1.2 - further and farther, the Qin Dynasty??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jolt

The fact that a Chinese force reached and successfully besieged a city in Ferghana doesn't prove that China would be capable of consistently fielding armies to go across the steppes and conquering and holding "remote" (In a chinese-centered "Middle Kingdom" way) sedentary populous areas with foreign customs which differ greatly from the Chinese ones. Neither would they be able to do this, nor do I believe they would be inclined to do so.

---

We don't know if the Chinese would have been able to do this like we don't know if, for instance, the Dacians would have been capable of consistently fielding armies to cross most of central and northern Europe and conquering and holding settlements in Scandinavia. Neither would they have been able to do this, nor would they most likely have been inclined to do so. But EB provides the player with the ability to do so. The simple fact is that whether Dacia and Scandinavia ever interacted directly, intended to do it, or were even historically able to do it, they interacted and affected one another indirectly and there is the possibility that they could have had direct contact.

That's the entire point of a game like EB, otherwise the game would be much more restrictive in forcing the player to follow a historical path. Looking at Macedonia in the mid 4th century, no one would have imagined that Macedonians would have been inclined, nor capable, of conquering to India and creating an Indo-Greek empire in the northwest of that subcontinent in what is historically the blink of an eye. All that would be necessary would be for some sort of circumstance within a game to create the inclination for one of the Warring States to head westward. EB is more about possibilities within the historical framework of the timeline than it is with strictly historical simulation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeinPanzer

The establishment of the Silk Road shows that this geographical barrier that you seem to think existed between China and Iran/Bactria would not "make conquest impossible." It is, just like between Iberia and Bactria, a matter of distance and route.

---

A series of merchants that travel for a long time following some trading routes isn't the same thing as a huge army that enters the steppes for an invasion of a whole continent.
Unless your army is a nomadic horse horde and you are called Temujin.

Quote:

---

You have a woefully limited understanding of Chinese history. The Chinese didn't just send "an army to defeat the steppe nomads."

---

You misunderstood my post. I wasn't saying that the Chinese didn't do any military campaign at all.

Quote:

---

Expansion under the Qin and Han was enormous, including the Korean peninsula, southwest China and parts of Vietnam, and parts of the Tarim basin, an empire which is not insignificant when compares to the the Seleucids'.

---

And so? The Romans conquered Britannia, North Africa and Phoenicia, does these conquest make them probably invaders of China? Come on, you're telling of Vietnam and Korea, they are completely different countries, they are really closer to the heart of China than Europe and connection with them was really a completely different thing than an hypotetical connection with Mid-East or Eastern Europe.
The fact that a Chinese army attacked Korea is a story that has anything to do with a serious attempt of conquering the far West (or vice versa).

But, well, yeah, if the Chinese conquered even Southern China, then it's obvious that they could be able to reach the Mediterranean Sea. ;)

Quote:

---

Arguing from a gameplay perspective makes little sense in this respect. You could argue from the same angle that it is not worth including the Iberians in the same map as Bactrians because, though they could meet, it is almost impossible to do so in an average game. The Chinese could meet Bactria, for instance, and that scenario is more likely than finding Iberians in Bactria (as shown historically in the episode described above).

---

A simple contact isn't enough for allowing a large-scale war scenario.
Bactria would have _a lot more_ things to do with Eastern countries than China could be with Bactria. And Eastern countries have a lot more in common with Western European countries.
Bactrians during the game may really make their presence visible to Seleucians and Parthians (and whoever could be there), while I don't think that a Roman/Greek/Seleucian player could notice a Chinese empire coming to knock at his doors because it wants to conquer Persia, Mesopotamia, Asia Minor and then go further: even if China should reach the territories that are today's Sinkiang and Tibet, distances would be too long from the mainland of China to lands west of Transoxiana.

I repeat what is my opinion: Chinese in game would remain in Eastern Asia doing their business, as well as Western countries would mind their own one. In a realistic mod, any attempt of a player to invade one side would be a logistical sucide (... if a player manages to make his dominions enough large during the timeframe) for the reasons said before. That's not a pic nic.

This argument is completely academic. There is no suggestion anywhere, that were it possible, EB would expand to include China. That is certainly not in our remit and I don't think we as a team would have any interest in expanding to an area of the map that had such little impact on the major theatres of war of the mediterranean and the Iranian Plateau.

Foot

@Jolt
...but you must admit that it was deathly effective, and to the eyes of a commoner it's a quick way to status and prestiege. The Han military later on largely adopted and expanded on the Qin system, and subsequently set the foundation of chinese military doctrine for years to come.

Imagine this, you are a soldier from one of the 6 states standing in a tight firing line. You draw your crossbow with your foot at signal's notice, load the bolt, and fire in upon command at the enemy firing line 300 yards away. Normally after a few trades one side will either lose nerve or a platoon commander gets fed up and orders his men to draw swords for an ill-fated charge. But no, the Qin men keeps on firing, despite the casualties they sustained. To make matters worse, a blocks of pikemen move forward upon your line and you have no way to reach them with your sword. Your line gets tied down. You hear a distant signal and the Qin men drop their crossbows, remove the Ji from the ground and come after you in a charge.

