NationStates

Atreidya wrote:

Tracian Empire wrote:Firstly, it would be nice if you would fix the few capital letters missing or in plus. Then, you should give us some sort of an image of your claims. But most importantly, the economy and military parts need some more details, at least a few sentences each.

I will fix those things as asked. Only problem is image. I have no way of making a map.

Then, send me a good description over TG and I'll make it for you

Western Imperial Union wrote:Hey trace did you get a chance to look at my app yet?

I just looked it up. It looks nice until now, but it still needs some more details.

Still, could you explain some things to me?

What are these Greek and Latin wars, and why are the wars with the Romans "Greek"?

If you took parts of Albania and Macedonia in these wars, how and when did the Romans get them back?

How did the Huns try to force the Romans to cede Romanian and Bulgarian lands?

Also, there are no Romanians or Bulgarians in this timeline as of now.

Tracian Empire wrote:

Western Imperial Union wrote:Hey trace did you get a chance to look at my app yet?

I just looked it up. It looks nice until now, but it still needs some more details.

Still, could you explain some things to me?

What are these Greek and Latin wars, and why are the wars with the Romans "Greek"?

If you took parts of Albania and Macedonia in these wars, how and when did the Romans get them back?

How did the Huns try to force the Romans to cede Romanian and Bulgarian lands?

Also, there are no Romanians or Bulgarians in this timeline as of now.

The Greek wars are over greece not against greeks, the Latin wars are taking on the non-roman Latins.

I seemed to have forgotten to add that you retook them in later wars.

They invaded to try and make them cede it, didn't work though.

as for the romanians, didn't the Bulgar tribes still exist till you eradicated them?

Western Imperial Union wrote:

Tracian Empire wrote:I just looked it up. It looks nice until now, but it still needs some more details.

Still, could you explain some things to me?

What are these Greek and Latin wars, and why are the wars with the Romans "Greek"?

If you took parts of Albania and Macedonia in these wars, how and when did the Romans get them back?

How did the Huns try to force the Romans to cede Romanian and Bulgarian lands?

Also, there are no Romanians or Bulgarians in this timeline as of now.

The Greek wars are over greece not against greeks, the Latin wars are taking on the non-roman Latins.

I seemed to have forgotten to add that you retook them in later wars.

They invaded to try and make them cede it, didn't work though.

as for the romanians, didn't the Bulgar tribes still exist till you eradicated them?

There is no Greece anymore, at least the definition was mostly lost. There is a Roman province of Graecia around Athens, but that's about it. You can name them however you want though, no problem, I was just confused.

As for the Romanians, I don't see then as anything more than Romans, as they never remained alone and isolated like they did in real life. Romania is a name for the Roman Empire in general after all, Imperium Romaniae.

And the Bulgarians were eradicated by Basil II and his successors, and they were deleted from history. Bulgaria is still known as Moesia.

No more Seinlo?

South Mauristan wrote:No more Seinlo?

It does seem so.

Well,
Felix MMXVII, barbarians!

Yeah we can't say stuff like that in Kossovan. But merry new year regardless

Tracian Empire wrote:

Western Imperial Union wrote:
The Greek wars are over greece not against greeks, the Latin wars are taking on the non-roman Latins.

I seemed to have forgotten to add that you retook them in later wars.

They invaded to try and make them cede it, didn't work though.

as for the romanians, didn't the Bulgar tribes still exist till you eradicated them?

There is no Greece anymore, at least the definition was mostly lost. There is a Roman province of Graecia around Athens, but that's about it. You can name them however you want though, no problem, I was just confused.

As for the Romanians, I don't see then as anything more than Romans, as they never remained alone and isolated like they did in real life. Romania is a name for the Roman Empire in general after all, Imperium Romaniae.

And the Bulgarians were eradicated by Basil II and his successors, and they were deleted from history. Bulgaria is still known as Moesia.

What if you guys just called it the Balkan wars?

Second Helghan Empire wrote:

Tracian Empire wrote:
There is no Greece anymore, at least the definition was mostly lost. There is a Roman province of Graecia around Athens, but that's about it. You can name them however you want though, no problem, I was just confused.

As for the Romanians, I don't see then as anything more than Romans, as they never remained alone and isolated like they did in real life. Romania is a name for the Roman Empire in general after all, Imperium Romaniae.

And the Bulgarians were eradicated by Basil II and his successors, and they were deleted from history. Bulgaria is still known as Moesia.

What if you guys just called it the Balkan wars?

I'm okay with any name, seriously.

Except for anything Byzantine related, because the term doesn't exist in this timeline.

We will have to discuss exactly how those wars happened, because while Albania could be let's say, easily taken since it's on the border, taking Macedonia would break Greece from the rest of the Imperium. And it could threaten Constantinople.

And while I have no issues with sieges of Constantinople, my main idea has always been that the city has remained unconquered until the present day.

Tracian Empire wrote:We will have to discuss exactly how those wars happened, because while Albania could be let's say, easily taken since it's on the border, taking Macedonia would break Greece from the rest of the Imperium. And it could threaten Constantinople.

