Age of Roma: 300 BCE (OOC/Signups)

[Zachary Nichols]

My god...
Dis gonna be gud.

Seriously though, loving all this coalition stuff going on. The Romans and the Etruscans, Carthage and Egypt, potentially the Seleucids and the Mauryans.

Mind you, Carthage would probably struggle to project power as far as Egypt. Nevermind Judea.

He wont be able to project power out of his city walls once Rome is made great by moi imho

[Torrocca]

My god...
Dis gonna be gud.

Seriously though, loving all this coalition stuff going on. The Romans and the Etruscans, Carthage and Egypt, potentially the Seleucids and the Mauryans.

Mind you, Carthage would probably struggle to project power as far as Egypt. Nevermind Judea.

Yes, but they'd be struggling even more if, y'know, we decided to make something good of that good ol' marriage alliance and smash them and their Egyptian allies. Especially since I definitely never, ever would stab you in the back.

c:

[G-Tech Corporation]

Mind you, Carthage would probably struggle to project power as far as Egypt. Nevermind Judea.

We will project power. But not territorial-wise, but by trading ports and monopolizing on trade routes.

A fair enough idea. As a wise man once said though, "No one need think that the world can be ruled without blood. The civil sword shall and must be red and bloody."

Gold is fine. But power, power comes from force.

[The Ik Ka Ek Akai]

Hey OP, can you tell me about the lands surrounding me? I'm thinking about an expansion.

To the south are pirates and raiders. To the west are Italians. To the north and west are mercantile Celts with a distaste for all things German.

[Zachary Nichols]

OP, since I'm gonna siege naples soon, can you tell us how siege mechanics work?

[The Flame Dawn]

Hey OP, can you tell me about the lands surrounding me? I'm thinking about an expansion.

To the south are pirates and raiders. To the west are Italians. To the north and west are mercantile Celts with a distaste for all things German.

So military on the south, attempt diplomacy to the north and east, and fortify the west, got it.

[Jaslandia]

Just going to point out that Ptolemy holds a great amount of influence in Rhodes as well.

The Etruscans also have a good claim to Cyprus. Being the literal inventors of Fascism, the Etruscans are fairly nationalistic, and will fight to save their kin from perceived destructive forces. This includes Crete, Cyprus, and Rhaetia. Lemnos is an option as well, but is fairly insignificant.

Yeah, I believe it was the Rhodians who first called Ptolemy 'Soter' (which means 'Savior'). I may be able to take advantage of that to get the Rhodians to assist me in a Cyprus attack.

Egypt will still fight. Egypt needs Cyprus as a base against the Seleucids, and as a jumping-off point for a future invasion of Anatolia. Cyprus is just too important to Ptolemy's overall plan to just give up.

So, on a scale of 1 to boned, how boned are the Seleucids if the Carthaginian-Egyptian alliance decides to attack? What if the Seleucids get the Mauryans to support them in it, on basis of the current marriage alliance?

My god...
Dis gonna be gud.

Seriously though, loving all this coalition stuff going on. The Romans and the Etruscans, Carthage and Egypt, potentially the Seleucids and the Mauryans.

It would be like the ancient world's equivalent of a world war!

http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/ran ... 0402225423

So, on a scale of 1 to boned, how boned are the Seleucids if the Carthaginian-Egyptian alliance decides to attack? What if the Seleucids get the Mauryans to support them in it, on basis of the current marriage alliance?

Ptolemy and Seleucid were fairly evenly balanced. If Seleuces can convince his satraps about the more pressing matters at hand, he could unify them for a bit to fight back. Defense needs no justification.

True, but Ptolemy was pretty victorious in the past Diadochi wars, and much like historically, I could ally with Lysimachus against the Seleucids. I would also have Carthage's "small loan of a million talents", and maybe even their mercenaries. I feel pretty good about me going up against Seleuces.

Hey scary Carthage. Dont mind me. I'll just expand to the tip of Italy and then attack Greece. No sir. Nothing to see or care about at all.

If you attack Greece, then I'll be giving you dirty looks (and maybe some spears): I'm still trying to unite Alexandria, and you don't want to be in the way of a p*ssed-off Ptolemy.

