Alternate History NESes; Spout some ideas!

So? Which alternate histories appeal to you?

  • Rome Never Falls

    Votes: 58 35.8%
  • Axis Wins WWII

    Votes: 55 34.0%
  • D-Day Fails

    Votes: 41 25.3%
  • No Fort Sumter, No Civil War

    Votes: 32 19.8%
  • No Waterloo

    Votes: 33 20.4%
  • Islamic Europe

    Votes: 43 26.5%
  • No Roman Empire

    Votes: 37 22.8%
  • Carthage wins Punic Wars

    Votes: 51 31.5%
  • Alexander the Great survives his bout with malaria

    Votes: 54 33.3%
  • Mesoamerican Empires survived/Americas not discovered

    Votes: 48 29.6%
  • Americans lose revolutionary war/revolutionary war averted

    Votes: 44 27.2%
  • Years of Rice and Salt (Do it again!)

    Votes: 24 14.8%
  • Recolonization of Africa

    Votes: 20 12.3%
  • Advanced Native Americans

    Votes: 59 36.4%
  • Successful Zimmerman note

    Votes: 35 21.6%
  • Germany wins WWI

    Votes: 63 38.9%
  • Other

    Votes: 31 19.1%

  • Total voters
    162
das said:
Xen, there are different concepts of realism. You have your concepts of realism, I have mine. I don't see any point at arguing with you about it, I guess...

Regardless, either accept the INITIAL PREMISE, either don't discuss it at all. I have no problems with your model of Alexandrine conquest, really.
if the intial premise- an alexander gone further- is what you wish to accept, i dont have a huge problem with it, its just that if he tires to conqore much more fo anythign else without making obscene overtutres to greece and macedon, no matter how great you want to make alexander, how much more capable a marshal of men you wish to have him, it simply isnt going to happen.



"How dare you use their gold! DIE!!! WHAT?! YOU WANT TO USE THEM AS CANNON FODDER AS WELL?! DEATH TO THE TYRANT ALEXANDER! WE WANT TO BE THE CANNON FODDER OURSELVES!"[/quote]
essentially, that is EXACTLEY what they woul dhave said- why shoudl persians have the honour of being in the imperial army of greece and macedon, yet also, why shoudl native greeks and macedonian shave to travel across the earth in the name of an empire under an emperor they dont really want.


What made you assume that the Macedonnians are the target audience? The religion developped in and was mostly confined to Egypt.
primarilly, because thier is no sense in such a religion springing forth in egypt; dd some on say "hey guys, even though our religion alreadfy worships our king as a god, i think we should make a new religion that dose the exactsame thing. we even take the name othe name of one of our old gods, osiris, a name the religion after. so basically guys, its the exact same thing we had before. pretty good idea, huh?"

No; thier is no need or want for a religion that operates in the exact same fashion as thier old one did, particuraly for a forign king.


He didn't let it go unpunished; he intimidated them into submission, or rather, his governors did that for him.
not so; the greeks and macedonians at home were surpsinglly free to critisice Alexander, and the provinces of old persia, like i said, loved him; they didnt offer resistence even after Alexander died, and the empire was split up between the generals because, fundemantally, they really did love Alexander.

The idea is that he lets all these conquests get into his head. That sort of stuff happens.
I think they already had, and that they had about run the course of how far they were going to effect him in his veiwing himself a s a god, and wanting to conqore a stretch of land from one side of the ocean to the other






He didn't invade India again, I'm talking about the first time.
same here- his first off go at india ended in brining in a good assortment of Indian states into the Alexandrian Imperial umbrella.

And he did conquer Arabia. The coastal one, anyway. Hejjaz, basically.
if he went for arabia, it wouldnt only be hejazz he looked to conqoure, but the reverse side on the persia gulf as well (in fact its much mor eliklly to be the first target, ad he works his way around the coast of the peninisul over to Hejazz subdues it, takes ships to the african coasta and conqored everything between where he sets off right up Egypt- a major undertaking, no matter who you are.