And while I have no issues with sieges of Constantinople, my main idea has always been that the city has remained unconquered until the present day.

The Italian Empire would, of course, come to East-Rome's aid if they were being sieged.

Tracian Empire wrote:We will have to discuss exactly how those wars happened, because while Albania could be let's say, easily taken since it's on the border, taking Macedonia would break Greece from the rest of the Imperium. And it could threaten Constantinople.

And while I have no issues with sieges of Constantinople, my main idea has always been that the city has remained unconquered until the present day.

Oh I see. Sorry I had no real idea what the actual problem was here it seems haha. I will shutup

The V O I D wrote:

Tracian Empire wrote:We will have to discuss exactly how those wars happened, because while Albania could be let's say, easily taken since it's on the border, taking Macedonia would break Greece from the rest of the Imperium. And it could threaten Constantinople.

And while I have no issues with sieges of Constantinople, my main idea has always been that the city has remained unconquered until the present day.

The Italian Empire would, of course, come to East-Rome's aid if they were being sieged.

The so called Greek Wars seem to happen in the period were Roman-Italian relations were pretty bad, from the looks of it.

Rome would come to Italy's aid in the Latin Wars though, since it seems that they happen in the 1600's.

Still, I don't fear a Siege of Constantinople that much. With the Imperium never being as weakened as it was in real life, and with the Eastern border secured by Persia, it is extremely unlikely for any state to be actually able to take Constantinople, especially since the defense system of the city was improved in the 1400's, the 1600's, and the 1800's.

Tracian Empire wrote:

The V O I D wrote:
The Italian Empire would, of course, come to East-Rome's aid if they were being sieged.

The so called Greek Wars seem to happen in the period were Roman-Italian relations were pretty bad, from the looks of it.

Rome would come to Italy's aid in the Latin Wars though, since it seems that they happen in the 1600's.

Still, I don't fear a Siege of Constantinople that much. With the Imperium never being as weakened as it was in real life, and with the Eastern border secured by Persia, it is extremely unlikely for any state to be actually able to take Constantinople, especially since the defense system of the city was improved in the 1400's, the 1600's, and the 1800's.

And with Novgorod, an ally, to your northern borders... yeah, you just have to worry about the Huns to the northwest/west. And the Italians are west of them and would happily counter-invade them for trying to invade you.

So, guess that means you're immune from collapse with regards to invasion... as to collapse from the inside, who knows.

The V O I D wrote:

Tracian Empire wrote:The so called Greek Wars seem to happen in the period were Roman-Italian relations were pretty bad, from the looks of it.

Rome would come to Italy's aid in the Latin Wars though, since it seems that they happen in the 1600's.

Still, I don't fear a Siege of Constantinople that much. With the Imperium never being as weakened as it was in real life, and with the Eastern border secured by Persia, it is extremely unlikely for any state to be actually able to take Constantinople, especially since the defense system of the city was improved in the 1400's, the 1600's, and the 1800's.

And with Novgorod, an ally, to your northern borders... yeah, you just have to worry about the Huns to the northwest/west. And the Italians are west of them and would happily counter-invade them for trying to invade you.

So, guess that means you're immune from collapse with regards to invasion... as to collapse from the inside, who knows.

Difficult to say. With Ik not taking Persia, I might not be all that immune. I'm pretty confident in the stability of the Roman state though.

Tracian Empire wrote:We will have to discuss exactly how those wars happened, because while Albania could be let's say, easily taken since it's on the border, taking Macedonia would break Greece from the rest of the Imperium. And it could threaten Constantinople.

And while I have no issues with sieges of Constantinople, my main idea has always been that the city has remained unconquered until the present day.

I think there was a misunderstanding I had meant the modern nation of Macedonia, my apologies.
As for Helghans idea for the name that could work easily.

Onto the idea that seems to remain that the Huns are barbarians. Actually I was having them largely influenced by Roman culture, so much so as to have intermarriages with the emperor and to adopt customs and a mutilated version of the naming system. The Huns even took the alphabet and language as well as replicated much of their later architecture on the Roman principles. Not to mention the Huns were a client state of Constantinople for a time according to my history should it be accepted. In all I want them to largely be considered the backwards cousins of the Romans, and that would be their own depiction of things. So while there would be unique cultural differences the huns would be very roman in some ways.

Tracian Empire wrote:

The V O I D wrote:
And with Novgorod, an ally, to your northern borders... yeah, you just have to worry about the Huns to the northwest/west. And the Italians are west of them and would happily counter-invade them for trying to invade you.

So, guess that means you're immune from collapse with regards to invasion... as to collapse from the inside, who knows.

Difficult to say. With Ik not taking Persia, I might not be all that immune. I'm pretty confident in the stability of the Roman state though.

Besides, if things go according to plan, the Italian-Roman Empire will be a force to be reckoned with.

Western Imperial Union wrote:

Tracian Empire wrote:We will have to discuss exactly how those wars happened, because while Albania could be let's say, easily taken since it's on the border, taking Macedonia would break Greece from the rest of the Imperium. And it could threaten Constantinople.

