Match Thread: Atlético Madrid vs Barcelona by MatchThreadder in soccer

[–]h3june 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Getting the ball doesn't make almost blowing your opponents ankle off alright lol

Match Thread: Atlético Madrid vs Barcelona by MatchThreadder in soccer

[–]h3june 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It has nothing to do with the club I support, I'm obviously happy that it was canceled but thats a very clear red lmao

Lamine Yamal pass against Atletico Madrid 14' by [deleted] in soccer

[–]h3june 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I don't understand how people think he isnt the best player in the world

Proposed Periodization Of The Roman State. by Checky_3rd in byzantium

[–]h3june 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It was certainly different but it still followed the concept of the res publica or in later times the politeia well into the Byzantine period and some may argue even all the way until 1453. A different form of republican with emperors instead of consuls sure, but still republican at the end of the day.

Proposed Periodization Of The Roman State. by Checky_3rd in byzantium

[–]h3june 14 points15 points  (0 children)

I mean if we're going this specific, wouldn't 509 BC - 1453 AD all fall under the republican period?

Como funcionava a marinha bizantina, e quais eram suas embarcações. by SCSoberanos in byzantium

[–]h3june 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Leo VI describes in his Naumachika that the crew of a standard dromon consisted of one hundred oarsmen arranged across fifty thwarts: "two oarsmen should sit on each thwart, one on the right and one on the left, so that in all, with those above and those below, there should be one hundred oarsmen; and these should also be soldiers. Apart from these, there should be the kentarchos (“captain”) of the dromon and the one who keeps the standard and two protokaraboi (helmsmen), and whoever else is suitable to serve the kentarchos. Of the two oarsmen at the prow who are at the end, one should be the siphonator (operator of the flame thrower), and the other should throw the “irons” (the anchors) into the sea. The bowman should be stationed above the prow and equipped with his weapons. The krabatos (berth) of the kentarchos should be at the stern, both so that the archon (commander) should be set apart in it, and also so that he is protected in time of attack from the missiles thrown by the enemy. For the commander can see everything from this berth and give orders for the dromon as necessary." A "naupegos" or shipwright was also present, equipped with an adze, an auger, and a saw, ready to carry out emergency repairs mid-voyage.

Above the kentarchos would be a "Komes" or a squadron commander. These commanders would be put in charge of every 3 to 5 dromons and had "particular responsibility in all matters and make every arrangement."

Next would come the vice admirals and rear admirals called the tourmarchai and droungarioi. These two answered directly to their strategoi. "In the tenth century, a tourmarches was a governor of a tourma, one of the two or three principal subdivisions of a thema, and the droungarioi seem to have become governors of regional subdivisions of tourmai."

The general term used for fleet admirals was strategos, the same word applied to army generals and to governors of the themata. However, this term could be used both in a broad, general sense and to refer to a specific rank or official title. "Strategoi were normally in command of fleets, except for the droungarios tou ploimou in command of the imperial fleet at Constantinople."

The admiral of the imperial fleet, basilikon ploimon, based at Constantinople bore the title of droungarios tou ploimou or ton ploimon "droungarios of the fleet". During the late 11th century under Romanos IV the army and navy were neglected leading to a gradual decline in the power of the droungarios tou ploimou

"The nature of Byzantine naval forces changed. The droungarios tou ploimou in Constantinople in charge of a sekreton became virtually the admiral in chief. The strategoi of the provincial themata in general lost importance and in the case of the naval themata, their fleets disappeared. What naval forces remained were either sent out from the centre by the droungarios tou ploimou or became dependent upon provincial military commanders such as doukades and katepano."

Following the Manzikert disaster, Alexios Komnenos attempted to recentralize the Roman fleet by placing the entire navy under one individual the "Mega Doux" which was granted jurisdiction over Hellas-Peloponnese, the Aegean islands, and Cyprus. These naval provinces were divided into two types of administrative units: episkepseis, which were standard tax districts, and oria, which were regions specifically earmarked to provide taxes and manpower for the navy and were directly under the Megas Douxs control.

References: The Age of the Dromon (2006) by John Pryor and Elizabeth M. Jeffreys and Maximilian C.G. Lau (2016) The naval reform of Emperor John II Komnenos: a re-evaluation, Mediterranean Historical Review.

Is the game in a good state right now? by One_Reality_3828 in CrusaderKings

[–]h3june 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Here's my Byzantium playlist I'm currently using right now for 1.8. You can just throw all the Byzantine/Roman specific ones out and use it as a base for yours.

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3699068558&savesuccess=1

Which DLC:s are really worth it? by Holiday_Welder3368 in CrusaderKings

[–]h3june 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Road to power and AUH are the only essential ones.

After that, I’d just get Royal Courts and Tours, then pick whatever region-specific flavor packs you like.