You are a reasonably well off land owner or artisian, your land or business is wealthy enough for you to provide your arms, and hire workers so you will have time off to drill. If you're dead, you cant keep that. The Qin, on the other hand, are conscripts. Most of them don't have much social status nor wealth, and pretty much all their gear are provided by the state. Their training's tough, dicipline harsh, but ONE thing drives their motivation: YOUR wealth, and your HEAD. For each (confirmed) kill elevates their status, each inch of land gained will one day be your to till, and each rank you attain increases your share of the booty.

You have something to protect, yet they have nothing to lose. Couple that with iron dicipline and harsh military training, they are a terror to behold.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Connacht

A series of merchants that travel for a long time following some trading routes isn't the same thing as a huge army that enters the steppes for an invasion of a whole continent.
Unless your army is a nomadic horse horde and you are called Temujin.

---

You seem to be a bit confused. I'm not discussing "huge armies entering the steppes for an invasion of a whole continent" (which continent, by the way? Is China not a part of Asia?), I'm discussing Chinese armies using the path that extends from the western portion of the great wall through either the north or south of the Tarim basin into the west- a route which Chinese armies historically took during the EB timeframe.

Quote:

---

You misunderstood my post. I wasn't saying that the Chinese didn't do any military campaign at all.
...
And so? The Romans conquered Britannia, North Africa and Phoenicia, does these conquest make them probably invaders of China? Come on, you're telling of Vietnam and Korea, they are completely different countries, they are really closer to the heart of China than Europe and connection with them was really a completely different thing than an hypotetical connection with Mid-East or Eastern Europe.
The fact that a Chinese army attacked Korea is a story that has anything to do with a serious attempt of conquering the far West (or vice versa).

---

That comment was in response to this, especially the bolded part:

Quote:

---

The only thing the country did was sending an army to defeat the steppe nomads, but the Chinese couldn't do anything else. The Romans, instead, with Traian were able to reach today's Iraqi-Iranian border and had even a possibility to go further, while the Seleucids had an empire that stretched from Asia Minor to current Afghanistan.

---

Your line of thinking here is clear: the Chinese couldn't do anything else other than send armies against the steppe nomads, while the Romans and the Seleucids controlled huge empires. My post was just to show that this isn't true- the Qin and Han empires expanded hugely during the EB timeframe, just like the Romans and the Macedonians. I'm just arguing that China was expansionist during this timeframe and had the capability to reach the west, but that they were not so inclined, in much the same way that Mediterranean powers could have invaded Scandinavia or the Baltics (areas which were about as accessible to and had about as much contact with the Mediterranean powers during the EB timeframe as China did with the easternmost EB factions), but they were not inclined to do so.

Quote:

---

A simple contact isn't enough for allowing a large-scale war scenario.
Bactria would have _a lot more_ things to do with Eastern countries than China could be with Bactria. And Eastern countries have a lot more in common with Western European countries.
Bactrians during the game may really make their presence visible to Seleucians and Parthians (and whoever could be there), while I don't think that a Roman/Greek/Seleucian player could notice a Chinese empire coming to knock at his doors because it wants to conquer Persia, Mesopotamia, Asia Minor and then go further: even if China should reach the territories that are today's Sinkiang and Tibet, distances would be too long from the mainland of China to lands west of Transoxiana.

---

I've pretty much covered my response to this in previous posts.

Quote:

---

I repeat what is my opinion: Chinese in game would remain in Eastern Asia doing their business, as well as Western countries would mind their own one. In a realistic mod, any attempt of a player to invade one side would be a logistical sucide (... if a player manages to make his dominions enough large during the timeframe) for the reasons said before. That's not a pic nic.

---

I should perhaps here lay out my position on all this just because it seems like everyone is going in different directions. I am not for anything east of what is currently in the EB map being included. I would not want to see more of India or even more of the Tarim basin included. I think the boundaries are fine as is even if it was feasible to expand the map.

All I am saying is that given the possibility to create a game akin to EB in the EB timeframe, with an overworld map divided into provinces and armies that would attempt to simulate the historical situation at a particular point in time, I would be all for extending the map to include parts of India, China, what is today Mongolia and eastern Siberia, and southeast Asia as far south as Indonesia. I would be for this firstly because it would allow for organic trade to emerge between East and West, primarily through the Silk Road, but also through sea routes from India. Secondly, it would allow for the steppes to be modelled more realistically, with true domino movements influencing both east and west. Finally, because it would allow for outlandish scenarios like Chinese forces invading westward or Bactrians invading eastward or Indians invading Bactria, etc., as EB presently allows. I would support making these actions as viable as they historically were (i.e. not impossible but improbable).

I personally think if Qin/Han are implemented into the mod, it would be a mundane ritual of holding a wide swath of homeland provinces, a tiny handful of expansion regions, surrounded by an endless sea of type 3 and 4 governments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeinPanzer

We don't know if the Chinese would have been able to do this like we don't know if, for instance, the Dacians would have been capable of consistently fielding armies to cross most of central and northern Europe and conquering and holding settlements in Scandinavia. Neither would they have been able to do this, nor would they most likely have been inclined to do so. But EB provides the player with the ability to do so. The simple fact is that whether Dacia and Scandinavia ever interacted directly, intended to do it, or were even historically able to do it, they interacted and affected one another indirectly and there is the possibility that they could have had direct contact.

That's the entire point of a game like EB, otherwise the game would be much more restrictive in forcing the player to follow a historical path. Looking at Macedonia in the mid 4th century, no one would have imagined that Macedonians would have been inclined, nor capable, of conquering to India and creating an Indo-Greek empire in the northwest of that subcontinent in what is historically the blink of an eye. All that would be necessary would be for some sort of circumstance within a game to create the inclination for one of the Warring States to head westward. EB is more about possibilities within the historical framework of the timeline than it is with strictly historical simulation.