And while I have no issues with sieges of Constantinople, my main idea has always been that the city has remained unconquered until the present day.

I think there was a misunderstanding I had meant the modern nation of Macedonia, my apologies.
As for Helghans idea for the name that could work easily.

Onto the idea that seems to remain that the Huns are barbarians. Actually I was having them largely influenced by Roman culture, so much so as to have intermarriages with the emperor and to adopt customs and a mutilated version of the naming system. The Huns even took the alphabet and language as well as replicated much of their later architecture on the Roman principles. Not to mention the Huns were a client state of Constantinople for a time according to my history should it be accepted. In all I want them to largely be considered the backwards cousins of the Romans, and that would be their own depiction of things. So while there would be unique cultural differences the huns would be very roman in some ways.

Christ, is just everyone super Roman?

Sanabel wrote:

Western Imperial Union wrote:
I think there was a misunderstanding I had meant the modern nation of Macedonia, my apologies.
As for Helghans idea for the name that could work easily.

Onto the idea that seems to remain that the Huns are barbarians. Actually I was having them largely influenced by Roman culture, so much so as to have intermarriages with the emperor and to adopt customs and a mutilated version of the naming system. The Huns even took the alphabet and language as well as replicated much of their later architecture on the Roman principles. Not to mention the Huns were a client state of Constantinople for a time according to my history should it be accepted. In all I want them to largely be considered the backwards cousins of the Romans, and that would be their own depiction of things. So while there would be unique cultural differences the huns would be very roman in some ways.

Christ, is just everyone super Roman?

I don't believe so I just felt it was the best bet for a Hunnic Empire to still exist if they adopted some roman things

Western Imperial Union wrote:

Tracian Empire wrote:We will have to discuss exactly how those wars happened, because while Albania could be let's say, easily taken since it's on the border, taking Macedonia would break Greece from the rest of the Imperium. And it could threaten Constantinople.

And while I have no issues with sieges of Constantinople, my main idea has always been that the city has remained unconquered until the present day.

I think there was a misunderstanding I had meant the modern nation of Macedonia, my apologies.
As for Helghans idea for the name that could work easily.

Onto the idea that seems to remain that the Huns are barbarians. Actually I was having them largely influenced by Roman culture, so much so as to have intermarriages with the emperor and to adopt customs and a mutilated version of the naming system. The Huns even took the alphabet and language as well as replicated much of their later architecture on the Roman principles. Not to mention the Huns were a client state of Constantinople for a time according to my history should it be accepted. In all I want them to largely be considered the backwards cousins of the Romans, and that would be their own depiction of things. So while there would be unique cultural differences the huns would be very roman in some ways.

The Romans call many foreigners barbarians. And since we seem to have had a turbulent past, the Huns especially will be unfortunately called like that by most Romans.

Sanabel wrote:

Western Imperial Union wrote:
I think there was a misunderstanding I had meant the modern nation of Macedonia, my apologies.
As for Helghans idea for the name that could work easily.

Onto the idea that seems to remain that the Huns are barbarians. Actually I was having them largely influenced by Roman culture, so much so as to have intermarriages with the emperor and to adopt customs and a mutilated version of the naming system. The Huns even took the alphabet and language as well as replicated much of their later architecture on the Roman principles. Not to mention the Huns were a client state of Constantinople for a time according to my history should it be accepted. In all I want them to largely be considered the backwards cousins of the Romans, and that would be their own depiction of things. So while there would be unique cultural differences the huns would be very roman in some ways.

Christ, is just everyone super Roman?

It somehow seems like that. But in the case of the Huns, I think that it would for the best for them to only accept Roman administrative and religious elements, culturally I don't know how much the Romans would spread north of the Danube.

Void, would it be okay if we would change some dates? The Kingdom of Italia should be formed in 490 by Zeno, but we need Justinian and Belisarius, so Italy would be fully retaken only in 540(Rome) 560(all of Italy).

Tracian Empire wrote:

Western Imperial Union wrote:
I think there was a misunderstanding I had meant the modern nation of Macedonia, my apologies.
As for Helghans idea for the name that could work easily.

Onto the idea that seems to remain that the Huns are barbarians. Actually I was having them largely influenced by Roman culture, so much so as to have intermarriages with the emperor and to adopt customs and a mutilated version of the naming system. The Huns even took the alphabet and language as well as replicated much of their later architecture on the Roman principles. Not to mention the Huns were a client state of Constantinople for a time according to my history should it be accepted. In all I want them to largely be considered the backwards cousins of the Romans, and that would be their own depiction of things. So while there would be unique cultural differences the huns would be very roman in some ways.

The Romans call many foreigners barbarians. And since we seem to have had a turbulent past, the Huns especially will be unfortunately called like that by most Romans.

Thats fine as long as the similarities are there.

Western Imperial Union wrote:

Tracian Empire wrote:The Romans call many foreigners barbarians. And since we seem to have had a turbulent past, the Huns especially will be unfortunately called like that by most Romans.

Thats fine as long as the similarities are there.

What similarities?