Koinon Hellenon's prospects

[Laevex]

I am currently playing a KH campaign and I have been reading a little at my university library about the anti-Macedon league which it represents.

Obviously in history, the KH failed to repel Antigonos' domination of Greece but in EB it is perfectly likely that the player can succeed in this respect. It has always seemed to me, however, that once Makedonia has been defeated (in my campaign I left them with just the one province of Makedonia and made peace) there is not a lot of point in the KH being a faction. Wouldn't the Greek cities have simply returned to governing themselves seperately once the Macedonian threat had been neutralised? I can't imagine Athenians, Corinthians, Aitolians and Thessalians all simply accepting a Spartan Hegemon for example.

I like to roleplay my campaigns and I'm a bit stuck to be honest. I have conquered most of the Aegean, as Makedonia went west once I had liberated their Greek holdings, but I don't feel like the Koinon would really be the kind of faction to aggressively expand.

How can this be roleplayed? Should I rename the Koinon Hellenon? Just defend my holdings (annoyingly both the Seles and the Ptolies are on my back sending stacks to my Anatolian cities)?

[Maion Maroneios]

As for your first question, it is true that most likely they would have split apart gain after securing their freedom and autonomy. This means that you could ''chose'' one polis like Athenai alomg with some others like Chalkis and Thermon and build up an Athenian Empire. After that, you could (after gifting all other provinces to another faction which you can rename and/or recolor) capture every settlement anew under leadership of the polis you chose and rename your faction into ''Athenaike Symmachia'' (Athenian Alliance) or ''Athenaike Hegemonia'' (Athenian Hegemony) for Athenai. For Sparte (being oligarchic), it would be more something like ''Koinon Lakedaimonion'' (League of the Lacedaemonians) or ''Lakedaimoniake Hegemonia'' (Lacedaemonian Hegemony). You could also edit the EDB text in order to allow type1 governments to be built anywhere, rp your guys (Spartans) forcing other poleis to accept their governing system.

Maion

[Tyrfingr]

The greek city states would accept a spartan hegemon as long as there was an imminent threat to the freedom and security of all of Greece. When there is no threat, the alliance would probably fall apart pretty fast.

I haven't played as KH that much, so I'm not familiar with the various ethnic traits but one idea for roleplaying is that you let your cities be governed only by family members with the correct traits, i.e only spartans in Sparta, rhodesians on Rhodes etc...

[Maion Maroneios]

The greek city states would accept a spartan hegemon as long as there was an imminent threat to the freedom and security of all of Greece. When there is no threat, the alliance would probably fall apart pretty fast.
I highly doubt that any major Hellenic polis would accept Spartan hegemony with Sparte having something like 700 Homioi (seriously, look it up). Remember, Hellenistic era Sparte is nothing compared to the might of Sparte during the Classical one. Then, other poleis feared and respected her, at EB's timeframe they did neither.

Maion

[keravnos]

As for Koinon Hellenon, the challenge is different. How to accurately portray the evershifting realities of that time and place, with Koinon (League) pitted against Koinon, and many of those joining together to form a "Sympoliteia" (League of leagues), which ruled supreme in the region until both Achaian and Aitolian leagues fell to the Romani war machine. Forming Koinon Hellenon will be tough, as it was historically. Even as the player starts as commanding the Chremonidean league, the stated goal would be the formation of the Koinon Hellenon (League of all Greeks), as was done by Antigonos Doson, a Makedonian King, which comprised Epirotes, Phokians, Boiotians, Akarnanians, Thessalians, Achaians and Makedones in 224 BCE. Just not from the Makedonian side.


In 224 a Hellenic alliance was formed, which had all Greeks as members. Had it lasted it could fight the Romani unified. I understand you don't really believe that the Greeks could stay unified, but there was a long and bitter struggle to make that happen. It started from the Persian wars, and ended up in Phillip, who was selected by those who wanted the "Pan-hellenic" idea to be realised (the joining of Greeks in one state). Before Phillip, Jason of Pherrai, Tagos(leader) of Thessaly had been chosen but he was murdered, most probably by an Achaimenid Persian agent (although some of the other Thessalians could very well be responsible). Sophists like Gorgias were the agents of this movement. (Gorgias was the tutor of Jason of Pherrai). While not exactly a secret organisation, those who believed in a common state for all Greeks existed. They were the first to welcome Phillipos in Southern Greece, and the reason why S. Greece stayed unified during Alexanders' reign. After his death it all fell apart, mainly because nobody was a single heir to his Empire.