[G-Tech Corporation]

Mind you, Carthage would probably struggle to project power as far as Egypt. Nevermind Judea.

Yes, but they'd be struggling even more if, y'know, we decided to make something good of that good ol' marriage alliance and smash them and their Egyptian allies. Especially since I definitely never, ever would stab you in the back.

c:

No offense, but I doubt the Seleucids could stab the Maurya in the back even if they wanted to. As of a current accounting, the Mauryans hold about a third of the world's population in this era.

That said, I doubt an alliance in truth between us could be in any way efficacious. Naval skirmishing and landings I could potentially affect against Arabia and Egyptian tributaries, but to send an army west from Arachosia would be a deed worthy of song and dance indeed.

@ Jas: Actually, Ptolemy's name "Soter" was more ironic than actual. He wasn't actually influential in that battle, but to the ignorant his propaganda was effective. The Rhodians called him Soter first of all out of a sense of endearment, not because he actually saved them.

[The Ik Ka Ek Akai]

OP, since I'm gonna siege naples soon, can you tell us how siege mechanics work?

You can camp outside of a city and wait it out, though it may try to fight back eventually, or you can storm the city and risk losing much more. Mind you, for the enemy to retaliate during a blockade, the soldiers will be more starved and will lose the defensive advantage of their walls. However, storming the city using siege engines can produce incredibly quicker results. Civilized peoples (non-tribal) can use a wide array of engines, including digging under the wall to collapse a portion, but the tribal and nomadic peoples are more-or-less stuck with battering rams and ladders.

[Torrocca]

Yes, but they'd be struggling even more if, y'know, we decided to make something good of that good ol' marriage alliance and smash them and their Egyptian allies. Especially since I definitely never, ever would stab you in the back.

c:

No offense, but I doubt the Seleucids could stab the Maurya in the back even if they wanted to. As of a current accounting, the Mauryans hold about a third of the world's population in this era.

That said, I doubt an alliance in truth between us could be in any way efficacious. Naval skirmishing and landings I could potentially affect against Arabia and Egyptian tributaries, but to send an army west from Arachosia would be a deed worthy of song and dance indeed.

@ Jas: Actually, Ptolemy's name "Soter" was more ironic than actual. He wasn't actually influential in that battle, but to the ignorant his propaganda was effective. The Rhodians called him Soter first of all out of a sense of endearment, not because he actually saved them.

Well, I mean, it'd probably depend on how much ends up getting put under control of both my Empire and yours. Since Egypt's obviously gonna be really rich, Seleuces (or his son) could end up scratching your back later on when you might need it, if our theoretical attacks on Egypt actually worked out well enough.

[The Ik Ka Ek Akai]

No offense, but I doubt the Seleucids could stab the Maurya in the back even if they wanted to. As of a current accounting, the Mauryans hold about a third of the world's population in this era.

That said, I doubt an alliance in truth between us could be in any way efficacious. Naval skirmishing and landings I could potentially affect against Arabia and Egyptian tributaries, but to send an army west from Arachosia would be a deed worthy of song and dance indeed.

@ Jas: Actually, Ptolemy's name "Soter" was more ironic than actual. He wasn't actually influential in that battle, but to the ignorant his propaganda was effective. The Rhodians called him Soter first of all out of a sense of endearment, not because he actually saved them.

Well, I mean, it'd probably depend on how much ends up getting put under control of both my Empire and yours. Since Egypt's obviously gonna be really rich, Seleuces (or his son) could end up scratching your back later on when you might need it, if our theoretical attacks on Egypt actually worked out well enough.

Persia's hard as hell to invade imho

[Torrocca]

Well, I mean, it'd probably depend on how much ends up getting put under control of both my Empire and yours. Since Egypt's obviously gonna be really rich, Seleuces (or his son) could end up scratching your back later on when you might need it, if our theoretical attacks on Egypt actually worked out well enough.

Persia's hard as hell to invade imho

Wait, why'd we invade Persia?! O_o

We're discussing a possible invasion of Egypt...

[The Ik Ka Ek Akai]

Also, side note: That thing in my latest post with the Etruscans saying the stuff about clouds is actually a historical thing.

