The Real World NES

[Swissempire]

:Littleboots is a mad man. I should post his orders in the orders thread, but i may have deleted the older ones.

YOu should post them

 

[Symphony D.]

Indochinese rulers are all too often like that, you know.

I guess mine must have been extroverts. Post it, Dachs, you've had enough time!

 

[das]

After all, winning the Caligula title is kinda like arguing about Star Trek - even if you win, you're still a loser

Depends. Caligula just didn't get lucky, lots of other rulers with similarities to him got very, very far indeed. And players, too...

 

[LittleBoots]

Depends. Caligula just didn't get lucky, lots of other rulers with similarities to him got very, very far indeed. And players, too...

True. Way I see it, it was his lack of story bonuses. Now his opponents on the other hand... I honestly think the mod might have been showing a little favouritism, because, to be honest, their stories were a little formulaic and unoriginal.

As for posting my orders, I'll post some Sadrith Mora orders on the condition that everyone understand that:

A) this was, as I said in my moderately demonic story, an exercise in depravity,
B) I am therefore, not normally like this (in NESes, or real life... trust me! ),
C) ...except in the Tartessos war in jalNES (I told them I'd make life hell, but they didn't listen... not really my fault), and
D) I am not trying to make some name for slaughter. It absolutely, positively, singularly, and only (mostly) an experiment confined to one NES to see how well it works in certain situations.

Actually, it ended up being more than one turn of orders and Tartessos was included. I also included, for your reading pleasure, pointless commentary in between spurts (ha) of graphic violence.

Spoiler the dark side of LittleBoots :

Spoiler The Beginning :

EDIT: Stats and other unevil things

New Unique Unit

- Templars of the Black Rose: Heavy cavalry type unit. The Templars are the resurrected souls of great Dark Elf warriors. They possess volunteers, absorbing the volunteer's soul in the process. They wear heavy, magically augmented armour (the magic reinforces the armour, while at the same time making the armour light for easy manuevering), carry black swords with carved runes, have life draining magic ability, allowing them to heal themselves by capturing their enemies' souls. They are completely bound to Thanatos' will as part of their pact of resurrection. They ride giant black stallions, covered in fearsome armour (with the same magical properties as the Templar's armour) that are said the feast of the flesh of the fallen.

EDIT: Domestic orders, rigid caste system, forced slave labour, bans on contraception, plans for constructing gates to hell, etc

EDIT: Boring stuff, etc

- Attack the city, send the Raiders in as the first wave to begin cutting down their archers. As the Raiders occupy the Archers and whatever else the Wood Elves have, send in the Templars charging down their flanks, trampling those with light armour and cutting down the rest. Steal souls rampantly to heal themselves and to kill people. As the Wood Elves waver from the frontal assault and then flank attack, send in the Avatar the incarnation of Thanatos. Have him wade through the enemy leaving a trail of blood behind him. The sight of him and his terrifying armour/use of magic should be enough to send the Wood Elves running. Use the cavalry especially to run them down.

EDIT: Boring strategy, etc

- If our attack is successful and we take the city, slaughter every single male of all ages and every woman too old to be of use. Enslave the remaining women and give them to Raiders to breed with, the offspring of which will become a new class of slaves and sacrificial victims. The mixed children are to be traumatized their entire lives into a state that is emotionally weak, subservient, and afraid.

- All male offspring of the mixing are to be castrated upon birth and put to work. All females are to be bred with other soldiers and put to work.

- After we've enslaved their women, loot their entire village, taking anything and everything of value back to Mournhold to be melted down and reforged. This includes the armour and weaponry of the enemy.

- When it has all been done, burn the entire city to the ground, including large areas of the forest around them. Heavily salt the ground and then return to Mournhold.

There we go, that was fun! Here's to hoping.

My first experiment with evilness... and aggressive behaviour in general.

Spoiler In too deep :

- After we capture Quanrion, sell their population into wholesale slaughter. Rape, pillage, burn, but do not destroy the city, occupy it. Rename it Balmora. Create pyramids of bones outside the city walls and place High Elf heads on pikes. Allow Raiders to carry severed heads on their belts as prizes. All children are to be beaten and murdered in front of their parents, <EDIT: Even I'm not proud of what went here...> women are then to be kept as slaves by the soldiers until the Avatar decides what to do with them. The men are to be slowly, painfully, tortured to death in terrifying rituals devoted to Thanatos.