In EB 2 KH will start out as Chremonideian league, but its target will be to become a Panhellenic alliance, and in the end a Hellenic state. It will be HARD mind you but that is what it should be. Ancient Greeks thought it easier to rule a Kingdom than a polis.

[Titus Marcellus Scato]

When I roleplay Koinon Hellenon, I operate as a unified faction until the threat from Macedon is defeated.

After that I simulate the interests of the various cities by making economy-building the #1 priority, rather than territorial expansion. And when I do expand, I do so in all directions, quite randomly. One army might go to Spain to conquer Arse, another one to Gaul to conquer Massilia, another one to the Crimea to conquer the two cities there, and so on. Usually only after the Elutheroi garrison has been destroyed by some other faction, so I have a reason to go to war.

This means my military is always divided up into small chunks here and there, not centralised as one or two big full stacks like other factions might do. That only happens when there's a huge threat to Greece.

I also rely on hiring mercenaries as the preferred method of raising troops - my Greek city populations mostly prefer making money to fighting.

[Lovejoy]

After Mac is defeated I return my faction leaders to there cities and I start treating Sparta(and all lvl1 gov. ctites) as one faction, and Rhodes and Athean as one faction. I usually expand west with my sparta faction and east with my Athean/Rhodes faction. :2thumbsup:

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

This is one of the main reasons I can't play factions like KH. Once their immediate goal is completed, I have a hard time roleplaying further.

[desert]

I roleplayed it as the great Spartan king Areus keeping the Koinon in a very loose affiliation in the name of defeating the Thracians and saving the Bosphoric colonies from marauding Skythians. Then I had a scheming Athenian politician, son of Chremonides, declare a new alliance in the style of the Delian League, acting as a modern Perikles and starting a second Athenian Golden Age.

I forgot my rationalization for why he would succeed, it was a long time ago. But I'm pretty sure it was sound.

[Celtic_Punk]

I have a Spartan Hedgemony. I also like to roleplay my campaigns somewhat, I plan to have a large civil war around 200BC.
What ive done is, well There are many Hellenic colonies possibly willing to join the League. they are governed by Tyrants of the evil Variety lol, therefore As a public service I liberate them, I've only done this with Pergamon though, I plan to do it with Syracuse and Massalia if my Alliance with Rome does not hold up. since i was allied with ptolemy I joined the Successor wars in Syria. I took Antioch with a Spartan army (5 Spartan Hoplites, 4 levies, 2 Hippies, one General of the Spartan Variety) And held it for a long time, Ptolemy attacked me so now ive got ample enemies to keep the Spartans on the top. THE NEW AGE OF SPARTA BECKONS! I should try to write a Spartan AAR maybe... Would anyone be interested in one?

[SwissBarbar]

yes

[Dodge_272]

Yes, very much so.

[Centurio Nixalsverdrus]

No.

[Maion Maroneios]

Well... Honestly no. I prefer to read at least semi-fictional AARs, Sparte becoming a great power is just too fictional if you ask me.

Maion

[Celtic_Punk]

id dint mean like rule what became the roman empire, i just mean the hella's

[Maion Maroneios]

In any case it would be extremely unlikely for a Sparte with approximately 700 homioi to re-conquer Hellas, believe me:yes: Though you could try it, you know.

Maion

[Dutchhoplite]

A reversed Sellasia could be interesting ~:cool:

[Timoleon]

In any case it would be extremely unlikely for a Sparte with approximately 700 homioi to re-conquer Hellas, believe me:yes:

If Sparta boosted their numbers by giving full political rights (and maybe conquered land) to Perioikoi or Neodamodeis (freed slaves) then this wouldn't be that unlikely.

[Maion Maroneios]

If Sparta boosted their numbers by giving full political rights (and maybe conquered land) to Perioikoi or Neodamodeis (freed slaves) then this wouldn't be that unlikely.
If my grandmother had balls, she would be my grandfather. And believe me that would be more likely for that to happen that what you just said. Plus, Perioikoi and Neodamodeis wheren not even close to the caliber of the Homioi, in terms of ability in warfare which was, after all, in the very genes of the Spartiatai after so many generations of fighters. I have studied Spartan history, I know how the people thought and how they lived, so believe me something like what you said would never, even happened, even if the Sparte would seem to have no other option.