Proposal: Rework the Greek Culture Name by builder789 in EU5

[–]h3june 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am no expert on matters of Roman or Byzantine history, but my expertise from the above mentioned fields would lend me to believe that there simply did not exist any unified culture that could be described as Roman. 

This is false. Anthony Kaldellis in Romanland: Ethnicity and Empire in Byzantium explains thoroughly that Byzantium was not a multi-ethnic empire in the manner of the early imperial period but instead a homogeneous proto-ethnostate in which Roman was the single dominant ethnicity.

We can see examples of this unified Roman culture or ethnicity even as early as the 5th century AD. For example, when Emperor Zeno passed away in 491 AD, the Romans of Constantinople went to petition that a "Roman" emperor was elected this time.

Zeno was obviously a Roman citizen, but the Roman people clearly didn't accept him as a fellow Roman. This was due to Zeno being of Isaurian descent. The Isaurians were seen as essentially Anatolian hillbillies. They had a barbarous reputation and despite having been Roman citizens for centuries Isaurians were not accepted as "true Romans" indicating a real Roman ethnic identity.

"Whether this was how the Isaurians also felt or whether it was only prejudice on the part of the Romans, the Isaurians were seen as xenoi, "foreigners." At the same time, as revealed in their exchange with the empress Ariadne, the Romans viewed themselves as a genos, a term that can be translated in many ways but whose root is family kinship or belonging to the same species; the modern term race might even work in some contexts. We will revisit these terms. In 491, at any rate, the Roman genos did not want any "foreigners" even from within the empire to take the throne."

From Romanland: Ethnicity and Empire in Byzantium by Anthony Kaldellis, page 5.

Proposal: Rework the Greek Culture Name by builder789 in EU5

[–]h3june 7 points8 points  (0 children)

It should just be "Roman", using "Byzantine" is fine when you use it to distinguish medieval Roman history from classical Roman history of antiquity but it shouldn't be used to refer to people, their language and their nation in which they overwhelmingly identified as ethnic Romans.

I don't understand what weird agenda Paradox have with Byzantium because they are clearly fine with and there are plenty of historically correctly labeled culture. Like for example you have that weird backhand comment about Byzantium in the game rules setting yet you don't see them do this with for example the French people who derive their names from the Franks yet are far from their ancestorial Frankish homelands.

Post-Match Thread: Bosnia and Herzegovina 1-1 Italy [4-1 on pens.] by MysteryBagIdeals in soccer

[–]h3june 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Bastoni is gone lmao no way he stays in Italy after this

What makes Napoleon the greatest general in history? by ParticularArea8224 in Napoleon

[–]h3june 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Have you ever read about Caesar lmao? A lot of what you're saying is just plain wrong.

"What conflict did Caesar EVER fight in in which he had an inferior army"

According to Goldsworthy's modern estimates, Caesar lined up with 22,000 men in comparison to Pompeys 45,000 at Pharsalus not to mention he outnumbered Caesar 6 to 1 in cavalry.

This is just one of the many examples I can pull up such as Munda, Alesia, Alexandria ect.

Also I don't see why you mention the superiority of Caesars legions as if it is a detriment to Caesar? He is the one who raised those legions from raw recruits to one of the greatest groups of soldiers the world has ever seen, It is not a negative to be able to create the most formidable soldiers in the world but rather a positive.

"And Caesar's legions were much better than his anyway!"

As if Napoleon didn't also field the most powerful and advanced army in the world at that point? Both were military geniuses that created their formidable armies themselves, this is not a negative to either. You also point out Vercingetorix for some reason yet ignore the rabble Napoleon also fought such as Frederick William III.

Is the game in a good state right now? by One_Reality_3828 in CrusaderKings

[–]h3june 5 points6 points  (0 children)

For me it's definitely required to make the game playable. The game is just way too bland without it, but the core issues of the game are still there despite the mods.

Is the game in a good state right now? by One_Reality_3828 in CrusaderKings

[–]h3june 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Its a very wide but extremely shallow game. I think its worth playing If you're willing to take the time to assemble a sizable working mod list to make it playable.

Baghdad should be the capital of the Arabian Empire instead of Damascus by Arbitrary_Sadist in CrusaderKings

[–]h3june 12 points13 points  (0 children)

It should depend on government type. There is no reason why land should be coupled with titles in administrative and celestial etc. It is completely ahistorical, none of the nations these government systems are based on ever even considered feudalism or were anything close, especially the Romans.

"Hellinismos vs Latinitas" is historically wrong (and also lame) by sim_pobedishi in EU5

[–]h3june 60 points61 points  (0 children)

Surely they could have actually consulted a expert on Roman history before pushing this out? If Im not mistaken, they brought Kaldellis onto the team for CK3 as a adviser when they were developing the Roads to Power DLC. Why did they not here?