Europa Universalis IV

[Mark.L.Joy]

Some even say the Roman empire never ended.

 

[Tigranes]

It really needs to be stressed that the Western Roman Empire was not destroyed by invasion of barbarians, or by a singular event. It was a gradual decline that lasted centuries, centered around the political instability, withering ability to administrate a military reserve (this is one of the single most important things in Rome's rise to power, the ability to not win battles with recover from defeats, an ability none of their enemies could do), and failure to make allies and entice new arrivals (or accept them, the Gothic War is a great example of something that just didn't happen before because Romans were good at absorbing new arrivals, for a long time being a Roman subject and Roman was a desired prospect; and of a real life "LOCAL MAN RUINS EVERYTHING" incident).

In the end Western Roman Empire didn't collapse in a big conflagration, it simply withered away until eventually the latest warlord to hold the keys to the empire... Simply didn't bother naming a new emperor.

Clearly Empires are not conductive to technological advancement.

The common parlance among historians today is that the problem appears to be that hegemony and presence of absolute advantage aren't conductive to pursuit of comparative advantage.

Yep. This may be a old chestnut even back to Gibbon etc., but (1) the degradation of the military reserve, staved off for a time through artificial supplements of former 'barbarians'; (2) the erosion of Rome's exceptional ability to integrate newly conquered peoples, cultures, inventions, resources, even gods, back into the homeland - these two were undeniably a major part, and arguably the major part, of Rome's decline.

The question is whether there was even a good way to maintain those 2 qualities - already very special in history - for over hundreds of years (which is already an incredibly long time). Even, say, refusing the Augustine policy of ending expansion, I think would not have really done it.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Not even just newly conquered, used to be that senators would boast on their tombs about how they brought 100,000 people over the Danube to be Romans (most likely a flagrantly embellished number, but still).

Some even say the Roman empire never ended.

Well one can make a good argument that the Catholic Church is an extant institution of the Western Roman Empire.

 

[Beastro]

Game also fails to portray how bad the slave trade was for Africa. Not just the European one, but also the Arab one.

Most people act as if it was simply a footnote of mere words in a history book, which is amusing given the shit like sexual slavery, importing 8000 women across the Sahara for the Turks and only having 2000 make it across alive, etc.

Yes, Byzantines held on to the technologies that they did have and were more advanced then the western kingdoms - but again - they had well over 1000 years to advance on stuff the Greeks came up, but instead they held on to what they had and tried to survive. Clearly Empires are not conductive to technological advancement.

A big problem was the lack of desire in the Byzantines to do things that would encourage development. It wasn't simply developing new tech, but encountering situations that would force them to produce new things that would allow them to expand and grow.

A good exmaple of that is the fact that they never bothered to develop farming beyond few, limited rivier valleys they had in Greece and Anatolia. It limited their food production and that then had an impact on other areas. It wasn't like they had to do major things, even simply developing the lower sides of hills and mountains would have helped, but they never tried.

Other areas were currency reform, something Alexios Komnenos tried but had to freeze in the 1080s, then never had time to continue, while his successors never saw the point which restricted them to mainly just silver and left them cut out of the spread of gold that was taking place in after 1000.

Another was they were happy leaving overseas trade to the Italians giving them monopolies which locked their own traders out, reducing them to local merchants who gave the Italians the stuff to then export which they did to their own advantage. All of that resulted in lack of growth and resentment at the Italians for dominating trade, which led to violence, which led to the Fourth Crusade.

A problem really was holding on too much to survive, even when they didn't. That was the trouble before Manzikert. They seriously thought if they stopped along the border nothing would happen forgetting borders constantly change.

Clearly Empires are not conductive to technological advancement.

Depends. Have to think how much empire effected the development of Europe tech development. Britain hardly stagnated in the 19th Century because they had 1/4 of the world.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Slave trade really would require a system that isn't merely trade goods IMO (even though I *think* the game can handle changing trade route directions based on what I recall reading about mods).

Similar to how technology and weaponry need decoupling (and how tech in general still sucks as a system in EU).

 

[Delterius]

Some even say the Roman empire never ended.

 

[FreeKaner]

Some even say the Roman empire never ended.

 

[Beastro]

Some even say the Roman empire never ended.

http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Black_Númenóreans

 

[Delterius]

Some even say the Roman empire never ended.

http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Black_Númenóreans

Everyone knows turks are poc.

 

[CaffeineConquistador]

Some even say the Roman empire never ended.

And those people are idiots. It’s like saying any particular Diadochi was continuing the Macedon empire after Alexander the Great kicked off.

 

[thesheeep]

I think my VeF game broke.
Half my provinces just went from 1526 to warp-capable overnight...

