North King said:
North King said:Only Samnium was fully against the Romans?Once their agressive intent was known, a heck of alot more then just samnium joined, I imagine.
obviouslly, we're talkign about the social wars here, because no other conflict even comes close to what your talkign about, unless you havebeen so desperate to grub up enmies for both Rome and samnium, you have tried to include thie rentire historicle roll-call, even if that is the case, the Romans often had a distinct advantagestate sof war dont matter- we woudl liek it if mexico sent raiding parties intot he US, woudl we, even if ti was an "act fo war" by the mexican government, we would demand the mexico do somthing- if they refuse, then obviouslly enough, we woudl force the raidnign to stop by using our own military action- the same goes for the Roman state; just because the government(s) of the area were not the direct cause of said strikes, did not mean they were unapposed to them, or aided in the ceasation- those that did aide Rome were, obviouslly enough, left alone, those that didnt- were conqoured or expelled form thier former territory
Those that aided Rome were absorbed into Rome. It's just silly to think that by aiding an aggressive expansionistic empire that they're going to leave you alone, especially when you're right on their borders.blackheart said:In this timeline, Rome has been defeated. That means everyone else is going to act differently, because politics and culture are interdependent. You can't just take out a chunk and act like everyone is going to be the same as it was with history.[.quote]
happend often enough; let suse greece as our example how many federations, and confederations, and single power city states were thier through Greek history- how many glroius rises, might nations, and huge failign were there? many, many, many of them- and yet the city states ocntinues to act in essentially the same way they always had, based more on local cultural and traditions then political need.
that said, most of pretenses have already been deicdeed- forinstance, what effect do the samnite wars have on Carthage? None, noen whatso ever- Carthage and Rome dont really have any influnce on eachother until the punic wars, which dont happen- so carthage is clear to keep alogn the merry way it always had been on; as far as italy goes, no one can denmy the lack of Rome woudl leave a power vaccume, and that, liek in all vaccumes, if somethign exists to fill it, it will be filled- th emost logical conclusion is that it woudl be the etruscans or smanites, as they were the other powers in dominat positions in the region
And stop it with the political argument. Only governments have the ability to justify their actions, no matter how poor the choice.one must remember, I'm not entirelly opposed to thatthough, if we want to get into moder politics, the mexicans should (in theory) take control over thie rborders, and help stop illiegle immigration; but they dont, and fact is, we dont want the, too; our country is runon illigle immigrent labour.
that said, the argument still counts; if your nation has some rowdy muckers in who insist on raidng my border, I'm goign to inist that you put a stop to it- if you dont, then, if its in my power, i will take control of the situation, and make them stop; Rome saw full out conquest, consolodation, and bestowing of Roman priviledges as its answer to the problem
dpends on what you mean; german tribes aided the empiure al the time, but wer enever annexed; ditto for the danube, it was only when the dacians presented a formidible threat did Roe begin its march of conquest; you must akso remember that Roman citizenship was coveted- even St. Peter was proud of his citizenship, and he was amoung the people who woudl have th ebiggest reason to loth it, and all it stood for; thiers a reason that during th ebeginning sof the darkages, barbarian tribes appealed to Rome to settl ein thier territory- its becaus elife was good in the Roman empire, and its people, its citizens, enjoyed life- many times allies willinglyl became parts of the empire- take a look at Pergamum- a city who was arguabll, the dominat power in anatolia, could have remained an indipendent Roman ally; when its king died, he seeded it to Rome
Xen said:
explainNorth King said:
nor did Rome push every one around it into annexation; many of Romes wars, such as the Numidian wars, were completelly unwanted by Rome
she did- her forefathers didnt, and eventually Rome got the upperhand, and egypt was forced into cheap grain shipment sto pay off debts to Rome; reason enough for egyptians to interfere in Roman politics, or at least try, i suspect.
A)I didnt say that interfered in the civil warThat's hardly interveining in the civil war.
no, cleopatra- she claimed him to be the only legale heir of caesar;She never claimed that, who's your source, Octavian?
A)no, shes not innocent- it was the egyptian navy that was used in the med sea, it was the egyptian army the formed the real (if crappy) core of the forces- the Romans wer emerelly an upper crust, and almost all of them switched sides ot Octavian by the end of it, because they were first hand witnesses of what was going on
), and I'll begin drafting rules. Although I'll need some ideas for rules. What units should the nations have around this time?