Trade posts. Are you going to say the Carthaginians didn't even have trade posts? Because it would seem that they did.
one-ff trade posts an an actual empire are two different things; and bearining in mad that signifanct trade posts, sich as gades, were stillt echnically indipendent of Carthage, and its very clear, Carthage had no Spanish empire; just some, like you said trade posts, that alexander would win if he sbded carthage (which i should say, many have theorized alxander may not have been able to do for virtre of carthaginians also using the alexandrian phlanx, and the local sources of fine Carthgianian heavy and numidian lighthorsemen)


According to the timeline, the Samnites were losing and asked Alexander for help. Not sure if it happened in OTL; maybe there were some butterflies involved.
this sint unliklly; the same situation occrued when Pyrrhus intervined in the greek south, though the Samnites very soon stopped giving him support; what they woudl do with ALexander after they met him, is uncertain.

Do remember that he by then controls Carthage AND Greece, thus putting Syracuse into a strategically-unbearable situation. They decided to pre-empt him, accepting his authority rather then having him attack them later.
all the more reason to just pay him tribue; Alexander wasnt at all opoosed to lettign his allies have thier own indipendent nations carved right out of his own land; just look at Epirus, Thracia, Pannonia, Galatia- he could have had all thes eplaces annexed, if he chose to, but he didnt because while he was a conqeror who lusted for lands, he wasnt an idiot, you dont go making enemies at every turn if you can avoid it




Which is exactly what happened in the timeline.
with the notale exception that he conqoures more or less everything by the time he cant conqore anything else; rather defeats the purpose of having that caveat at all, really.
 
if the intial premise- an alexander gone further- is what you wish to accept, i dont have a huge problem with it, its just that if he tires to conqore much more fo anythign else without making obscene overtutres to greece and macedon, no matter how great you want to make alexander, how much more capable a marshal of men you wish to have him, it simply isnt going to happen.

Xen, I honestly try to avoid making comments about your spelling nowadays, but...

What did you say there?

primarilly, because thier is no sense in such a religion springing forth in egypt; dd some on say "hey guys, even though our religion alreadfy worships our king as a god, i think we should make a new religion that dose the exactsame thing. we even take the name othe name of one of our old gods, osiris, a name the religion after. so basically guys, its the exact same thing we had before. pretty good idea, huh?"

No; thier is no need or want for a religion that operates in the exact same fashion as thier old one did, particuraly for a forign king.

An insuficient argument - it COULD have happened. It doesn't operate in the exact same fashion, btw. The difference is about the same as the difference between Judaism and Christianity.

The religion seems to have been a minor cult in Alexander's lifetime now that I checked it again. It seems to have become seriously influential in Egypt two centuries later.

not so; the greeks and macedonians at home were surpsinglly free to critisice Alexander, and the provinces of old persia, like i said, loved him; they didnt offer resistence even after Alexander died, and the empire was split up between the generals because, fundemantally, they really did love Alexander.

Not in OTL, sorry if I confused you... There was growing dissent against Alexander for gradually becoming less and less Greek.
I think they already had, and that they had about run the course of how far they were going to effect him in his veiwing himself a s a god, and wanting to conqore a stretch of land from one side of the ocean to the other

He didn't live long enough for it to develop further, then. ;)
same here- his first off go at india ended in brining in a good assortment of Indian states into the Alexandrian Imperial umbrella.

Yes. But he still had to retreat. That rather left a bad aftertaste...


if he went for arabia, it wouldnt only be hejazz he looked to conqoure, but the reverse side on the persia gulf as well (in fact its much mor eliklly to be the first target, ad he works his way around the coast of the peninisul over to Hejazz subdues it, takes ships to the african coasta and conqored everything between where he sets off right up Egypt- a major undertaking, no matter who you are.

He has ships and troops, and frankly I doubt that Arabs could put up serious resistance. Although chasing after all those tribes could take some time...

one-ff trade posts an an actual empire are two different things; and bearining in mad that signifanct trade posts, sich as gades, were stillt echnically indipendent of Carthage, and its very clear, Carthage had no Spanish empire; just some, like you said trade posts, that alexander would win if he sbded carthage (which i should say, many have theorized alxander may not have been able to do for virtre of carthaginians also using the alexandrian phlanx, and the local sources of fine Carthgianian heavy and numidian lighthorsemen)

Yes, that's what I said.

The battle with Carthage WAS a close one. Still, he did win the battle, whilst he also managed to find some traitors in Carthage itself.

this sint unliklly; the same situation occrued when Pyrrhus intervined in the greek south, though the Samnites very soon stopped giving him support; what they woudl do with ALexander after they met him, is uncertain.