Spoiler

(normal values would be between 10 and 30 each)
Which unfortunately also increases my Administrative Efficiency need several times over, so now I'm so far above my capability that autonomy in those provinces is going for 100% across the board, tanking everything from tax income to force limits to absurdly small values

Oh, well. Mods, amirite?

Edit:
Seems this is a known bug: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...reporting-thread.879466/page-33#post-25796374

Guess that also explains why the Ming revolution totally failed in my game and Yuan fields about a million troops already.

 

[Delterius]

Some even say the Roman empire never ended.

And those people are idiots. It’s like saying any particular Diadochi was continuing the Macedon empire after Alexander the Great kicked off.

tbh an empire that lasts for 3 weeks and a half while its founder is still alive isn't really an empire

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

I think my VeF game broke.
Half my provinces just went from 1526 to warp-capable overnight...

Spoiler

(normal values would be between 10 and 30 each)
Which unfortunately also increases my Administrative Efficiency need several times over, so now I'm so far above my capability that autonomy in those provinces is going for 100% across the board, tanking everything from tax income to force limits to absurdly small values

Oh, well. Mods, amirite?

Edit:
Seems this is a known bug: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...reporting-thread.879466/page-33#post-25796374

Guess that also explains why the Ming revolution totally failed in my game and Yuan fields about a million troops already.

A case example of why the Prime Directive is in place!

 

[normie]

Some even say the Roman empire never ended.

Well one can make a good argument that the Catholic Church is an extant institution of the Western Roman Empire.

according to jews, Rome will exist as long European derived peoples will, and the west as it stands is just Rome that has to be subverted and destroyed for their transgressions against jews historically

jews are not clueless like deracinated huwhites who see things in terms of principles, honour, spirituality, "institutions" or other nonsense to get autistic about in themselves, but family, tribe, race, as continuous and whole and in service of a racial will to power

Some even say the Roman empire never ended.

lol, turks are squatting on the ruins of Rome, Planet of the Apes style

 

[FreeKaner]

lol, turks are squatting on the ruins of Rome, Planet of the Apes style

Ottomans had rulers that were called "Emperor of Romans" by the Patriarch of Constantinople, where Constantine moved the Capital of Rome. The real squatters here are bunch of Germanic, Anglo-Saxon and Celtic invaders that just spontaneously claimed themselves Roman and didn't even hold its legitimate capital while roleplaying Romans. I am especially a big fan of the English and their colonies claiming descendant from Romans.

 

[Mark.L.Joy]

AVE TITUS AUGUSTUS JUDEII DOMITORIS









ye i dunno about the declensions it's been too long

 

[janjetina]

nigga please https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei

What a bunch of pseudohistorical retarded fedora drivel. Are you high on Draper and Dixon farts?
https://www.catholiceducation.org/en/controversy/galileo/debunking-the-galileo-myth.html
https://historyforatheists.com/the-great-myths/

 

[fantadomat]

nigga please https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei

What a bunch of pseudohistorical retarded fedora drivel. Are you high on Draper and Dixon farts?
https://www.catholiceducation.org/en/controversy/galileo/debunking-the-galileo-myth.html
https://historyforatheists.com/the-great-myths/

When i see wikipedia source,i roll my eyes so hard that they may pop out.

 

[MajorMace]

lol, turks are squatting on the ruins of Rome, Planet of the Apes style

Ottomans had rulers that were called "Emperor of Romans" by the Patriarch of Constantinople, where Constantine moved the Capital of Rome. The real squatters here are bunch of Germanic, Anglo-Saxon and Celtic invaders that just spontaneously claimed themselves Roman and didn't even hold its legitimate capital while roleplaying Romans. I am especially a big fan of the English and their colonies claiming descendant from Romans.

E tu, kaner ?
May I remind you who from the celts and the romans decided to settle with the other ?

 

[Eirinjas]

nigga please https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei

What a bunch of pseudohistorical retarded fedora drivel. Are you high on Draper and Dixon farts?
https://www.catholiceducation.org/en/controversy/galileo/debunking-the-galileo-myth.html
https://historyforatheists.com/the-great-myths/

When i see wikipedia source,i roll my eyes so hard that they may pop out.

Yea, I feel the same way when it comes to that bullshit. Like when people link to biased, agenda-driven, propagandist sources like the Catholic Education Resource Center, or when they link to a christian apologist posing as an atheist trying to set the record straight on "Great (atheist) Myths". You'd have to be King of the Retards to think an atheist would waste his precious time on Earth defending Christianity from Atheism.

 

[Jimmious]

nigga please https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei

What a bunch of pseudohistorical retarded fedora drivel. Are you high on Draper and Dixon farts?
https://www.catholiceducation.org/en/controversy/galileo/debunking-the-galileo-myth.html
https://historyforatheists.com/the-great-myths/

When i see wikipedia source,i roll my eyes so hard that they may pop out.