It was noted that the Romans gave this as the primary distinction between the Etruscans and them: The Romans say that lightning happens because clouds rub against each other, while the Etruscans say that clouds rub each other so that lightning may happen.

Take from that what you will.

[The Ik Ka Ek Akai]

Persia's hard as hell to invade imho

Wait, why'd we invade Persia?! O_o

We're discussing a possible invasion of Egypt...

I mean for the Maurya. You've both got great defensive positions, and whoever goes on the offensive is likely to get ruined.

[G-Tech Corporation]

Wait, why'd we invade Persia?! O_o

We're discussing a possible invasion of Egypt...

I mean for the Maurya. You've both got great defensive positions, and whoever goes on the offensive is likely to get ruined.

A man holds the Kyber Pass, 'urra.

Also, Ik, I'm finally finishing my post about negotiations with the Kalinga. I figure, since they were part of the Nandas three years ago, leaving due to the incompetent rule of the last emperor that Chandragupta overthrew, they would be amenable to joining in empire with his overthrower. Kind like merging Alsace back with France. Just wanted to run that diplomatic move by you before I finalized it.

[Hastiaka]

We will project power. But not territorial-wise, but by trading ports and monopolizing on trade routes.

A fair enough idea. As a wise man once said though, "No one need think that the world can be ruled without blood. The civil sword shall and must be red and bloody."

Gold is fine. But power, power comes from force.

In that case, that sword is Egypt. Carthage can buy a lot of things and build a lot of things for Egypt. This alliance is a combination of a wealthy republic and a warrior empire.

[The Ik Ka Ek Akai]

I mean for the Maurya. You've both got great defensive positions, and whoever goes on the offensive is likely to get ruined.

A man holds the Kyber Pass, 'urra.

Also, Ik, I'm finally finishing my post about negotiations with the Kalinga. I figure, since they were part of the Nandas three years ago, leaving due to the incompetent rule of the last emperor that Chandragupta overthrew, they would be amenable to joining in empire with his overthrower. Kind like merging Alsace back with France. Just wanted to run that diplomatic move by you before I finalized it.

They would not accept. Few people surrender power willingly, even when greatly outmatched. Especially since they're a republic, and you're a monarchy. There was a war about this historically. In fact, this war is said to have motivated Ashoka to become a Buddhist, shocked and horrified by how bloody it was.

[G-Tech Corporation]

A man holds the Kyber Pass, 'urra.

Also, Ik, I'm finally finishing my post about negotiations with the Kalinga. I figure, since they were part of the Nandas three years ago, leaving due to the incompetent rule of the last emperor that Chandragupta overthrew, they would be amenable to joining in empire with his overthrower. Kind like merging Alsace back with France. Just wanted to run that diplomatic move by you before I finalized it.

They would not accept. Few people surrender power willingly, even when greatly outmatched. Especially since they're a republic, and you're a monarchy. There was a war about this historically. In fact, this war is said to have motivated Ashoka to become a Buddhist, shocked and horrified by how bloody it was.

Certainly- but this was before the Republic had become truly entrenched; historically, the Kalinga Kingdom has only existed for three years now, not the sixty of Ashoka's time. It is a nascent entity with little power or political elite, and is being offered a position of a province within the Maurya Empire on equal standing, which entails the dissolution of tariffs and trade boundaries. If you think three years is a long enough time to undo the cultural and historical ties of ~two centuries of coexistence with greater India, so be it, but I think the offer is reasonable for reintegration.

[Jaslandia]

@ Jas: Actually, Ptolemy's name "Soter" was more ironic than actual. He wasn't actually influential in that battle, but to the ignorant his propaganda was effective. The Rhodians called him Soter first of all out of a sense of endearment, not because he actually saved them.

Interesting. I didn't know that.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/Y2nbrJyAR6RiM/200_s.gif

A fair enough idea. As a wise man once said though, "No one need think that the world can be ruled without blood. The civil sword shall and must be red and bloody."

Gold is fine. But power, power comes from force.

In that case, that sword is Egypt. Carthage can buy a lot of things and build a lot of things for Egypt. This alliance is a combination of a wealthy republic and a warrior empire.

Basically. I have the armies, while Carthage has the money to fund those armies.