That was perhaps a little overboard. That turn also included the systematic, ritualistic slaughter of 4,000 High Elf slaves, mainly because I got paranoid of the development of a subculture that could gain power and revolt. I had planned on possibly executing a Spartan system of random murders to keep them beneath the boot(s) (har har, I'm on a roll), but as I was planning a campaign, I didn't feel like sparing the manpower.

Spoiler The Horror, the Horror, etc :

- Expand west along the river, not into Wood Elf territory, north of it. If we run into any villages or small kingdoms, etc, offer them a chance to save their lives by unconditionally surrendering and agreeing to transport back to Mournhold as slaves. Remind them of Quanrion's Fall and then let them decide. If they say yes, good for them. Occupy their towns, move our people in to populate 'em, move them out to work on the road network, kill all troublemakers.

- Actually, separate 'em into groups by age, gender, physical fitness, and attractiveness (if they're elvish) and bring them to separate locations. Quietly and secretly kill all the old, weak, overweight, and/or ugly ones in rituals to Thanatos. Force the lookers among the women into brothels in Mournhold and Balmora, and work the men to death building roads/working in mines/etc. Slaughter troublemakers and random guys every once in a while to keep 'em in line. Children are to raised as the lower classes are raised, traumatized into complacency and self-hate.

- The ones that resist... well, our modus operandi is fairly obvious. Wholesale slaughter, rape, loot, pillage. Kill or enslave every single person and loot every single thing, but leave the villages standing (not walls, those are to be torn down and shipped back to be used in the road system/walls) as a terrifyingly silent monument to the price of resistance, so that all the travelers would see the effects - a town that resists is cleansed of all life and left an empty husk.

More of the same, although it does provide for some chance of life. If you could call it that.

Spoiler Tartessos :

Operation: Upstart
Irish:3000 axemen, 3500 swordsmen, and 5 catapults (or 4000 swordsmen if no catapults)
Ally (British): 3000 Axemen, 2000 Archers, 50 Galleys

- Send the entire force into Tartessos land. Burn, rape, pillage, and slaughter their outlying villages. Leave no one alive in any village.

EDIT: Boring stuff, like strategy

- Force battle with their army only on our terms. Evade them whenever possible, retreating to burn out their homes and villages and then coming back and hitting them hard. Make them chase after us and get tired and then strike back at them.

EDIT: Grocery list

- If we capture Gibraltar, put the entire city to the torch. Leave no stone upon another stone (but save the stone for afterwards when we rebuild the city in our image). Kill every male, enslave every female, and give them to the warriors (also, promise them women beforehand to motivate them).

- Slowly torture and kill the merchant council that ruled Tartessos, constantly reminding them of their choice.

- After our campaign, there should be barely a Tartessian left alive.

That was mainly a bit of a rampage I wrote after I had just finished my Sadrith Mora orders and I was feeling a little mad that they had refused my very generous offer... of annexation.

 

[Dachs]

LittleBoots, the orders thread is the other one.

I finished over the weekend instead of working on calculus! Yay! Here it is: and I give you a guarantee that it will be highly unsatisfactory compared to the amount of time you spent waiting for it.

Augustus (27 BC - 14 AD) - Jason the King. For his generalship (although Augustus had his generals) and for his domestic ability. Nuff said.

Tiberius (14 - 37) - Finmaster. One of the greatest Roman generals of the Pax Romana times is matched up with the guy who was a pretty good Switzerland in NES2 V. Not especially a domestic overachiever, though.

Caligula (37 - 41) - LittleBoots. Some similarities and insanities abound in them both, but mainly because he said he wanted to be Caligula.

Nero (54 - 68) - Sheep. Both have an (not entirely deserved) interesting domestic track record, and both are pretty good militarily (Nero's general Corbulo was able enough to fight well in Parthia and Armenia).