---

Do not forget that you're example has very little in common with a China-West connection. Persia had already invaded Greece, and was only separated by the small Aegean Sea, and was a force with significant impact in Greece even after the defeat of their invasion. Whereas China and Bactria are separated by miles of steppe lands, surrounded by mountainous terrain. But then, by following your line of thought, providing...let's see, Great Zimbabwe united all the Bantu tribes in Africa, and headed Northwards, and embarked on a World Conquest reaching as far as Japan could be just as possible, considering they'd be inclined to such a task, despite existing little connection between Great Zimbabwe and the Mediterranian. What I am saying (And Foot explained it) is that nations who had little impact on the affairs of the current EB map are best left omitted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by satalexton

@Jolt
...but you must admit that it was deathly effective, and to the eyes of a commoner it's a quick way to status and prestiege. The Han military later on largely adopted and expanded on the Qin system, and subsequently set the foundation of chinese military doctrine for years to come.

Imagine this, you are a soldier from one of the 6 states standing in a tight firing line. You draw your crossbow with your foot at signal's notice, load the bolt, and fire in upon command at the enemy firing line 300 yards away. Normally after a few trades one side will either lose nerve or a platoon commander gets fed up and orders his men to draw swords for an ill-fated charge. But no, the Qin men keeps on firing, despite the casualties they sustained. To make matters worse, a blocks of pikemen move forward upon your line and you have no way to reach them with your sword. Your line gets tied down. You hear a distant signal and the Qin men drop their crossbows, remove the Ji from the ground and come after you in a charge.

You are a reasonably well off land owner or artisian, your land or business is wealthy enough for you to provide your arms, and hire workers so you will have time off to drill. If you're dead, you cant keep that. The Qin, on the other hand, are conscripts. Most of them don't have much social status nor wealth, and pretty much all their gear are provided by the state. Their training's tough, dicipline harsh, but ONE thing drives their motivation: YOUR wealth, and your HEAD. For each (confirmed) kill elevates their status, each inch of land gained will one day be your to till, and each rank you attain increases your share of the booty.

You have something to protect, yet they have nothing to lose. Couple that with iron dicipline and harsh military training, they are a terror to behold.

---

Indeed. But providing you had all the training in the world, if your squad leader comitted one mistake and got himself killed, then you had 0 chances in theory of escaping alive, despite doing your best at fighting/trying to save your squad leader's life. But yes, it is a system which forces all the army to win, true, but if things don't go too well. Then massive desertions could ensure.

I have one question. Was the Han system very alike, or did they alter some principals behind the army organization?

Han was nearly identical to that of Qin in fact, the only real difference really is that the source of motivation is no longer the threat of execution (they prefer the idea of 'court martial', seems more 'fair' when it's a bunch of your peers judging ya death huh?) and lobbing others' heads off to prove u got a kill. It worked mainly because the military is now under the hands of relatively more lenient regime (tho still using Qin constituitions and laws), a much larger territory, and a much larger population. The latter is particularly important because, despite every adult male are still technically considered as reserves, many people may never see military service in their life time. Thus the Han army is more professionalized and take up a smaller proportion of the total population.

Oh it also helps when ur no longer fighting a civil war, but 'defending' your self from the XiongNu, punishing 'rebellious' IndoGreeks and defending the Silk Route while making a fat load of cash in the process.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jolt

Do not forget that you're example has very little in common with a China-West connection. Persia had already invaded Greece, and was only separated by the small Aegean Sea, and was a force with significant impact in Greece even after the defeat of their invasion.

---

I don't understand why you're bringing up the connection between Persia and Greece in this context.

Quote:

---

Whereas China and Bactria are separated by miles of steppe lands, surrounded by mountainous terrain.

---

If you wanted to go through the north, yes. But the route actually taken by Chinese troops was through the Tarim Basin, which remained the primary route for any travellers going from the west to China and vice versa for millennia. This route followed the great wall to the west, then continued westward until it hit the Tarim Basin (which is a desert; no steppe lands involved) and went either north or south, following the edge of the desert until they crossed mountains on the western side of the basin and crossed into the region around Bactria.

If you think my example has little in common with the China-West connection, here's a better one. The Sabaeans lived a huge distance away from the Mediterranean, had minimal contacts with the other EB factions (mainly with the Aithiopians, who are not represented in game, and to a limited extent in the east with some Iranian peoples). In order for them to reach another EB faction, they would have had to travel hundreds of miles either over the Red Sea or through desert and mountain to reach them. There was a brisk trade of exotic commodities through parts of Arabia, but the Sabaeans themselves almost don't appear on the radar of the ancient historians, and even when we do hear of contact with Arabians (Aelius Gallus' expedition being the primary mention), we only hear about a penetration of a fragment of the Arabian peninsula, not even getting close to the Sabaean homeland. They were barely expansionist, only fighting other neighbouring Arabian states. Yet the Sabaeans are included in EB.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Connacht

It would be possible only in custom battles.