Yea, I feel the same way when it comes to that bullshit. Like when people link to biased, agenda-driven, propagandist sources like the Catholic Education Resource Center, or when they link to a christian apologist posing as an atheist trying to set the record straight on "Great (atheist) Myths". You'd have to be King of the Retards to think an atheist would waste his precious time on Earth defending Christianity from Atheism.

Yeah isn't it something when someone rolls his eyes on an open-source knowledge DB (which obviously is never to be fully trusted but still..) but doesn't when he sees sources like "catholiceducation" and "historyforatheists" ?

 

[janjetina]

nigga please https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei

What a bunch of pseudohistorical retarded fedora drivel. Are you high on Draper and Dixon farts?
https://www.catholiceducation.org/en/controversy/galileo/debunking-the-galileo-myth.html
https://historyforatheists.com/the-great-myths/

When i see wikipedia source,i roll my eyes so hard that they may pop out.

Yea, I feel the same way when it comes to that bullshit. Like when people link to biased, agenda-driven, propagandist sources like the Catholic Education Resource Center, or when they link to a christian apologist posing as an atheist trying to set the record straight on "Great (atheist) Myths". You'd have to be King of the Retards to think an atheist would waste his precious time on Earth defending Christianity from Atheism.

Tim O'Neill might not be a True Scotsman, but he is an atheist. The fact that you employ a No True Scotsman fallacy speaks volumes of your privation of rationality, and abundance of butthurt.

 

[Eirinjas]

nigga please https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei

What a bunch of pseudohistorical retarded fedora drivel. Are you high on Draper and Dixon farts?
https://www.catholiceducation.org/en/controversy/galileo/debunking-the-galileo-myth.html
https://historyforatheists.com/the-great-myths/

When i see wikipedia source,i roll my eyes so hard that they may pop out.

Yea, I feel the same way when it comes to that bullshit. Like when people link to biased, agenda-driven, propagandist sources like the Catholic Education Resource Center, or when they link to a christian apologist posing as an atheist trying to set the record straight on "Great (atheist) Myths". You'd have to be King of the Retards to think an atheist would waste his precious time on Earth defending Christianity from Atheism.

Tim O'Neill might not be a True Scotsman, but he is an atheist. The fact that you employ a No True Scotsman fallacy speaks volumes of your lack of rationality, and plenitude of butthurt.

The butthurt appears to be all yours. I can't help it if you're naive, or intellectually disingenuous.

 

[janjetina]

nigga please https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei

What a bunch of pseudohistorical retarded fedora drivel. Are you high on Draper and Dixon farts?
https://www.catholiceducation.org/en/controversy/galileo/debunking-the-galileo-myth.html
https://historyforatheists.com/the-great-myths/

When i see wikipedia source,i roll my eyes so hard that they may pop out.

Yea, I feel the same way when it comes to that bullshit. Like when people link to biased, agenda-driven, propagandist sources like the Catholic Education Resource Center, or when they link to a christian apologist posing as an atheist trying to set the record straight on "Great (atheist) Myths". You'd have to be King of the Retards to think an atheist would waste his precious time on Earth defending Christianity from Atheism.

Yeah isn't it something when someone rolls his eyes on an open-source knowledge DB (which obviously is never to be fully trusted but still..) but doesn't when he sees sources like "catholiceducation" and "historyforatheists" ?

Historyforatheists.com is run by an atheist Tim O'Neill (see, for example https://blog.feedspot.com/atheist_blogs/, no. 29)

 

[Jimmious]

nigga please https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei

What a bunch of pseudohistorical retarded fedora drivel. Are you high on Draper and Dixon farts?
https://www.catholiceducation.org/en/controversy/galileo/debunking-the-galileo-myth.html
https://historyforatheists.com/the-great-myths/

When i see wikipedia source,i roll my eyes so hard that they may pop out.

Yea, I feel the same way when it comes to that bullshit. Like when people link to biased, agenda-driven, propagandist sources like the Catholic Education Resource Center, or when they link to a christian apologist posing as an atheist trying to set the record straight on "Great (atheist) Myths". You'd have to be King of the Retards to think an atheist would waste his precious time on Earth defending Christianity from Atheism.

Yeah isn't it something when someone rolls his eyes on an open-source knowledge DB (which obviously is never to be fully trusted but still..) but doesn't when he sees sources like "catholiceducation" and "historyforatheists" ?

Historyforatheists.com is run by an atheist Tim O'Neill (see, for example https://blog.feedspot.com/atheist_blogs/, no. 29)

I took a quick look and I saw what he claims to be. In any case a blog of some guy, whoever he is, is not a reliable source of information unless you can verify the information given. Especially when its a blog obviously targeted against or in favor of specific views, for whatever reason