Vespasian (69 - 79) - Symphony D. Militarily, one of the best around. Domestically, very solid. Both characterized by lightning campaigns (witness Second Bedriacum and NES2 VI, respectively). This one doesn't require much explaining.

Trajan (98 - 117) - Insane_Panda. Once again, he earns this for his military record and his "conquer the world" complex. A dangerous enemy...and a dangerous ally, if he so chooses.

Hadrian (117 - 138) - Goober. An able general...with a few peccadilloes, too. Domestically, one of the top dogs, too (at least, that is my impression). A strong and able leader.

Marcus Aurelius (161 - 180) - JosefStalinator. One of the great Roman soldier-emperors, Josef/M. Aurelius sure as heck can fight, although he doesn't get much opportunity to do much else.

Septimius Severus (193 - 211) - das. The best Roman general since Caesar, with a particular disdain for elected (Senatorial) officials. Also, the last of the Soldier Emperors of the Pax Romana...before the dark times of the crisis.

Caracalla (211 - 217) - Cleric. Ruthless and cruel, but a good general. 'Nuff said.

Valerian (254 - 260) - tossi. Able enough, and can keep going for awhile and even get the best of his enemy, but somehow always ends up losing narrowly through exhaustion (Phoenicia, Kartyria, Portugal). A good player, with a good deal of operational skill (witness the Isra campaign, ITNES), although on the plane of grand strategy he ends up on the wrong side a lot.

Gallienus (254 - 268) - andis-1. One of my favorite emperors, a tragic and able hero who saved Rome and gets little credit. An excellent general, he provided the basis for the Illyrian emperors to restore the Empire. I see a lot of parallels between andis' operations as the HRE in NES2 V and Gallienus' attempts to keep a crumbling Rome together. Too, he gets short shrift in most histories/NESes.

Diocletian (284 - 305) - Lord_Iggy. No great shakes as a general (although able enough), Diocletian mainly reformed the state and helped it survive (although not through his tetrarchy's creation as much as 1) its precedent in creating an Eastern and Western Empire) and 2) allowing the rise of Constantine, who imbued the empire with the religious fire of Christianity and allowed it to survive another century and a half). LI, I think, is a far better mod than player (not to denigrate his playing abilities), and is cursed with some of the worst times to take a vacation in the history of the universe.

Maximian (286 - 305) - stalin006. A good-enough general, but the main thing about Maximian was his constant attempts to regain power or influence the rest of the Empire after his forced abdication - just like stalin's constant rebel movements, at least in NES2 VI.

Constantine I the Great (306 - 337) - Capulet. I realize a minor irony here, but I believe that they are about the same level in generalship (on the good side of good) and ruling ability, and they both are rather opinionated about their beliefs (witness Cap's OT discussions...I shall say no more), despite belonging to different systems. Cap's performance as Luca in ITNES was one of the more brilliant ones around, and Constantine's systematic elimination of his rivals contained much the same amount of military flair.

Constantius II (337 - 361) - emu. An able general, as is witnessed by his campaigns against the Sassanids in the east, he is also somewhat tyrannical and a tad insane. I think that that fits emu perfectly, personally.

Valens (364 - 378) - Luckymoose. His name is rather ironic: he doesn't have much luck at all. He's able enough, but Valens' thirst for glory at the expense of his subordinates and colleague (the other emperor, Gratian) induced him to attack the Goths at Second Adrianople, and he was crushed there. Valens is comparable to Jacques in NES2 VIb's Egypt, alienating group after group in his attempts to further his own ambitions.

Majorian (457 - 461) - Sgt. Hellfish. Having not spent much time in a NES with this character, and only having heard of his particular skills, I can only really have him as an able general emperor in the waning days of the Western Empire. With this one (sorry, Sarge), I'd be glad to have someone recommend some other emperor, having had too little data upon which to go.

Anastasius I (491 - 518) - BananaLee. I'm taking largely from BL's operations as Siam in NES2 V for this one, and an able general Anastasius was (that seems to be a general rule for most NESers: good general. Hmm.). Although there are no Indochinese connections, he fought and won a naval battle against some rebels, which could be similar to BL's wars on piracy (there are quite a few, no?).