[The Ik Ka Ek Akai]

They would not accept. Few people surrender power willingly, even when greatly outmatched. Especially since they're a republic, and you're a monarchy. There was a war about this historically. In fact, this war is said to have motivated Ashoka to become a Buddhist, shocked and horrified by how bloody it was.

Certainly- but this was before the Republic had become truly entrenched; historically, the Kalinga Kingdom has only existed for three years now, not the sixty of Ashoka's time. It is a nascent entity with little power or political elite, and is being offered a position of a province within the Maurya Empire on equal standing, which entails the dissolution of tariffs and trade boundaries. If you think three years is a long enough time to undo the cultural and historical ties of ~two centuries of coexistence with greater India, so be it, but I think the offer is reasonable for reintegration.

Even if the republic isn't as firmly entrenched, as historically it incorporated aspects of Feudalism, many of the republican traditions it held were established under autonomous rule of the region before its independence.

Simply said, most people won't say 'yes' when you offer them that opportunity unless they have some pretty good reasons, and they in particular don't feel like you properly should own their land.

[Togeria]

Howdy.

[G-Tech Corporation]

Certainly- but this was before the Republic had become truly entrenched; historically, the Kalinga Kingdom has only existed for three years now, not the sixty of Ashoka's time. It is a nascent entity with little power or political elite, and is being offered a position of a province within the Maurya Empire on equal standing, which entails the dissolution of tariffs and trade boundaries. If you think three years is a long enough time to undo the cultural and historical ties of ~two centuries of coexistence with greater India, so be it, but I think the offer is reasonable for reintegration.

Even if the republic isn't as firmly entrenched, as historically it incorporated aspects of Feudalism, many of the republican traditions it held were established under autonomous rule of the region before its independence.

Simply said, most people won't say 'yes' when you offer them that opportunity unless they have some pretty good reasons, and they in particular don't feel like you properly should own their land.

Hmm, fair enough. Thankfully, "The Velvet Glove" was only Stage One.

[The Ik Ka Ek Akai]

@ Jas: Actually, Ptolemy's name "Soter" was more ironic than actual. He wasn't actually influential in that battle, but to the ignorant his propaganda was effective. The Rhodians called him Soter first of all out of a sense of endearment, not because he actually saved them.

Interesting. I didn't know that.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/Y2nbrJyAR6RiM/200_s.gif

In that case, that sword is Egypt. Carthage can buy a lot of things and build a lot of things for Egypt. This alliance is a combination of a wealthy republic and a warrior empire.

Basically. I have the armies, while Carthage has the money to fund those armies.

Ptolemy historically did not allow native Egyptians into his armies because they were seen as disloyal and too nationalistic. He was right, of course, as the Egyptians very much did not like the Ptolemies nearly as much as they liked Alexander, which is ultimately the reason the Ptolemies tried to merge their Greekness with Egyptian aspects (like creating Serapis). This may not be the only reason, but it doubtless was a contributor.

[Torrocca]

Interesting. I didn't know that.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/Y2nbrJyAR6RiM/200_s.gif


Basically. I have the armies, while Carthage has the money to fund those armies.

Ptolemy historically did not allow native Egyptians into his armies because they were seen as disloyal and too nationalistic. He was right, of course, as the Egyptians very much did not like the Ptolemies nearly as much as they liked Alexander, which is ultimately the reason the Ptolemies tried to merge their Greekness with Egyptian aspects (like creating Serapis). This may not be the only reason, but it doubtless was a contributor.

... I suppose I could use that against him?

[The Ik Ka Ek Akai]

Ptolemy historically did not allow native Egyptians into his armies because they were seen as disloyal and too nationalistic. He was right, of course, as the Egyptians very much did not like the Ptolemies nearly as much as they liked Alexander, which is ultimately the reason the Ptolemies tried to merge their Greekness with Egyptian aspects (like creating Serapis). This may not be the only reason, but it doubtless was a contributor.

... I suppose I could use that against him?

You could cause dissent by reminding the Egyptians that Ptolemy is not as divine as Alexander. The Seleucids, contrarily, recruited significant amounts of Syrians and Persians into their army proper.

Ptolemy was a naval sort of guy. The Egyptian navy used actual Egyptians, if only because there's not enough Greeks to be rowers.