---

Not if The Sioux Managed to get across the Bering Strait, Through China, and round India to Pahlava! Or If Pahlava did the revrerse. Obviously though, this hypothetical mod would cover about 2000 years of history (I would say 300 BC to 1432 AD),, and would be simply immense. Still, it's not gonna happen, unless that would be possible in ETW, which I somehow doubt)

To cut this story short: there will not be Qin or any other Chinese power in EB; even if the map allowed it. Not even if the faction limit allowed it. Likely, not even if the engine could be massaged in such a way the Qin military organisation could be modelled accurately. Which by the way AFAIK is still largely a matter of individual duels; yes a comprehensive organisation existed - but the point is that a soldiers pay, or punishment was a direct consequence of the number of duels/encounters won (or lost). Hence the importance of cutting off the heads of fallen foes.

The reason why no Chinese power would be included is that if they can; so can dozens of other things.

From what I'm reading this 'discussion' has become an argument for the sake of having one. Why?

Tellos, there were no infantry one-on-one duels. There were chariot duels during the much earlier period of the Eastern Zhou dynasty, but chariots by the EB time frame are on the decline, it's role being filled by cavalry introduced by the Zhao state's "Hu Fu Qi She" (literally means dressing up as a nomad and practising horse-riding and shooting from horseback) reform. Chariots then were largely used to serve as a mobile command post for generals, signalers (drums and large horns), while the rest are put onto the 2 flanks.

The Qin putting on obtaining the enemy's 首级 (roughly translates to 'head') was to encourage the men to fight more ferociously when the charge (300 yards while taking at least 3-4 vollies of bolts) was ordered. The head lopping bit comes when the enemy is breaking, where the Qin soldier would literally drop his Ji, draw his sword, and start chasing to nearest routing chap for his head. In a battle between Qin and Chu during 224BC, when the Chu decide to retreat to a better position to fight the Qin after a long stalemate, the Qin ordered an advance all of a sudden and turned what was suppose to be a tactical retreat into a rout.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeinPanzer

I don't understand why you're bringing up the connection between Persia and Greece in this context.

---

Because you gave Macedonia as an example of someone who wasn't expected to build an Empire, like China could, providing they cross over to the West. My point was that there were already great rivalries between those civilizations (Which motivated the original purpose of the war), while an easily surpassable obstacle (Sea/Strait). Both civilizations had already been in constant warfare and were greatly hostile to one another. Thus it becomes logical that either Macedonia or any other Greek City-State or a coalition of them could try to head East with a significant number of troops, or a Persian re-invasion of Greece, for that matter.
Putting it back into context, there was no such thing between Qin/Han and Bactria. There were no rivalries between the states, and they weren't exactly very aware of how each other even functioned; They had miles to cross before they reached one another, especially Qin, which never focused much in external expansion; Both had little encounters throughout their histories (The one related in this thread is the first one that I know of between Greeks and Chinese, even though someone said they weren't exactly Greeks but some sort of vassal/tributary state.), and that sporadic encounter happened merely because the Chinese envoy was killed. Otherwise, no expedition would have took place.
Therefore one example and other have little in common.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeinPanzer

If you wanted to go through the north, yes. But the route actually taken by Chinese troops was through the Tarim Basin, which remained the primary route for any travellers going from the west to China and vice versa for millennia. This route followed the great wall to the west, then continued westward until it hit the Tarim Basin (which is a desert; no steppe lands involved) and went either north or south, following the edge of the desert until they crossed mountains on the western side of the basin and crossed into the region around Bactria.

If you think my example has little in common with the China-West connection, here's a better one. The Sabaeans lived a huge distance away from the Mediterranean, had minimal contacts with the other EB factions (mainly with the Aithiopians, who are not represented in game, and to a limited extent in the east with some Iranian peoples). In order for them to reach another EB faction, they would have had to travel hundreds of miles either over the Red Sea or through desert and mountain to reach them. There was a brisk trade of exotic commodities through parts of Arabia, but the Sabaeans themselves almost don't appear on the radar of the ancient historians, and even when we do hear of contact with Arabians (Aelius Gallus' expedition being the primary mention), we only hear about a penetration of a fragment of the Arabian peninsula, not even getting close to the Sabaean homeland. They were barely expansionist, only fighting other neighbouring Arabian states. Yet the Sabaeans are included in EB.

---

That is true, but the supposed wealth of the Sabeans prompted the expedition of Aelius Gallus, which shows that they weren't exactly isolated. And the distance they'd have to travel through the sea to reach, I'm not even talking of the Eythrean Ptolomaic possessions or Upper Egypt, but Necao's Channel, is still at the very least half of the distance of Han's Eastern-most borders to reach the Bactrians. And providing they knew in which seasons the wind was favourable to go Northwards (Which I'm sure they did know), it wouldn't be that difficult to reach Egypt from Arabia Felix.

Still, what you bring up is also true, since the Sabeans had little impact on the affairs of the rest of EB's factions.

Quote:

---

and lobbing others' heads off to prove u got a kill.

---

Chinese Head Hunters! ^_^'

It is true that Saba played very little part in the affairs of the mediterranean, though there was certainly some. However we are, due to how the world works, stuck with a huge expanse of space in the shape of Arabia. Before Saba were added the rebel towns and armies of Arabia had no appropriate parent faction to belong to (this is important as it defines what names the rebel family leaders can use, what portraits, what it can recruit and so on). I can't remember exactly but I think that in the 0.7x group of releases Parthia was chosen as the parent faction in Arabia, which inevitably led to purple provinces all over the place (in india to as parthia was the parent faction there, and still is). So we have a large entirely complete peninsular in need of a parent faction, that housed important trading cities, and would stop the encroachment of parthian purple into this huge part of the map. For practical purposes Saba had a lot to offer.