Justinian I the Great (527 - 565) - Disenfrancised. Dis and Justinian share some generalship qualities, but the main things I'm looking at is the degree of success. Dalnorossia was a Great Power, and the EUA is the second Superpower. Justinian oversaw a massive territorial regain during his reign, and Dis does nothing if not that itself. Also, it seems to me that Dis likes to fool around in Western America and Mexico...no real correlation with Justinian there, but meh.

Maurice (582 - 602) - Wubba360. His performance as Abyssinia was excellent, and Maurice was one of the better soldier emperors of Byzantium (although there were many). They were both done in in the end by bad luck and a small error in policy (Maurice antagonized the Danube legions and got himself murdered by the centurion Phocas, Wubba's Negus Negusti went up too close to the front lines and got sniped).

Heraclius (610 - 641) - silver2039. Sigh. I was a little dismayed to find that the only Byzantine Great Captain (not counting Belisarius, who wasn't an emperor and doesn't count) was best matched to silver. Think about it: tons of reforms, huge military victories all over the Middle East from Constantinople to Isfahan, and after he wins he forgets to send orders and the Muslims wipe him out (probably played by Contempt). I have to go take a break and destroy something now.

Justinian II Rhinotmetus (685 - 695, 705 - 711) - Reno. The first part of his reign is Reno-ish, with a generally successful foreign and domestic policy (the Pope even visits Constantinople, the last time during Byzantine reign), but then he gets himself some enemies and is forced out (they even cut off his nose), and starts a rebel movement. Yes: a rebel movement. When he regains the throne, of course, he goes on an orgy of slaughter and destruction, weakening the state, but that's another story entirely.

Anastasius II (713 - 715) - Kentharu. Just like Sultan Osman IV, his reforms got him thrown out. 'Nuff said...except for that minor incident in which he rebels later on, which sounds vaguely Kentharu-ish, too.

Irene (797 - 802) - Cuivienen. Mainly because I wouldn't be so mean to give her Zoe or Zoe's sister Theodora. Irene was at least an iconodule, which is good, and a fairly able ruler, another good thing, but due to her actions, Charlemagne became Holy Roman Emperor, a bad thing.

Theophilus (829 - 842) - North King. Very philosophical, like NK's convos in OT (I use "philosophical" here loosely) and a bit like NK's Harsha in ITNES. An adequate general, although every now and then his cookies get stolen (destruction of Amorium). That, and he always seems to have tons of money, and I can never figure out where it comes from...just like Theophilus.

Basil I the Macedonian (867 - 886) - Harleqin. Excellent general, and a bit of a reformer (that stuff about Michael III starting all of his reforms is junk; Michael couldn't stop screwing his mistresses long enough to go to church, much less initiate a bunch of reforms). Basil can be compared to Justinian in his recodification of law and reconquests in Italy; Harleqin's Scandinavian campaigns deserve some notice, as well.

Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus (945- 959) - Azale. Good both domestically and militarily; Azale's reputation, unfortunately, has suffered a bit due to the incidents in the former PUAF; his turn as the Papal States is of more interest if one wants to compare him to the Porphyrogenitus.

Romanus I Lecapenus (920 - 944) - tommy_toon. A good mixture of peace and war in both of these. Romanus has the unfortunate reputation of usurper (which, unfortunately, he deserved) and a poor emperor (which he didn't as much). tommy's wars as the Afghan Khanate seem very much like situations the Lecapenus was in.

Nicephorus II Phocas (963 - 969) - Thlayli. Thlayli just seems rather luckless with respect to NESes with the main exception being his earlier time as Safavid Persia in NES2 V. (Look at basically all of NES2 VI, LINES II, and NES2 V's last few years.) Nicephorus was a very able leader who had the misfortune to get involved with the Empress Theophano and John Tzimisces, a formidable opponent - similarly, Thlayli's skills seem nullified when opposed by a far stronger opponent, against whom he has little chance.

Basil II Bulgaroctonus (976 - 1025) - Stormbringer. Stormy's style of warfare is very similar to Basil's: slow and steady wins the race. His performances as Russia and the FK lend a bit of support to that last. The FK especially seems very Basil-ish. Basil's reign was the apogee of Byzantium; the Federates' apogee was reached under Stormy's George V.