Maion

P.S.: Don't take what I first said personal, it's a saying we have here in Greece:sweatdrop:

[Centurio Nixalsverdrus]

If they had only 700 homoioi (sp), they couldn't even field one unit of Spartiates Hoplitai. One unit has 120 or 160 men, when we think of the roleplay-factor, this would be 1200 or 1600. Also, a roleplay-factor of 10 doesn't fit with most Roman armies. Considering a legion had about 5500 men, it'd only consist of 550 men in game, which is 3,5 units only. This has become quite a problem for me lately.

[Phalanx300]

Even with 700 Spartiatai they could very well become dominant, maybe not with armies filled with Spartans but with Periokoi and Mercenary armies led by a few Spartans(as they did when their number was low:dizzy2:).

[Celtic_Punk]

my point exactly

[Maion Maroneios]

Even with 700 Spartiatai they could very well become dominant, maybe not with armies filled with Spartans but with Periokoi and Mercenary armies led by a few Spartans(as they did when their number was low:dizzy2:).
That would require large sums of coins which they didn't have, who do you think supplied them with money when they fought the Peloponnesian Wars and afterwards (before the rise of Thebai)? The Persian Empire. Now who would do that? Nobody. You see, it is all fiction, too much fiction. Sparte would not be able to become dominant, even if all odds turned against them. Just some simple calculations will show you that only Athenai could probably field double their numbers and - let's face it - it was the Homioi who where the true core of their armies. Even with those 700, they wouldn't stand a chance. Take in mind that their reputation was already shattered, plus their training was not as harsh as it used to be. Jut do some research before you post stuff like that please, or simply use your reason.

Maion

[Gleemonex]

If my grandmother had balls, she would be my grandfather.

Very funny ;) An equivalent North American (probably from the USA) expression: If a frog had wings, it wouldn't bump its ass when it hops.


Plus, Perioikoi and Neodamodeis wheren not even close to the caliber of the Homioi, in terms of ability in warfare which was, after all, in the very genes of the Spartiatai after so many generations of fighters.

Then why are there numerous and variegated instances of Helots -- being below even Perioikoi and Neadamodeis -- serving as Spartan hoplites?


That would require large sums of coins which they didn't have, who do you think supplied them with money [...] ?

The EB Script did. It's a game, people. Play it, enjoy it, read AARs you like, don't read AARs you don't. But you're wasting your breath if you're going to tell people how to NOT enjoy themselves.

And I think a Spartan Hegemony AAR would be an interesting read.

-Glee

[Celtic_Punk]

It would be possible if they convinced other cities to back them militarily and economically. If Makedon suffered huge military blunders and sparta took advantage, they could have taken Makedons place in the Hellas

[Dutchhoplite]

I don't think it's impossible that they could have stopped the Macedonians. A Spartan empire is a complete different discussion.
Just be another Cleomenes or Nabis and give those Macedonians hell ~:cool:

[Maion Maroneios]

I'm kind of geting tired with this discussion, seeing too many of you are living in a world of dreams and still confuse the Classical with the Hellenistic eras.

First of all, I said I don't very much enjoy fiction AARs, stating why I believe (according to what historically the state of Sparte at the time was) such a plot (Spartan Hegemony) would be complete fiction.

Secondly, where do you base all of your statements that it could be possible for Sparte to conquer Hellas, defeat the Makedonians or whatever you say? I mean, come on, we might all like Sparte and admire them and their glorious past, but let's be rational. Even on her worst days, Makedonia creamed Sparte and could, in numerous occassions, have reduced her to rubble, like during the siege of Megalopolis. I mean, they didn't even reform their military until it was too late. They had not sufficient funds to do anything, plus they lacked the manpower that made Sparte what she was, the Homioi.

Everything revolved around them, their whole society and way of living. They would have to change a history of some hundreds of years in order to have stood any chance at that time, that's a fact.

Maion

[Gleemonex]

I'm kind of geting tired with this discussion, seeing too many of you are living in a world of dreams and still confuse the Classical with the Hellenistic eras.

You're in no position to condescend to anyone in this thread. Everything you've said here is absolutist, inflexible bluster. The only reason I'm responding to your troll is that I don't want you to walk away thinking you're right, lest you feel the urge to act up like this again.