This in no way is designed to express all the reasons behind Saba's inclusion, but it certainly helps explain the practical reason.

Foot

Yeah, I remember how in 0.74 the Parthians would end up at war with the Ptolies over, say Yemen... When the Parthians themselves had been beaten naught but to dust by the Seleukids from day one. Oh, those were some really whacky wasteland days! ~:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeinPanzer

You seem to be a bit confused. I'm not discussing "huge armies entering the steppes for an invasion of a whole continent" (which continent, by the way? Is China not a part of Asia?),

---

Only a part of Asia doesn't mean the entire Asia, otherwise going from Hong Kong to Teheran or to Omsk would be the same as going from Madrid to Istanbul. Then we have also to consider Europe as a possible region to expand towards, during the game, since an hypotetical faction that can occupy territories in the Mid-East could also go further - as the Seleucians, for instance, in EB might do - but this is "A bit too far" (half-quote)...
The same thing would be applied to a western country or to a Eastern/Eastern Greek faction, since trying to conquer China isn't the same thing as conquering Persia or the whole Mediterranean shores. ;)

Quote:

---

I'm discussing Chinese armies using the path that extends from the western portion of the great wall through either the north or south of the Tarim basin into the west- a route which Chinese armies historically took during the EB timeframe.

---

And what will be the destination of those armies? Transoxiana? Persia? Then even further? As said, it would be a suicide for armies sent there to fight and conquer. ;)
And attacking those lands would be a thing that no one in the far east would have even tried to think, because of the far distance and the low knowledge of what was there: even with some trading contacts, those were lands that the 99% of the people who heard about them only knew for light filtered echoes and didn't care much (and it's for these reasons that many myths grew amongst people in the corners of the Eurasian supercontinent about "the far exotic East/the far exotic West"), imho it's not very much for taking in consideration a conquest somewhere over there.

Which Chinese ruler would say "let's send an army west of the Tarim basin" for some lands that were almost unkown to the majority of the people in the east, except for some old merchants (and not all of them: trading routes could be also a web of connections between cities and places, with goods passing in the hands of many traders before reaching the west)? Why sending huge armies so far, if there were REAL targets in the neighborhood (and just occupied lands that needed to be garrisoned) as Korea or Indochina?
Why should a monarch think to invade really distant places which he only vaguely heard about, instead of leaving them alone and worrying about more closer, concrete, pressing troubles?
Why should a ruler summon thousands and thousands soldiers from more relevant provinces and send them to places that he hasn't any interest for, except for letting traders travel freely travel there through years? This last one is also the reason for the expedition against the _nomads_... and it would also deny any attempt to declare war against any kingdom there, since they wouldn't more establish trading relationships: why disrupting possible trading routes for waging war against somebody?
Well, which general would not consider a campaign like that just a completely crazy project?
I repeat again, an Eastern empire would mind its own businness without caring about what happens near Ekbatana/Palmyra/Persepolis and without thinking of conquer these lands; so a Western empire would mind its own one without caring about what happens in Mongolia, near the Yellow River or in Tibet. ;)

Only one army sent to fight nomads would be a thing, but a campaign with many armies for the conquest of the second half of actual EB map is another thing. It would be only a fabulous dream where mighty armies fight in the nobody's land without any really reasonable aim.

Quote:

---

That comment was in response to this, especially the bolded part:

Quote:

---

The only thing the country did was sending an army to defeat the steppe nomads, but the Chinese couldn't do anything else. The Romans, instead, with Traian were able to reach today's Iraqi-Iranian border and had even a possibility to go further, while the Seleucids had an empire that stretched from Asia Minor to current Afghanistan.

---

Your line of thinking here is clear: the Chinese couldn't do anything else other than send armies against the steppe nomads, while the Romans and the Seleucids controlled huge empires. My post was just to show that this isn't true- the Qin and Han empires expanded hugely during the EB timeframe, just like the Romans and the Macedonians. I'm just arguing that China was expansionist during this timeframe and had the capability to reach the west, but that they were not so inclined, in much the same way that Mediterranean powers could have invaded Scandinavia or the Baltics (areas which were about as accessible to and had about as much contact with the Mediterranean powers during the EB timeframe as China did with the easternmost EB factions), but they were not inclined to do so.

---

Nope. Read again the post. The topic was the expansion in the Mid-East, the region from the eastern shores of the Mediterranean Sea to today's Iran. My sentence was referring to that.
While the Seleucids and Romans could expand there for some reasons, the Chinese couldn't. Nobody said that China didn't conquer anything east of the Tarim Basin. Nobody said that the Chinese weren't expansionist. And these things are irrelevant, since we were precisely talking about a conflict between West and Far East, a conflict that can't be done for many reasons and that the Chinese never attempted to engage, since the only thing the country did westward was sending an army to defeat the steppe nomads (which was not a preinvasion-of-the-West campaign nor could have forced the Chinese to consider a similar opportunity). ;)

Quote:

---

Yet the Sabaeans are included in EB.

---

In fact IMHO I would have replaced them with factions like Numidia or Pergamon, leaving the southern part of Arabia only to Eleutheroi.