Well, AFTER meeting with Alexander they fought the Romans as a part of his army, obviously enough. Playing a not-insignificant role in the victory, they suffered large casualties. Not much of a mention of them afterwards - although they didn't seem to like that.
all the more reason to just pay him tribue; Alexander wasnt at all opoosed to lettign his allies have thier own indipendent nations carved right out of his own land; just look at Epirus, Thracia, Pannonia, Galatia- he could have had all thes eplaces annexed, if he chose to, but he didnt because while he was a conqeror who lusted for lands, he wasnt an idiot, you dont go making enemies at every turn if you can avoid it

The Syracusans didn't seem to accept his rule, now that I looked it up. Some others did, they didn't, and there seems to have been something of a phony war between Syracuse and Alexander (at least, there isn't any mention of a campaign against them). Later, Syracuse was one of the first to support the great rebellion against Alexander.

STILL, going back to the primary purpose of this thread, IMHO a NES set just after the overstretched Alexandrine Empire collapses and new states rise in its wake could be interesting.
 
A single state out of the Alexandrinian empire or compromising one of the regions that his generals controlled or a mix?
 
In the beginning, there is a single Alexandrine Empire... with all stats rapidly crumbling, Greece and Anatolia in revolt and the army nearly-annihilated. Makes a nice challenge to survive with anything at all... People start as various rebels or invading barbarians, or something like that, and carve their new empires.
 
Something like this? (I only put on the Alexandrine Empire and those directly related to them.)
 

Attachments

  • Failed Alexandrine.gif
    Failed Alexandrine.gif
    73.1 KB · Views: 177
Well, yes... though remember - Romans are dispersed/slaughtered and same with Hebrews. Carthage is still there, but weakened.

From what I could discern, there is a "Hellenic League" (or something like that), an alliance of Greek rebels from Sicily to Western Anatolia, which temporarily holds territory as far as northern Mesopatamia (well, they have an army there). It is unlikely to hold together, naturally... Italy is probably dominated by an alliance of Italic tribes (Samnites and the like), though southern Greeks and Latins/Capuans are important as well. The Parthians seem to be poised to take over Persia, though a native rebellion still could beat them to it.

Also, Alexander doesn't control Cush (failed expedition - bad luck with a vanguard, dark omens, demoralized soldiers persuade Alexander to go somewhere else).

I believe that Numidia, Mauretania and Carthage will launch separate rebellions, at first anyway.
 
1000-1100

Affalon:

Nova Hibernia lost a major war with the Patrickians, led by Toton III, in 1012-1023. This war cut off their western expansion, with St. Communus River Valley passing over to Patrickians; Nova Hibernia was also forced to pay an admittedly-small tribute to Patrickia. Regardless, life went on, as Nova Hibernian refugees from the Valley settled down along the western coast of the Atlantic, in South Nova Hibernia (OTL Maine) and in Diarmaida (OTL New England south from Maine). A Patrickian prince, Erik, fled with some supporters to the island of Sandland (OTL Long Island).

Toltecs, far to the south, were struck hard by the diseases, collapsing into civil war. Still, the winners begun rebuilding the empire... Mixtecs meanwhile built a rival state to the south.

In 1078, a Spanish noble, Sancho Rodriguez, reached the coast of Alfonsia (OTL Virginia). The Third HRE, back then led by Alphonso IV, was, much like the rest of Western Europe, filled with tales brought by Snowish merchants. Alphonso IV was determined to trick the arrogant Snowish barbarians and to take over the trade of Affalon for himself; Sancho's was the second expedition sent (the first one was lost), and although it was blown off from its original course, it did establish a short-lived Spanish colony. Although it was abandoned after a few years, the further explorations, combined with a certain amount of luck, allowed a more permanent colony in Nueva Alfonsia (OTL Florida) and the establishment of the (unstable) transatlantic trade route. Ofcourse, the Northern Path was still preffered; but now, the Spaniards had their own goods to ship from Affalon.

Europe:

Snowish and Geldish raiders thoroughly devastated England, causing it to collapse altogether into warring states. Eventually, Agbert I of Northumbria reunited England (with captial in York), but it was considerably set back by this "time of troubles".