Isaac I Comnenus (1057 - 1059) - KrimzonStriker. Really, not much to say: a better than average general who was defeated by internal dissent and outside pressure; a NESer who was defeated mainly through an unexpected attack at the outset of his reign in Byzantium. Later operations remain to be seen...

Alexius I Comnenus (1081 - 1118) - Contempt. Here, since Contempt's famous steppe empires don't really apply to Byzantium and Rome, we use Scandinavia as an example. Diplomatic triumphs (such as pulling the FK into the war as opposed to having them fight with the HRE) are matched by military ones (reconquest of northern Germany and victories in northern Muscovy) - just like Alexius.

John II Comnenus (1118 - 1143) - The Farow. A good general (man, I'm tired of saying that!) determined to conquer Anatolia; Farow's Germanic empire in ICNES can be compared a bit to that in its victories over the Celts (it's a bit of a stretch, but...). Farow's Britain was also fairly competent in NES2 VI.

Manuel I Comnenus (1143 - 1180) - Silver Steak. I leave here little to the imagination. Generalship, yes, but Myriocephalum...

Alexius V Murtzuphlus (1204) - Icmancin. The impression I get from IC is one of some skill, but transience - like his von Barkenburg and his Alaska.

John III Ducas Vatatzes (1221 - 1254) - Dachspmg. A reunifier, of Byzantium anyway. It remains to be seen (i.e. it hasn't happened yet, but will soon) if I can keep Byzantium together (I can't). One of the better Byzantine emperors, he went a bit mad in his later years.

Michael VIII Palaeologus (1259 - 1282) - alex994. Yes, I know I have compared him to Alexius Comnenus; but I think that he deserves this spot more. Possibly the most brilliant diplomat and Euro-centric emperor the Byzantines ever had; and a good general in his own right. I say Euro-centric because alex almost always starts a European-education program in his Chinas, doesn't he?

John V Palaeologus (1341 - 1391) - ~Darkening~. Really, the Segu/John V comparisons sort of work, a little bit. Maybe he'd be better as one of the two Andronici. Maybe not. I'll have to think about that one. Sorry, Darkening.

John VI Cantacuzenus (1347 - 1354) - DrakeRlugia. A competent figure, but unable to halt Byzantine decline; from what little I can see of Drake (his performance as Venice in NES2 V), that seems to be him. A good enough NESer in his own way.

John VIII Palaeologus (1425 - 1448) - Kal'thzar. Evoking memories of France in NES2 V, I chose John VIII for Kal'thzar. Had he been born earlier, John VIII could have been a great basileus; instead, he was Emperor when the Empire needed a manager, not a grandiose schemer. His actions and antagonization of the Ottoman Sultans were enough to put Constantine XI into the unenviable position of being the last Roman Emperor, when grand schemes were not what the Byzantines needed to get themselves out of the hole.

That's it, folks! If I missed you, I either did it on purpose, having insufficient data to get a conclusion, or I forgot, and should feel bad about it.

 

[Reno]

Justinian II Rhinotmetus (685 - 695, 705 - 711) - Reno. The first part of his reign is Reno-ish, with a generally successful foreign and domestic policy (the Pope even visits Constantinople, the last time during Byzantine reign), but then he gets himself some enemies and is forced out (they even cut off his nose), and starts a rebel movement. Yes: a rebel movement. When he regains the throne, of course, he goes on an orgy of slaughter and destruction, weakening the state, but that's another story entirely.

This actualy fits me rather well, even the slightly unlikely part about slaughtering once regaining the throne. (See Tarunist States Atlantis in NES2 II)

 

[das]

Augustus (27 BC - 14 AD) - Jason the King. For his generalship (although Augustus had his generals) and for his domestic ability. Nuff said.

Strange, those are precisely the reasons I thought him to be more Panda-esque - well, that and the various administrative reforms.

Caracalla (211 - 217) - Cleric. Ruthless and cruel, but a good general. 'Nuff said.

But he didn't even get to launch a socialist revolution! Nor does he seem to be a one for guerrila warfare... Face it, Cleric was born for a different age.