I think this debate can't really go anywhere, as most points have been made at this point, but I just want to reiterate a few things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Connacht

And what will be the destination of those armies? Transoxiana? Persia? Then even further? As said, it would be a suicide for armies sent there to fight and conquer. ;)
And attacking those lands would be a thing that no one in the far east would have even tried to think, because of the far distance and the low knowledge of what was there: even with some trading contacts, those were lands that the 99% of the people who heard about them only knew for light filtered echoes and didn't care much (and it's for these reasons that many myths grew amongst people in the corners of the Eurasian supercontinent about "the far exotic East/the far exotic West"), imho it's not very much for taking in consideration a conquest somewhere over there.

Which Chinese ruler would say "let's send an army west of the Tarim basin" for some lands that were almost unkown to the majority of the people in the east, except for some old merchants (and not all of them: trading routes could be also a web of connections between cities and places, with goods passing in the hands of many traders before reaching the west)? Why sending huge armies so far, if there were REAL targets in the neighborhood (and just occupied lands that needed to be garrisoned) as Korea or Indochina?
Why should a monarch think to invade really distant places which he only vaguely heard about, instead of leaving them alone and worrying about more closer, concrete, pressing troubles?
Why should a ruler summon thousands and thousands soldiers from more relevant provinces and send them to places that he hasn't any interest for, except for letting traders travel freely travel there through years? This last one is also the reason for the expedition against the _nomads_... and it would also deny any attempt to declare war against any kingdom there, since they wouldn't more establish trading relationships: why disrupting possible trading routes for waging war against somebody?
Well, which general would not consider a campaign like that just a completely crazy project?
I repeat again, an Eastern empire would mind its own businness without caring about what happens near Ekbatana/Palmyra/Persepolis and without thinking of conquer these lands; so a Western empire would mind its own one without caring about what happens in Mongolia, near the Yellow River or in Tibet. ;)

---

I don't know how many times this has to be mentioned, but Han forces did invade Ferghana. Here's a basic outline:

Han dynasty in the second century BC had a difficult time keeping the Xiong-nu at bay. They waged a pretty much constant campaign against the nomads to the northwest and struggled to push back incursions. One wing of this campaign involved the easternmost opening of the Tarim basin, which had been under the control of the Xiong-nu prior to 108 BC, when Han forces captured the city-states in that area, including the largest one in the region, Loulan.

Now, a major facet of the conflict against the Xiong-nu for the Han was a search for good steeds, since those of the nomads were far superior to those of Chinese stock, and in order to combat them properly, the Han needed well-mounted cavalry. After Zhang Qian's embassy to the west in the 120s BC, the Han became aware of a source of "heavenly" horses in a prosperous region they called Da Yuan (Ferghana). The emperor Wudi wanted these horses very badly, and so he commissioned an expedition to go and ask for them, but the king of Da Yuan refused (obviously because they were a precious resource), the embassy left unhappy with this news, and the king for some reason became angry with their response and had them killed on their way back.

Wudi, realizing that the horses wouldnt be gotten so easily, had a military force organized for the dual purpose of punishing this offending kingdom and getting those horses. While this took place, a diversionary attack was made against the Xiong-nu to keep them distracted from this interference in their former western possessions. This expedition took the route to the south of the Tarim basin.

The force organized included something in the region of 30,000 troops, including 20,000 or so conscripts, 6,000 local cavalry, and 3,000 crossbowmen. This was obviously pitifully small, and they were unable to even strongarm local cities in the Tarim Basin into providing them with supplies, so that by the time they reached Da Yuan, they were just a fraction of their previous numbers. They besieged the first city they encountered in Ferghana and were defeated.

Surprisingly, the commander of the military expedition was allowed to undergo a second expedition. This time they learned from their errors, and he was given a force of roughly the same composition as before (border conscripts, local cavalry) but numbering 60,000 men and a huge supply train, including 100,000 head of cattle, 30,000 horses, and other pack animals (donkeys, camels) to the number of around 10,000; food in copious amounts; and plentiful "weapons and crossbows." When he reached Ferghana, he had about 30,000 men left over (many, perhaps most, of the other half were lost, but many were split off into forces that stayed behind and guarded positions along the route they followed).

The army faced off against the Da Yuan troops, defeated them, and forced the population to retreat to the capital. A detached force captured, with some difficulty, the border town which the first expedition had tried and failed to capture. The main body of troops laid siege to the capital, and after 40 days of siege, the outer walls were taken, with the rest of the defenders falling back to the citadel. They killed their king and offered to negotiate with the Chinese, who accepted a gift of 3,000 horses.

Quote:

---

Only one army sent to fight nomads would be a thing, but a campaign with many armies for the conquest of the second half of actual EB map is another thing. It would be only a fabulous dream where mighty armies fight in the nobody's land without any really reasonable aim.

Nope. Read again the post. The topic was the expansion in the Mid-East, the region from the eastern shores of the Mediterranean Sea to today's Iran. My sentence was referring to that.
While the Seleucids and Romans could expand there for some reasons, the Chinese couldn't. Nobody said that China didn't conquer anything east of the Tarim Basin. Nobody said that the Chinese weren't expansionist. And these things are irrelevant, since we were precisely talking about a conflict between West and Far East, a conflict that can't be done for many reasons and that the Chinese never attempted to engage, since the only thing the country did westward was sending an army to defeat the steppe nomads (which was not a preinvasion-of-the-West campaign nor could have forced the Chinese to consider a similar opportunity). ;)

---

The inhabitants of Ferghana were neither nomads, nor did they live on the steppe. Nothing in the abovementioned expedition involved the steppe. The inhabitants of Ferghana were sedentary agriculturalists who lived in walled cities and were keen traders. They may even have included some Greeks. If you want a simple scenario where Han China could have been motivated to conquer Ferghana and head eastward, then perhaps the emperor required broader stocks of horses to equip the army, and so felt that it was necessary to secure this source (in much the same way that the Ptolemies felt it necessary to secure a source of elephants to equip for war, and the Seleucids the same in Bactria), and so sent another expedition this time subjugating the region and, in typical Chinese practice, securing the cities and settlements in the surrounding region to establish vassal states to defend this new holding (as they did with the Tarim basin city-states).