Franks, led by Karlis II, used the decline of English and Severoslavian pressure to build up an empire of their own. The Franks had a natural target - Occitania, and they struck against it in 1001. The mercantile Occitanians were no warriors, albeit after the rout of their "army" at Toulouse the resistance stiffened as citizens took up arms and defended their cities and towns. But against superior military might, the results were predictable - a bloody massacre. The Third HRE tried to save the remaining Occitanian territories in Provence, Languedoc and Septimania, but Karlis II crushed the Spaniards at Beziers and at Monaco. The ensuing invasion of Italy was grounded to a halt by the autonomous cities, but the death of Emperor Pedro I at Monaco caused great instability in the Empire, which became even more decentralized. Eventually, the Spaniards agreed to pay a monetary contribution and recognized Karlis as the ruler of Occitania.

Gradually, the Third HRE somewhat recovered, with commerce being revived and with exploration of East Affalon (see Affalon) and West Africa (see Africa). Decentralization nonetheless became widespread, but it wasn't entirely a negative thing, as all regions of the HRE were now much more defensible. However, the initial unhappiness of the emperor with this arrangement caused the loss of Sicily and Malta to the Byzantines, who bribed the local nobles.

Geldish chiefdoms during this time begun reuniting under seven different rulers; this eventually, after several wars, resulted in the creation of five Geldish states: Jylland (Jutland), Sjaelland (Copenhagen, surrounding regions, Bornholm, Gotland, parts of Scane), Trondheim (much of Norway, without the southern coast), Vikland (southern coast of Norway and western coast of Sweden, plus some inland Norwegian regions) and Svealand (the rest of Sweden).

Severoslavia during this time became increasingly feudal as well, having become the target of many Geldish raids and Prussian invasions.

Moravia ceased to exist during this time - the resurgent Byzantines conquered as far north as the Carpathians and Dniester after an intensification of Moravian raids on Byzantine soil, whilst the Severoslavians annexed Moravian territories in Czechia and Carinthia using chaos that ensued after the Byzantine victory at Devin.

Indeed, generally the Byzantines have recouped from their past defeats. Under Leo VIII (r. 1064-1091), Byzantines underwent military reforms, creating a more powerful and mobile cavalry army; it proved its worth in Moravia and elsewhere (see Middle East). Other reforms, of administrative and religious character, allowed the further stabilization of the Byzantines, and an expedition to Crimea kicked Khazars out of the peninsula with abysmal casualties. Byzantium was on the rise.

Prussia had some hard times now. Not only was it fought back in Severoslavia in 1020s, but it was also defeated on the Neman by the Balts, whilst the Khazars put an end to all Prussian eastern ambitions in a decisive battle at Sluck - after which the Prussians not only paid a monetary indemnity, but also lost all lands east of Neman and Bug. Those lands weren't very important - but now, Prussia was closed in with no hopes of expansion any time soon. Decline set in...

Baltland, in spite of occasional Slavic and Esti rebellions, remained a viable force, though it, too, was stagnating. Wars with Khazaria eventually saw some gains on the southeastern border, but that's as much as they got.

Barakid Khazaria was increasingly weakened by the wars with Byzantines, Turkic raids and internal strife. Still, as Sluck has proved, it still was a power to be reckoned with.

Africa:

Idrisids faced some troubled times late in the century, losing Tangiers to the Third HRE in 1195, and generally stagnating. Still, it remained a notable force, expanding south into Sahara, until coming into conflict with the rising Berber empire of the Almoravids (similar to OTL ones generally, though details are different)...

Fierce desert warriors and puritan Muslims, the Almoravids were a rising force that expanded violently in all directions. Islam spread peacefully as well, southwards, by the means of trade.

South from the Almoravids were the warring kingdoms of Ghana and Tuareg.

Fatimid expansion southwards faced increasing resistance, but nonetheless they overran Alodia; after that, logistics and danger of overstretchment stopped them short. Fatimid Egypt was also faring well, economically. Not all was well for them in the Middle East, however (see Middle East).

Abyssinia continued to rise in power, conquering Islamic states to its east (mostly in OTL Ethiopia and northern Somaliland).

Middle East:

Byzantines have recouped from previous defeats in the end of the 10th and the beginning of this century. Under the energetic reign of Leo VIII, they finished their expansion into Palestine, pushed Khazars out of Armenia and even took over Mesopatamia, greatly wounding the Buwayhid Empire.

