Let's Discuss Poland

[TheLastOne36]

1. Well, they don't teach history of insignificant European nations here in Finland. All that I know about the history of Poland is something I've learned on my own during my short life.
2. Care to enlighten me? What is this golden age you are talking about?
3. You lost to Swedish in 1650s if I recall correctly, and then you had a Cossack uprising and numerous wars with Russian shortly after that, which all were lost. I don't think that really counts as a golden age.
4. Wasn't it so that only the initial losers of the was used cavalry?
5. At least while they get all the benefits from EU that used to belong to other countries. It's gonna take more than a few years though, your country relies too much on agriculture still.
7. IMO, it didn't.

1. Funny, i learned about finnish history in poland. And finland is a minor country. (no offence)
2. well our first golden age was when we were the strongest in europe (or second only to venice)
3. yes but pretty much the official end was at the partisans.
4.i don't get what your getting at this. At the end the Allies won.
5. well the "Great European plain" is in Poland, might as well take advantyage of it.
7. we were still strong despite that. It only took the force of 3 major powers to take us down.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

1. Funny, i learned about finnish history in poland. And finland is a minor country. (no offence)

Funny, I learned about Polish history in America, and Poland is a minor country (no offense).

I guess it's a wee bit relative, isn't it?

 

[hvevo]

1. Funny, i learned about finnish history in poland. And finland is a minor country. (no offence)
2. well our first golden age was when we were the strongest in europe (or second only to venice)
3. yes but pretty much the official end was at the partisans.
4.i don't get what your getting at this. At the end the Allies won.
5. well the "Great European plain" is in Poland, might as well take advantyage of it.
7. we were still strong despite that. It only took the force of 3 major powers to take us down.

1. I'm not patriotic so no offence taken (I'd rather move abroad asap but I have to go to army next years. Sucks )
2. So when was that?
3. It's a question of interpretation. I think the golden age ended when the Swedish invaded.
4. Yes they did, but initially the Nazis conquered vast territories rapidly. I'm not gonna analyze the reasons why Hitler lost the war (e.g. the intervention of the US etc.), but just stating that only the countries who were conquered by the Germans used much cavalry. Am I not correct?
5. Well, you won't win space race
7. How many major powers did it take to bring Nazi-Germany down (and remember, they only recovered from a loss in WW1 for a couple of decades).

Edit. BTW, just remembered we do learn some Polish history here in Finland. However, it only covers the period during the WW2 (so not really Polish history).

 

[Methos]

Well, theoretically, there was only one Hitler thread as well, and look how that ended up.

True, but there's always the second try.

 

[cybrxkhan]

1. Poland used to be a regional power.
2. Now its not.
3. Does that really matter in choosing a civ?
4. Because some civs were regional powers.
5. But now they're not, like Ethiopia or the Khmer.
6. So it really comes down to what Firaxis wants.
7. What does Firaxis want anyways?

 

[TheLastOne36]

2. So when was that?
3. It's a question of interpretation. I think the golden age ended when the Swedish invaded.
4. Yes they did, but initially the Nazis conquered vast territories rapidly. I'm not gonna analyze the reasons why Hitler lost the war (e.g. the intervention of the US etc.), but just stating that only the countries who were conquered by the Germans used much cavalry. Am I not correct?
5. Well, you won't win space race
7. How many major powers did it take to bring Nazi-Germany down (and remember, they only recovered from a loss in WW1 for a couple of decades).

2. time period after the black death.
3. well after that we repelled the swedes, i wouldn't consider it then end of the golden age, but if you said the begining of the decline of thegolden age then i'd agee with you.
4. Frace used Calvary?
5. Space racevictory doesn't happen in the real world.
7. Yes and Poland only became a country a few decades before to. And the war did visit poland. So your point's even more valid for Poland. Besides the few years after we got independance we already took moscow!

 

[Poppa Candy]

1. Poland used to be a regional power.

yes

2. Now its not.

I disagree here

3. Does that really matter in choosing a civ?

No, it does not

4. Because some civs were regional powers.

like Ethiopia

5. But now they're not, like Ethiopia or the Khmer.

yes, but you forget the Netherlands

6. So it really comes down to what Firaxis wants.

Possibly

7. What does Firaxis want anyways?

who cares?