MeinPanzer, u missed several details, but most importantly, the Han envoy was robbed and killed, not merely 'left unhappy'...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by satalexton

MeinPanzer, u missed several details, but most importantly, the Han envoy was robbed and killed, not merely 'left unhappy'...

---

Obviously I'm not going to relay all the details of the story, since that would take too much time. I just tried to summarize it here for the debate at hand. I left out some of the details which were irrelevant to the discussion (like the Xiong-nu shadowing the second expedition, which doesn't seem to have had any outcome) or the agreements with allies on both the Han and Xiong-nu sides (which resulted in no action, as none of the allies joined either side in combat).

But you misunderstand what I wrote in the second part. I don't think I was quite clear in my writing:

Quote:

---

the king of Da Yuan refused (obviously because they were a precious resource), the embassy left unhappy with this news, and the king for some reason became angry with their response and had them killed on their way back.

---

What I mean here is that the king of Da Yuan told the embassy that they couldn't have the horses, and the embassy reacted unhappily to this news, which made the king of Da Yuan angry. The embassy left the king's residence, but made it only to the border of Ferghana, where they were killed and robbed by agents of the king because of the king's anger at their reaction to being rebuffed.

Guys really you got your response from the EB team that under no situation would they include the Qin dynasty in EB with the TW engine, why is this argument still going on? It's pretty obvious that no one is going to be changing their mind in this thread. Just accept that an alternate history there is really an infinite number of possibilities for outcomes. Maybe the Chinese and Romans could have had a military impact on each other but we will never know since if you change one factor there will be a ripple effect. If chinese soldier went west whats to say they wouldn't come close to rebellion and the army would have to turn back (a la Alexanders macedonian army at the indus), it just can't be known since there are too many variables.

I don't think anyone has any illusions about the Chinese making their way into EB... this is a hypothetical discussion.

Not only is it hypothetical, but it is also quite enlightening. :clown:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methuselah

Not only is it hypothetical, but it is also quite enlightening. :clown:

---

Indeed, I have read every post.

wow so many people commented on this, never expected this to arouse so much interest

I am grateful for the hard-working gamers who coded the mod to it's max. And really rather than just thinking that my desire of including China was in the next update, but just the idea of what such a game would be like, whenever it is that our computers could handle such performance.

And really just how many people it would take to create such an epic game.

So sorry if anyone thought i was raising a petition sort of thing to actually start something along these lines, just more an idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by irishguy1

wow so many people commented on this, never expected this to arouse so much interest

I am grateful for the hard-working gamers who coded the mod to it's max. And really rather than just thinking that my desire of including China was in the next update, but just the idea of what such a game would be like, whenever it is that our computers could handle such performance.

And really just how many people it would take to create such an epic game.

So sorry if anyone thought i was raising a petition sort of thing to actually start something along these lines, just more an idea.

---

I think most people here understood. But I share your dream for having a World:Total War Game, consisting of over 100 factions, and the whole frigging world. As I've sid before, you'd be able to answer that great question: If the Romans and the Zulus had a fight, who would win?

Of course, W:TW would come in a collectors tin, with a free Concubine.

xD I could do with the concubine w/o the tin nor the game tho xD

Ancient China conquering Rome and vice versa is stretching it, but only slightly less crazy things have happened. Somewhat later than EB's timeframe we have the Tang empire with protectorates as far as Tocharistan, held mainly by vassalised nomads but AFAIK also with a regular Chinese military presence, a small one, but still. Not that this 'western empire' could ever have survived (and it looks absolutely terrible on a map), but the immense authority of the early Tang emperors helped hold it together for some time.

I would love to see something like that in a Total War game/mod - although obviously the RTW/MTW2 engines would not be capable of handling anything like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by satalexton

xD I could do with the concubine w/o the tin nor the game tho xD

---

I reccomend reasing 1421 by Gavin Menzies. If nothing else makes you scream 'I WANT A BLOODY CONCUBINE' Nothing will. A word of note though. The Red silk bra-stocking combo, which he claims is called the mo xiong isn't called that. Any help?

:hijacked:

Sorry about that. It's also a bit outside our period (Ming Dynasty), but it's all good (VERY good in the case of the Concubines) Dammit, someone shoot me.

Seriously though, what was the mo xiong REALLY called (and yes, I kow Mo Xiong was a Chinese Communist)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by satalexton

Tellos, there were no infantry one-on-one duels. There were chariot duels during the much earlier period of the Eastern Zhou dynasty, but chariots by the EB time frame are on the decline, it's role being filled by cavalry introduced by the Zhao state's "Hu Fu Qi She" (literally means dressing up as a nomad and practising horse-riding and shooting from horseback) reform. Chariots then were largely used to serve as a mobile command post for generals, signalers (drums and large horns), while the rest are put onto the 2 flanks.