Diocletian (284 - 305) - Lord_Iggy. No great shakes as a general (although able enough), Diocletian mainly reformed the state and helped it survive (although not through his tetrarchy's creation as much as 1) its precedent in creating an Eastern and Western Empire) and 2) allowing the rise of Constantine, who imbued the empire with the religious fire of Christianity and allowed it to survive another century and a half). LI, I think, is a far better mod than player (not to denigrate his playing abilities), and is cursed with some of the worst times to take a vacation in the history of the universe.

Though generally I'd agree, Diocletian surprisingly enough reminds me of silver2039; must be because of silver's clearly Diocletian-inspired BT orders for NES2 VI... Still, there are some disturbing parallels. And Iggy isn't known particularily for administrative reforms - more for creating countries, actually. I'd nominate him to be Romulus had Romulus been an emperor.

Constantine I the Great (306 - 337) - Capulet. I realize a minor irony here, but I believe that they are about the same level in generalship (on the good side of good) and ruling ability, and they both are rather opinionated about their beliefs (witness Cap's OT discussions...I shall say no more), despite belonging to different systems. Cap's performance as Luca in ITNES was one of the more brilliant ones around, and Constantine's systematic elimination of his rivals contained much the same amount of military flair.

Constantine was a pagan. Its not exactly a sign of being "opinionated" about one's beliefs by undermining them and introducing completely different ones as state religion. Constantine actually also reminds me of Panda. Or of myself, though I don't mind Severus.

Anastasius I (491 - 518) - BananaLee. I'm taking largely from BL's operations as Siam in NES2 V for this one, and an able general Anastasius was (that seems to be a general rule for most NESers: good general. Hmm.). Although there are no Indochinese connections, he fought and won a naval battle against some rebels, which could be similar to BL's wars on piracy (there are quite a few, no?).

BananaLee is quite good militarily, but he is one of the greatest "builders" here. Not sure who should he be in that case, to be honest; had Julius Caeser lived longer, he would probably have been just perfect (colonies, dealings with barbarians, military skill, naval battles, and then, supposedly, more campaigns combined with major domestic reorganization and development).

Justinian I the Great (527 - 565) - Disenfrancised. Dis and Justinian share some generalship qualities, but the main things I'm looking at is the degree of success. Dalnorossia was a Great Power, and the EUA is the second Superpower. Justinian oversaw a massive territorial regain during his reign, and Dis does nothing if not that itself. Also, it seems to me that Dis likes to fool around in Western America and Mexico...no real correlation with Justinian there, but meh.

Disenfrancised strikes me as better-suited for the position of one of the later Byzantine emperors; he also, despite military talents, is even better at domestic development and better still - at diplomacy and intrigue. Justinian is silver2039 or Insane_Panda, IMHO.

Nicephorus II Phocas (963 - 969) - Thlayli. Thlayli just seems rather luckless with respect to NESes with the main exception being his earlier time as Safavid Persia in NES2 V. (Look at basically all of NES2 VI, LINES II, and NES2 V's last few years.) Nicephorus was a very able leader who had the misfortune to get involved with the Empress Theophano and John Tzimisces, a formidable opponent - similarly, Thlayli's skills seem nullified when opposed by a far stronger opponent, against whom he has little chance.

Thlayli's key characteristics are overconfidence and military innovativeness. Not sure, but from what I know of Nicephorus, the overconfidence bit at least doesn't apply; where Thlayli is optimistic is naive, Nicephorus, though reasonably so, was highly paranoid. Actually, Thlayli strikes me as similar to Ioann VIII. VERY similar. I mean, remember all those attempts to rally an anti-Turkish coalition, the senseless trust in the western states up to the reconciliation with Rome, the unlucky last stand and so forth. I have no doubt that he wrote a nice four-part story on the fall of Constantinople in the end.

Michael VIII Palaeologus (1259 - 1282) - alex994. Yes, I know I have compared him to Alexius Comnenus; but I think that he deserves this spot more. Possibly the most brilliant diplomat and Euro-centric emperor the Byzantines ever had; and a good general in his own right. I say Euro-centric because alex almost always starts a European-education program in his Chinas, doesn't he?

