eric of Pomerania
Franks: Louis, Charles VI
Vandals: Brennus, Wenceslaus
I Need this if u want some proper leaders, for now i'm just putting leader of...
Populations Might be Tricky, But i think i will just use the 1500AD Improvements and then Put Pops to 1 or 2 under max.
TADA! i have put all the cities with their owners and right names on the map. I have edited the WBS and put civnames and leaders for the first 15 or so. have a look and feedback. Next Up is Religions then Techs then Wonders then Improvements then Populations then Buildings then Units then testing then changing things possibly.
View attachment GEMAH 1400AD.rar
Is everyone alright for me using Islam to represent Pagan and Judaism to Represent Orthodox. Perhaps Hinduism for americas?
Well, I wouldn't say the Middle East, more like the Arabian Penninsula. I'm sure the Byzantines would force harsh punishment for any Muslims in their trerritoties, like the Spanish Inquisition. The Persians, I'm not too sure about. Maybe they'd be just as strict, maybe not.
The Persians punishment of Muslisms in their territory depends primarily on their religion. If it was Catholicism or Orthodox then Muslisms would be hunted down.
If it's Hinduism then it all depends on the Muslim and Persian leaders. If they wish for peace and harmony between the two(which some Muslim rulers of India did want.) then the religion may survive. Othewise it's a similar situation to Christianity.
I couldnt find any buddhist opinions on Islam so thats blank.
If it's Hinduism then it all depends on the Muslim and Persian leaders. If they wish for peace and harmony between the two(which some Muslim rulers of India did want.) then the religion may survive. Othewise it's a similar situation to Christianity.
I couldnt find any buddhist opinions on Islam so thats blank.