First of all, I said I don't very much enjoy fiction AARs, stating why I believe (according to what historically the state of Sparte at the time was) such a plot (Spartan Hegemony) would be complete fiction.

If it wasn't for a single roof tile, Epeirote fanboys would probably be calling a Roman Hegemony complete fiction. Your point?


They would have to change a history of some hundreds of years in order to have stood any chance at that time, that's a fact.

Um.... everyone who plays EB has to change a history of some 2280 years in order to enjoy themselves. They don't seem to have much trouble with it. What's your excuse?

-Glee

[Phalanx300]

That would require large sums of coins which they didn't have, who do you think supplied them with money when they fought the Peloponnesian Wars and afterwards (before the rise of Thebai)? The Persian Empire. Now who would do that? Nobody. You see, it is all fiction, too much fiction. Sparte would not be able to become dominant, even if all odds turned against them. Just some simple calculations will show you that only Athenai could probably field double their numbers and - let's face it - it was the Homioi who where the true core of their armies. Even with those 700, they wouldn't stand a chance. Take in mind that their reputation was already shattered, plus their training was not as harsh as it used to be. Jut do some research before you post stuff like that please, or simply use your reason.

Maion

Cleomenes already prooved you wrong.

And if Argos hadn't rebelled Sparta would have had the Pelopponesos. And afterwards who knows, they could very well become the Hegemon of Greece again.

1 Man and 1 reform can change a future of a nation, look at Phillip, at Cleomenes. Without them their nations never would have become so dominant(In Cleomenes case its again).

And I've done quite enough amateur research to know quite some things about Sparta, however you saying that Sparta never could have become dominant again is ofcourse not true.

[Dutchhoplite]

Hmm, throwing around facts are we??

Fact is that that the Spartan "new model army" under Cleomenes III performed quite well. Fact is that is Macedonian/Allied army was extremely reluctant to attack the smaller Spartan army. Fact is that the rebellion in Argos forced the Spartan army to retreat and not the Macedonian army.

There are enough interesting "what ifs".

[Phalanx300]

Hmm, throwing around facts are we??

Fact is that that the Spartan "new model army" under Cleomenes III performed quite well. Fact is that is Macedonian/Allied army was extremely reluctant to attack the smaller Spartan army. Fact is that the rebellion in Argos forced the Spartan army to retreat and not the Macedonian army.

There are enough interesting "what ifs".


Yes, but before Cleomenes Sparta was basicly nothing. However by his reforms it became a power to watch out for once more.

And his point is that during/after EBs time frame its impossible that Sparta would become a big power again, thats ofcourse not true.

Basicly every city state, yet how weak can become a power, look at Rome, a city state, unlikely? Yes but it still became the biggest power. Carthage, a city state. And like that there are many more city states, they started out as a laughter however became some of the biggest powers ever.

:sweatdrop:

[Ca Putt]

it may have been possible but highly unlikely. if one imagines most possible time strings during the EB time frame there would have been a very large number of strings without rome but still relatively few with Spartans rising above the other Poleis, very few.

Personally I gave up justifying a KH expansion , after i defeated Macedon. from what i read, they were not the people to do so. I've even read that some Historians think The Poleis was not realy a state. but a group of people that have enclosed themselves amung there fellow Hellens. take that aside, imo the most likely way the Hellenes could have rose to a vast empire from the Pillars of Hercules to Kolchis(or baktria^^) would be through first having to face a even bigger challenge than the war against the Persians(over a long period), which would have united them and after that they got some megalomanic Leader who 1. want's to unite ALL Hellens of the World(Massilia etc.) 2. got the taste of power and just could not stop conquering(I had to come up with this one once I crossed the alps :D)
to be honest it realy could fit on my current Faction leader who realy enjoys Looting, pillaging, ransacking, burning and Hellenising(of cource) Gaul with his Veterans :D
so to be frank I'm not behaving very Hellenic at all, but It's still a lot of fun and I am quite impressed by those who try to play their Campaign as Historical accurate as possible, but that's just not my way of playing History related Games, I rather change history than re-enact it.

[Dutchhoplite]

to be honest it realy could fit on my current Faction leader who realy enjoys Looting, pillaging, ransacking, burning and Hellenising(of cource) Gaul with his Veterans :D


Sounds like a great guy :D

[Ca Putt]

yeah, i like him :D. afaik he has got all traits which increace the looting output :D but he's 60 by now :(

[Phalanx300]

it may have been possible but highly unlikely.