Qarmatians reached the height of their power during this time. Led by al-Muttabi, they took over Hejjaz, Dubai, Oman and Yemen, thwarted a Buwayhid invasion and imposed a very strict Ismailite version of Islam on the entire Arabian Peninsula. However, their empire was very shaky and increasingly loose, due to problems of communication.

Buwayhids were facing defeat on all fronts, eventually collapsing into civil war. The result of it was an appearence of a weakened Persian Sunni state in the west (east from Mesopatamia, west and south from Khorasan/Dasht-e Kavir) and of several Sunni/Shiite Turkic states in the northeast; eventually, all those Turkic states were consumed by the Samanid Empire. As for the Persian state, Jalid Sultanate, well, it lingered on, mostly because nobody of its "neighbours" (Byzantine Empire, Barakid Khazaria, Samanid Empire) wanted its territories all that much and feared that an invasion would strenghthen the interests of the others.

Samanid northwards expansion led to furthering of tensions with Khazaria.

India:

Hindu Shahis rose to pre-eminence during this period, fighting off Samanid raids and uniting the Indus Valley states, eventually extending their hegemony as far as Chambal. In opposition to them, Chandellas and Karakuris rose to importance in the east, whilst an united, though weakened, state re-emerged in Gujarat.

Virayendra led the Cholas to a crushing victory against the Calukyas, solidifying Cholan hegemony in Deccan at the expense of eastwards, maritime expansion (this allowed the Kadiri Javanese to become increasingly powerful there).

East Asia:

Steadily, the butterfly effect penetrated the steppes. A talented Khitan general who didn't exist in OTL, by the name of He-ku-ta, befriended the Jurchen tribes and with their assistance overthrown the Liao Dynasty in 1089, founding his own Lung Dynasty. The powerhouse of the Lung, as of 1100, stood poised to strike against Song China...

Meanwhile, Mongol tribes to the northwest united into a tribal confederation to resist the Lung Dynasty.

---

OOC: I changed my plans, as you can see, making only a short chapter about the major events that inaguarated the 12th Century. This is because I am now very interested in a certain new project (yes, Symphony, the one you asked me about).

IC:

1104-1119

Several important developments happened in the world during this time.

Spanish Imperial forces entered the Carribean Sea in 1104, establishing trade posts, devastating natives and beginning intrigues in Tolteca, which was only beginning to recover from the civil war. They also came into contact with Mayans, where the plagues resulted in a final collapse of most of Mayan urban civilization... apart from northernmost Yucatan, where Cocom rulers of Mayapan used the power vacuum to create a semi-feudal empire.

Agbert I strenghthened England, militarized its society, assembled a vast, Viking-imitating fleet and conquered Snowland in an epic war of 1111. Snowish refugees fled west en masse, albeit some remained and tried to fight on from the interior. This was the Viking War. Agbert didn't limit himself to devastating SOME of the raiders, though - he also devastated and subdued Trondheim, another source of irritation. Everywhere, he was merciless, being traumatised in youth by sights of Snowish and Geldish looting.

The Geldish refugees from Trondheim spread across Geldland, causing trouble and agitating for an united campaign against England. Snowish refugees were more important - the Affalonian states were beginning to lag behind and lose much of their early impulse by this time. Snowlanders, however, revived this. Those who went to Patrickia won great respect as warriors, and assisted expansion across St. Communus River, bringing Patrickia into conflict with the powerful tribal confederation of the Cree, which at the time was also expanding - towards the river. Some Snowlanders came to Nova Hibernia, where they were accepted on the principle of "my enemy's enemy..." and contributed to colonization of Diarmaida's immediate interior. A few came to Sandland, allowign the settling of the nearby regions, and leading into conflict with another native Affalonian tribal confederation - the Mohawk League.

Meanwhile, Baltland scored a major victory over the Khazars at Muroom. This allowed a shift of the borders southwards, to the northwestern part of the Volga and to river Moskva further west.

Almoravids crushed the declining Idrisids in a series of battles, most notably the one at Marrakech, where the superior training and devoutness of the Almoravids proved vital. North African culture went into temporary decline under the puritan Almoravid reign, which displaced Idrisids everywhere outside of Tunisia, where they maintained a politically- and militarily-weak, but culturally-rich existance.

Shahis expanded southwards, conquering Gujarat but being confronted by the stronger (then Gujarat, not then they themselves) Paramaras. Cholas meanwhile begun paying more attention to Sumatra and the like, abandoning the absurd plans of conquering the Hoysalas.