..............(1o chars)

 

[Legat]

Besides the few years after we got independance we already took moscow!

I've asked you already a few weeks ago if you can give me a source about this. Or do you mean a different Moscow than the Russian capital?

 

[TheLastOne36]

I've asked you already a few weeks ago if you can give me a source about this. Or do you mean a different Moscow than the Russian capital?

In the Polish Soviet war.

 

[Legat]

Another source than you, please.

 

[Unconquered Sun]

Oh uh textbook cliches about WWII are everywhere in this thread.

Germany used the most horses in WWII. If you have actually read serious WWII research books, or memoirs of WWII German generals, you would have known that.

Since you're a product of an educational system that finds learning about another Baltic nation "irrelevant", well, I can see why you buy the ridiculous "Germans conquered cavalry states" myth.


PS. You probably believe Germany had more tanks than USSR in June 1941 as well, don't you?

 

[TheLastOne36]

Oh uh textbook cliches about WWII are everywhere in this thread.

Germany used the most horses in WWII. If you have actually read serious WWII research books, or memoirs of WWII German generals, you would have known that.

Since you're a product of an educational system that finds learning about another Baltic nation "irrelevant", well, I can see why you buy the ridiculous "Germans conquered cavalry states" myth.


PS. You probably believe Germany had more tanks than USSR in June 1941 as well, don't you?

Yah he's right. Lol and POLAND did NOT CHARGE tanks with Horses. We charged them with our cool minitanks!

 

[cybrxkhan]

i still think even if Poland didn't do it, its kinda interesting charging tanks with horses - kinda romantic, in a way... but spearmen do beat tanks, seriously, so...

 

[Ishon]

i still think even if Poland didn't do it, its kinda interesting charging tanks with horses - kinda romantic, in a way... but spearmen do beat tanks, seriously, so...

That story of charging tanks with horses is one of the many successful products of Goebbels.

 

[cybrxkhan]

^*nods*

well, don't worry, some Vietnamese living up in the hills used crossbows (i think similar to the cho-ko-nu ones) during the Vietnam War, i've heard.

 

[bombel1979]

1. Really it doesnt matter if you are killed with a crossbow or with a sniper rifle. The end product is that you are dead.
2. I second the info about German agmy using about 2 mln horses. German infantry wasn't that motorosied or mechanised as we think today.
3. Polish cavalry didnt charge taks. Thay we quite effective in flankig German troops, as Poland didnt have developed a road system, and cavalry units were very versatile and took advantage of the knowladge od their land (unfortunatelly, it didnt help).
4. "The first Polish Golden age" (I wouldnt used that term) took place in the XIV century when Poland was fluorishing under the reign of Kasmir the Great (there is a saying the the king became a king when Poland was made of wood and the passed away then it was made of stone - sorry for inaccurate translation Poland wasnt so heavilly strucked by the black death and that is when Polish exports to Western Europa started.
5. Taking Moscow during the Polish-Bolshevik war. Hm, IMO, I was possible but not probable... Poland should have better cooperated with Ukrainian and allied forces. But remeber that Poland did have taken Moscow and established Tzar (IIRC it was in XVI century?).

 

[Lone Wolf]

Poland did not take Moscow "the militiary way", through...

 

[Legat]

5. Taking Moscow during the Polish-Bolshevik war. Hm, IMO, I was possible but not probable... Poland should have better cooperated with Ukrainian and allied forces.

The opinion that the conquest of Moscow during that war was perhaps possible under certain circumstances doesn't mean that it really happened as TheLastOne36 repeatedly claimed.

But remeber that Poland did have taken Moscow and established Tzar (IIRC it was in XVI century?).

As far as I know, Ivan III was the first who took the title "Czar" in 1478. It didn't have to do anything with Poland. Poland captured Moscow in 1610 and lost it to Swedish and Russian troops shortly after.

 

[0R4NG3]

It didn't have to do anything with Poland. Poland captured Moscow in 1610 and lost it to Swedish and Russian troops shortly after.

"Captured" is not the right word for it, Polish troops were invited into Moscow by some boyars. And were kicked out 2 years later, if I'm not mistaken, by a Volunteer Army and Cossacks.

 

[Legat]

Sorry, I admit that I don't know that much about Russian history of that period. I just wanted to point out that the Poles didn't have anything to to with the establishment of czardom in Russia.