Yes thats what I ment, said it a bit wrong, its unlikely but not impossible.:sweatdrop:


I've even read that some Historians think The Poleis was not realy a state. but a group of people that have enclosed themselves amung there fellow Hellens.

Well, I don't really think thats true, it could be said about all states, even todays ones.

[Centurio Nixalsverdrus]

And what should keep the other Hellenes from just getting rid of the Spartans? Everytime the Spartan army would leave a newly conquered city, it would just revolt. The southern Greeks never felt any urge to unify Hellas under one polis. Conquer them, yes, make them do what they want, yes, forcing them into an "alliance", yes, but they never tried to make a homogenuous state out of Hellas.

Rome had a different approach. They started out very small, but they never ate too much at the same time. Babysteps approach basically. And during EB's starting time, Rome had already huge masses of manpower to command. The troops they could levy were more or less cheap and included all free men. The Spartans had a totally different approach. They wanted to make everyone slaves with a small elitist core of homoioi. Of course the Romans wanted to be the sole masters too but they never told the subjugated, that's the difference. :grin:

[Celtic_Punk]

You throw around "spartan empire" like i meant itd be purely spartan. If the KH actually won against Makedonia there would be Athens and Sparta as the most influential states. Perhaps Pella would weigh in somewhat but I don't think so due to years n years n years of war. Just like how everyone didn't (and some don't sadly) trust Germans till recently. Sparta probably would be commanding most of the battles, like in the past. Please don't get worked up just because a few guys think 700 men could kill tens of thousands because they saw 300. (terrain permitting, 700 men could in theory [without being flanked] kill as many as 20 thousand)

[Dutchhoplite]

How would a "Empire" consisting only of level IV governments work ???

Would it work??

Just thinking aloud ;)

[Celtic_Punk]

then its more of an alliance, so a spartan alliance? you belong as long as you give full military control to Sparta?

[Maion Maroneios]

You're in no position to condescend to anyone in this thread. Everything you've said here is absolutist, inflexible bluster. The only reason I'm responding to your troll is that I don't want you to walk away thinking you're right, lest you feel the urge to act up like this again.
I'd better watch your words, Gleemonex. I'm not saying blustering around, just using simple reason as well as known facts. I don't want to think I'm right, as the only reason I'm bothering to reply to every over philo-Laconian here is to bring them back to earth, because truly some people float in the sky. I'm stating my personal opinion, and that's because of what The Celtic Punk said about a possible next AAR of him.


If it wasn't for a single roof tile, Epeirote fanboys would probably be calling a Roman Hegemony complete fiction. Your point?
This has absolutely nothing to do with what I say. Unless you can compare Makedonia-Sparte with Roma-Epeiros. If that is so, I think it was a mistake to even bother to reply to your bumbling.


Um.... everyone who plays EB has to change a history of some 2280 years in order to enjoy themselves. They don't seem to have much trouble with it. What's your excuse?
I never said anything against that any time. Nor do I have any trouble about that. As I said before (but clearly you haven't well understood), I have stated my personal opinion. Maybe coming too much in conflict with the rest, ok, but I use reason and facts, while most others just throw out bold assumptions or fictional idealistic theories.

Maion

[Maion Maroneios]

Cleomenes already prooved you wrong.

And if Argos hadn't rebelled Sparta would have had the Pelopponesos. And afterwards who knows, they could very well become the Hegemon of Greece again.

1 Man and 1 reform can change a future of a nation, look at Phillip, at Cleomenes. Without them their nations never would have become so dominant(In Cleomenes case its again).

And I've done quite enough amateur research to know quite some things about Sparta, however you saying that Sparta never could have become dominant again is ofcourse not true.
Hmmm, I kind of thought someone would fall into this trap. Sadly though, that doesn't prove that Sparte could rule Hellas over again.

While a reform, as you very correctly stated, can make big changes, that only wouldn't assure that Sparte would again become Hegemon of Hellas. Why is that? Because Sparte's governmental system, while excellently working within the restricted boundaries of Lakonike and Messenia, was almost useless when applied to a much wider territory. This was proved after Sparte won the Peloponnesian War against Athenai. They won, though they didn't last very long, did they? It would require massive political reforms for Sparte to be able to remain dominant for a considerable amount of time, though those changes would change Sparte completely. So basically, it wouldn't be the Sparte we know anymore.