And that is why Disenfrancised deserves this most, IMHO - he also is very big on education and so forth. Not sure where alex994 should be placed...

Also, I declare SwissEmpire Andronicus I Comnenus! Come on, coming to power with great promise just to be cut into pieces by a street mob cheered on by hordes of domestic and foreign enemies from everywhere is just so him!

 

[Symphony D.]

The only problem I see in comparison of myself to Vespasian, is that unlike Vespasian, after the first war or two, there doesn't tend to be peace... just more war. Admittedly though, I was rather quite content with my (northern and western) boundaries in ITNES I at least... Otherwise, I like it.

 

[Kal'thzar]

John VIII Palaeologus (1425 - 1448) - Kal'thzar. Evoking memories of France in NES2 V, I chose John VIII for Kal'thzar. Had he been born earlier, John VIII could have been a great basileus; instead, he was Emperor when the Empire needed a manager, not a grandiose schemer. His actions and antagonization of the Ottoman Sultans were enough to put Constantine XI into the unenviable position of being the last Roman Emperor, when grand schemes were not what the Byzantines needed to get themselves out of the hole.

But sometimes the grandoise schemes work

 

[silver 2039]

instead, he was Emperor when the Empire needed a manager, not a grandiose schemer. His actions and antagonization of the Ottoman Sultans were enough to put Constantine XI into the unenviable position of being the last Roman Emperor, when grand schemes were not what the Byzantines needed to get themselves out of the hole.

To his credit he was quite sucessful in formenting civil wars withing the Ottoman Empire and kept a pretender Sultan in Constantinople which he threathned to releases if the Ottomans got overtly agressive.

Though that did irritate Mehmed greatley and convicned him that to to secure his Empire he had to take the straits...but really at that point the Roman Imperial power was in its death throes having lost the vast majority of the land and population.

 

[das]

I agree that the Byzantines were doomed by then. And Mehmed II had plenty of other reasons to take Constantinople beside that.

 

[Dachs]

Yeh, I know I "forgot" Swiss. Like I said, these are just my personal impressions, flawed as they are - and opinions as well.

I was actually going to give him a non-Emperor (sort of), Theodore I of Epirus, because of the constant rebelling and scheming, much of which is comparable to Cameronist Ireland/Holy Celtic Empire.

Also, I finally realized why LittleBoots is named "LittleBoots". I guess I just wasn't paying attention.

 

[das]

Meh, I didn't realize it immediately neither, only when the Roman Emperor discussion begun.

 

[Oruc]

Man you have good impressions of everyone Dachspmg

 

[das]

Only rather similar ones, as he himself had noted. Pretty much everyone seems to be "a good general".

 

[Oruc]

Only rather similar ones, as he himself had noted. Pretty much everyone seems to be "a good general".

Yes I did notice that, Imagine if we were all part of the same army we would be unstoppable!
or maybe we would just stab each other in the back in a desperate attempt to assume control over the country

 

[jalapeno_dude]

I don't get anything?

 

[Dachs]

Sorry, JD. I don't really see much of you in das NESes; unfortunately, that's where I spend most, if not all, of my time these days. I wouldn't really be qualified to give a emperor to you.

As to the "good general" bit; I'm afraid that to avoid defamation of character I may or may not have overrated some fighting capabilities of some or all of the players here.

 

[tossi]

"Valerian (254 - 260) - tossi. Able enough, and can keep going for awhile and even get the best of his enemy, but somehow always ends up losing narrowly through exhaustion (Phoenicia, Kartyria, Portugal). A good player, with a good deal of operational skill (witness the Isra campaign, ITNES), although on the plane of grand strategy he ends up on the wrong side a lot."
---
Ha . Thanks for mentioning me. Yeah I guess that kinda fits me.

 

[LittleBoots]

On the topic of the orders I posted, Dachs, that was mainly demostrative of mildly brutal/vaguely disturbed orders to verify Swiss' claims that I was, in fact, mad.

As for the name, in retrospect, it was a little obscure and not readily recognizable (while not exactly conveying a terribly intimidating image) and therefore maybe it wasn't the best choice. Then again, a little obscure, not readily recognizable, and lacking a terribly intimidating image describes me in NESing so far