The Qin putting on obtaining the enemy's 首级 (roughly translates to 'head') was to encourage the men to fight more ferociously when the charge (300 yards while taking at least 3-4 vollies of bolts) was ordered. The head lopping bit comes when the enemy is breaking, where the Qin soldier would literally drop his Ji, draw his sword, and start chasing to nearest routing chap for his head. In a battle between Qin and Chu during 224BC, when the Chu decide to retreat to a better position to fight the Qin after a long stalemate, the Qin ordered an advance all of a sudden and turned what was suppose to be a tactical retreat into a rout.

---

@Satalexon, Thank you for an amazing insight on the army of Qin and Han. Very much appreciated.
First off, even if Qin never makes it to EB (which I would personally love to see), here are some pictures based on the terracota army to better visualise what Satalexon is talking about.

https://i122.photobucket.com/albums/...recreation.jpg
and
https://i122.photobucket.com/albums/...struction4.jpg
and
https://i122.photobucket.com/albums/...struction3.jpg
and
https://i122.photobucket.com/albums/...struction2.jpg
this,
https://i122.photobucket.com/albums/...nstruction.jpg
a diagram of its operation in chinese,
https://i122.photobucket.com/albums/...bowdiagram.jpg
and a bronze crossbow replica of the period, found in a grave,
https://i122.photobucket.com/albums/...ecrossobow.jpg

The crossbow of the Han was superior to range and penetrating power to all bows of its time. It would be only later with the asymmetric composite bow (Turkic bows' ancestor), developed by either the Yuehzi or Wusun, or better yet the HsiongNu that the HA's would gain an advantage. In the period of EB, though and for a good time yet, Qin/Han crossbow would outshoot all bows.
After those guys would be done shooting and the opposition would be reeling from its wounds. In that semi-paralyzed army would the pikemen (holding their "Pi" pike with both hands) would run into. They had no shields because they would need none (first ranks were pretty well armored in their lamellar bronze cuirasses and a lot of padding underneath). Their flanks would be protected by HA "dressed in the nomad manner"-basically unarmored as S. very well put it. Chariots would be used by the leader to survey the battlefield and/or give commands to his runners (who would be mounted and follow the leaders' chariot). There would be also a backup chariot on standby should the primary "Comand and control" chariot fail for any reason. This would be quite a formidable army to go up against, and I am not so certain that a manipular formation, a typical Pahlavan mounted army (9HA/1Cataphract) a hoplitic phallanx or a pike phallanx, even backed by hetairoi and flanked by hypaspistai would fare so well fighting them. Like I said, I don't have the qualifications to go further into that hypothesis as to what would actually happen. This would take a military expert (as a judge), and 2 dedicated historians of the time, who (knowing all the strategies and stratagems that the two opposing armies had used-that we know of), might be able to use them on one another, in a pseudo-battlefield. Even then, this would be a reconstruction, NOT an actual encounter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Satalexon

Han was nearly identical to that of Qin in fact, the only real difference really is that the source of motivation is no longer the threat of execution (they prefer the idea of 'court martial', seems more 'fair' when it's a bunch of your peers judging ya death huh?) and lobbing others' heads off to prove u got a kill. It worked mainly because the military is now under the hands of relatively more lenient regime (tho still using Qin constituitions and laws), a much larger territory, and a much larger population. The latter is particularly important because, despite every adult male are still technically considered as reserves, many people may never see military service in their life time. Thus the Han army is more professionalized and take up a smaller proportion of the total population.

Oh it also helps when ur no longer fighting a civil war, but 'defending' your self from the XiongNu, punishing 'rebellious' IndoGreeks and defending the Silk Route while making a fat load of cash in the process.

---

That is very interesting, including the fact that the country Han attacked was called "Da Yuan" or "Great Ionia", meaning the larger of the two states. This can mean that the Greeks of the Ferghana valley, were either a state of their own or in someway different to "Ta Yuan" or Bactria. It was also called "Da Xia" if memory serves right. Anything you can dig up for them would be nice to know.


Let's also tackle the "lost romans in China" subject. Is there is a description of the Han army fighting those "Yuan"?. They were on foot, and wearing "fish scales" or something (they would be the perceived "Romans" that Han fought). Since you are more or less our resident expert on ancient chinese, could you perhaps dig out that info and tell us more on the Baktrians/IG/Romans that the Han army faced?

-On another note, I have always considered that the King of the Ferghana city under assault by the Han was a Tokharian/Yuehzi in a Tokharian/Yuehzi controlled city. While this has to be the case, it could be that the King was an overlord, allowing the local city to maintain its independence. Also, reading more on the way the siege/countersieging was conducted, it has to have been led by a greek captain. There is no doubt about it, in my mind. The amount of expertise Greeks had on sieging/counter sieging, can't be discounted here, nor the actual methods used. From the accounts of the battle I have read, to counter the undermining of the first walls, the engineers of the besieged city (Kyropolis according to Tarn) built a second wall inside the first one. Hence they were able to withstand a dedicated Han assault and then negotiate a settlement which did make them a subject of the Han, but the Han were so far away, they might as well have been independent. (Exactly like the Bactrians did when Antiochos III besieged Baktra for two years). Again, this is my take on the whole situation, I may be wrong.

Anyways, as this seems likely to be the 2 only likely encounters of EAST VS WEST that we know of, all we could have on them would be absolutely great.

I love this thread.

I'm very much interested in Hellen-Sino relations, and this is pretty awesome.