As you see, Sparte might have dominated Hellas by force (difficult, but I agree possible), they wouldn't have been able to keep hold on their newly conquered provinces for long enough. Then again, I believe we can always leave open room for such a possibility, it's just that the chances are probably such minuscule, that you could probably just consider them as non-existing.

Maion

[Celtic_Punk]

Well I'm still gunna do that AAR, its going to be an Alliance headed up by Sparta and Athens. We'll see where it goes though. I am planing on having a civil war between Sparta and Athens around the 200-150BC range too, and It'll end somewhere around 100BC.

What point of view should I write in in? I was thinking a Spartan hoplite from the Civil war era, and finished by his son.

[Phalanx300]

Hmmm, I kind of thought someone would fall into this trap. Sadly though, that doesn't prove that Sparte could rule Hellas over again.

I see it differently, if Sparte could have gained control over the Peloponessos, and then beated the Macedonians in a pitched battle or a few, they would probably gain control over Hellas, it would be hard but not impossible. And as far as I know about Cleomenes he was quite a good tactician.


While a reform, as you very correctly stated, can make big changes, that only wouldn't assure that Sparte would again become Hegemon of Hellas. Why is that? Because Sparte's governmental system, while excellently working within the restricted boundaries of Lakonike and Messenia, was almost useless when applied to a much wider territory.This was proved after Sparte won the Peloponnesian War against Athenai. They won, though they didn't last very long, did they? It would require massive political reforms for Sparte to be able to remain dominant for a considerable amount of time, though those changes would change Sparte completely. So basically, it wouldn't be the Sparte we know anymore.

I don't really agree with that, it could very well be possible for Sparta to control Hellas. Even with their govermental system. They would probably not expand beyond Hellas, and not forming a new Roman empire, but becoming the hegemon of Hellas again was certainly possible.


As you see, Sparte might have dominated Hellas by force (difficult, but I agree possible), they wouldn't have been able to keep hold on their newly conquered provinces for long enough. Then again, I believe we can always leave open room for such a possibility, it's just that the chances are probably such minuscule, that you could probably just consider them as non-existing.

I also don't think that the chances are that small that it becomes non possible, if history has shown us anything then it is that anything is possible, the same with holding onto it after dominating Hellas. At that time they would be quite wealthy again, their numbers would be increasing, though not that noticable in such a short period(and the other poleis also didn't knew about the real number of Spartiatai).

If they would play their cards right they could very well maintain such a state for a while.

Though yea, all of it is somewhat unlikely, yet not impossible.


Anyways, I would like such a AAR CelticPunk!

[Gleemonex]

I'm not saying blustering around, just using simple reason as well as known facts.

Stating your own highly debatable (and debated) opinions as inalienable facts = blustering.

Also, you might note that Centurio Nixalsverdrus was able to voice his similar concerns civilly (ie. without calling everyone else pie-in-the-sky fools).




If it wasn't for a single roof tile, Epeirote fanboys would probably be calling a Roman Hegemony complete fiction. Your point?This has absolutely nothing to do with what I say. Unless you can compare Makedonia-Sparte with Roma-Epeiros. If that is so, I think it was a mistake to even bother to reply to your bumbling.

Your homework for today is to read about the Butterfly effect. Extra credit if you can figure out how my statement has everything to do with what you say (and, indeed, warfare in general).


As I said before (but clearly you haven't well understood), I have stated my personal opinion.

Followed by:


I use reason and facts, while most others just throw out bold assumptions or fictional idealistic theories.


Well I'm still gunna do that AAR, its going to be an Alliance headed up by Sparta and Athens. We'll see where it goes though. I am planing on having a civil war between Sparta and Athens around the 200-150BC range too, and It'll end somewhere around 100BC.

What point of view should I write in in? I was thinking a Spartan hoplite from the Civil war era, and finished by his son.

That should be fun. What about an emancipated helot, and his son going through the agoge?

-Glee

[Celtic_Punk]

I was thinking about a spartan hoplite because he'd be writing from a first hand account. The helots would be more behind the lines... but they would have also been there I guess.

[Phalanx300]

Maybe as a mercenary?

[Celtic_Punk]

No its definitely going to be a biased account. hehe.