Finally, the Lung forces crushed the incompetently-led Song armies. The error of the Song military (or, rather, anti-military) policy was fully exposed, as Lung Khitans, with their iron discipline, not only destroyed the Song forces at Ping and at Chengdu, but also managed to cross the Yangtze and brutally impose their rule on all of China thusly. Now, Lung China came into being, and was eager for further expansion - perhaps against the Tanguts and Mongols in the west, perhaps against Korea and Japan in the east.

After all those changes, a new era has dawned upon the world. New empires displaced old ones, whilst other empires were set into decline.
 
World Map 1119.
 
Comments?

Btw, that old Guess-the-PoD was about Bismarck's premature death.
 
Lung China crossed the Yangtze so easily? What happened to the large Song inland navy? *looks digusted* Jurchens *shakes head* better Mongols then them....
 
Khitans and Jurchens - they had good disciplinne, and a good navy. The Song army was utterly useless, and with a bit of luck plus He-ku-ta's military genius
 
anybody have soem maps of India and the far east at 248 AD- exactley 248, if possible, actually.

I have a fairlly nice little alt history coming up- the major changes havent spread to the far east yes, India is just beginning to feel them because the Kushan empire is adopting soem of the changes it can get its hands on (Rome, Parthia-event conspired that allowed them to very handilly crush the sassanian Persian insurrection, and in a big way- and Africa are the biggest immediate changes in this alt history)
 
das said:
Khitans and Jurchens - they had good disciplinne, and a good navy. The Song army was utterly useless, and with a bit of luck plus He-ku-ta's military genius

Khitans and Jurchens = good navy???? :eek: The Song army was useless in real life too, and yet they lasted a long time. ;) Just providing some "loyal opposition"
 
Khitans and Jurchens = good navy????

Uh... Don't see how did a "navy" get in there myself. But they COULD theoretically have crossed that river, IMHO.
The Song army was useless in real life too, and yet they lasted a long time.

That's because nobody wanted to finish them off seriously. Here, the Jurchen-Khitans get a person who happens to want to do that.

Xen, I happen to have a world map for 250 AD in my historical atlas... but considering that all of India is, on the map, united into a monolithic empire of "Indian States", I suspect it isn't very useful. IMHO NK should know something...
 
The Song Army wasn't useless... they DID withstand the mongols for decades before succombing. If the army at Shanyang actually received reinforcements, they would've lasted longer too probably. Oh, and they also kept the jurchens away for hundreds of years too.
 
The Song ARMY was useless; the government policy was that of completely neutralizing any threat of military rebellions, and they attained that by subordinating generals to civilian officials and so forth. The only reason the Jurchens didn't overrun them completely was that they lacked the strategic vision and understandment of Chinese specifics, something possessed by the Khitans who were there longer.

The Song had nice forts; by the time they had to fight back the Mongols, they also had gunpowder. But still, in spite of fighting a DEFENSIVE war (something that by its nature is easier then offensive one), they lost.
 
Mongols had gunpowder too. If anything mongols were more advanced than Song. Also, this defensive war was lost from the beginning. It was similar to Late Ming, when all the court officials were bribed/no longer loyal to the nation. Even if the generals were still loyal, they received little to no reinforcements/supplies. That and the emperor was too damn young to make a difference during late song time period. When you look at it that way, the fact that song lasted decades against the mongols is a miracle.

Also, there is a famous southern song general who almost succeeded in kicking the jurchens out, but (AGAIN) he was killed by the court eunochs/officials. This is proof that the army isn't useless :p
 
ThomAnder said:
Mongols had gunpowder too. If anything mongols were more advanced than Song.

wrong- everythign the mongols got equipemnt wise accept thier horses and bows was from the Chinese- swords, sheilds- even war arrows- was from the chinese; the Mongosl themselves didnt even knwo hwo to msith metal; it was thier variosu subject nations whom they forced to do these tasks for them.
 
In the Battle of Xiangyang, the mongols used lots of cannons. No doubt they were adopted from the chinese, but for an empire that stretches so far and wide, i'm sure they combined other type of siege weaponry like muslim catapults and other sorts which song don't have. Hence my point that they were more advanced. They had LOTS of vassals to make these equipments.
 
Back
Top Bottom