[Gleemonex]

I was thinking about a spartan hoplite because he'd be writing from a first hand account. The helots would be more behind the lines... but they would have also been there I guess.

Well, as I'd mentionned before, there is (albeit scant) evidence that helots served verily in the Spartan phalanx as early as the Battle of Platea.

The reason I mention helots is that you could have a helot archer or hoplite telling the first half of your AAR, with his fully-Spartan son telling the latter half. Just a thought though.

-Glee

[Celtic_Punk]

I'm going to start the AAR once I finish a basic first draft of what i want it to be like, maybe a week depends on work.

[Nobo]

I'm going to start the AAR once I finish a basic first draft of what i want it to be like, maybe a week depends on work.

I don't usually read AARs, but this one sounds pretty fun... make sure to let us know, when you're ready :2thumbsup:

[Maion Maroneios]

Stating your own highly debatable (and debated) opinions as inalienable facts = blustering.
Where did I exactly state that my opinions are inalienable facts? Look at my replies, I have mentioned again and again that I believe there is a possibility that Sparte could reach such heights anew. Meaning, I agree with everyone else, but just using my statements I considerably decrease that number. So basically that means that you are the one who's blustering here, not me. You're trying to show you're something, debating with me about a topic I already agreed with the rest, but in truth you aren't getting to anything.

[QUOTE=Gleemonex;2056965]Also, you might note that Centurio Nixalsverdrus was able to voice his similar concerns civilly (ie. without calling everyone else pie-in-the-sky fools).
Centurio Nixalsverdrus might do whatever he wishes and that I respect. I never called anyone a fool, mind you, I just want people to start doing some reading/research about Sparte instead of watching movies like 300 for a change. Same goes for you, it seems, or you wouldn't be on fire now.


Your homework for today is to read about the Butterfly effect. Extra credit if you can figure out how my statement has everything to do with what you say (and, indeed, warfare in general).
Your homework for today are the following:
1) Read my previous replies over and over again until you fully understand exactly what I say, for you truly seem to have no idea.
2) Do some research about the "butterfly effect" and I mean some real one. Maybe then you will understand that it is a theory, not a proven fact.

Maion

[Phalanx300]

I never called anyone a fool, mind you, I just want people to start doing some reading/research about Sparte instead of watching movies like 300 for a change.


And what makes you think that people haven't done some research on them? If they are here that means they probably play EB and like historical accuracy, which means they probably know more about Sparte to then your average 300 steriotype.

[Maion Maroneios]

Because of what they state. I agree that most know at least something about Spartan history (aexcluding wikipedia sources), but they just are heavily influenced by the American propaganda of today.

Maion

[Titus Marcellus Scato]

The Romans moved from city-state to great power because they allowed two things in the late kingdom/early republic:

1. Men from other Latin cities could move (with their families) to Rome and in time, become Roman citizens.

2. Wealthy Roman citizens could, through time, service to Rome and political/economic success, join the patrician class (Rome's nobility), even if their ancestors were not of patrician blood.

This thinking was anathema to the Spartans. They wouldn't accept other Greeks moving to Sparta and becoming Spartan citizens. And their nobility didn't want wealthy commoners joining their social class, because the more nobles there are in a society, the less power and influence each one has.

The Spartans would have to make similar social reforms to Rome to become a great power. And the Spartans were the most politically and socially conservative of all Greek cultures. Kind of like the 'North Korea' of the ancient world!

[Centurio Nixalsverdrus]

I totally agree, Titus Marcellus Scato.


Centurio Nixalsverdrus might do whatever he wishes and that I respect.
Well, nice, but basically I had the same or very similar opinion like you, so please don't drag me into this because Gleemonex mentioned me.

[Maion Maroneios]

I have no intention in dragging you into anything, belive me. I just answered Gleemonex.

Maion

[Gleemonex]

The Romans moved from city-state to great power because they allowed two things in the late kingdom/early republic:

1. Men from other Latin cities could move (with their families) to Rome and in time, become Roman citizens.

2. Wealthy Roman citizens could, through time, service to Rome and political/economic success, join the patrician class (Rome's nobility), even if their ancestors were not of patrician blood.

I basically agree, but it's not so cut-and-dry. And note (as I have earlier in this thread) that there were multiple instances, and varieties, of helot emancipation.

-Glee