Why 272 BC?

**LordCurlyton** · 05-02-2008, 04:23

No Chremonidean League, no wars between Pyrhhus and Rome yet, no Galations tearing up the Maks and others yet, even further away from baktria's official decalration of independence, possibly even no Aedui/Arveni civil war yet. I'm sure there are others.

**Teleklos Archelaou** · 05-02-2008, 04:28

I've no time right this second, but if someone (team or no) creates a good response we should put it in the FAQ. We have answered this question a few times already for sure and it should be there.

**Spartan198** · 05-02-2008, 04:37

Originally Posted by Teleklos Archelaou

We have answered this question a few times already for sure and it should be there.

Oops. Um... I'm sorry.

**Teleklos Archelaou** · 05-02-2008, 04:38

It's no problem - I'm not chiding you.

Just saying it would be good for us to make a thorough answer and put it in the faq.

**MarcusAureliusAntoninus** · 05-02-2008, 05:29

Having KH and Baktria is already pushing it. If the game started earlier then they would probably have to be removed. In 280, the Antigonids were not a power either and Makedonia was in disorder without a leader. The Galatians were still in the process of settling in Galatia. The Romans were much weaker and controlled little.

272 is a good year because KH and Baktria can kind of be streched to fit in and yet Epeiros is still a power. During and just after the start date the Romans begin their true rise to power with the consolidation of southern Italy. And there is a Syrian War in progress that has divided the Hellenic and Hellenistic world.

**QuintusSertorius** · 05-02-2008, 12:54

I can kind of understand why; any later and you start having problems with Rome really being a major power.

If it were up to me, I'd start the game in 250BC, with the First Punic War already going on. Makes it easier to justify Baktria and Pahlava being around too. However it would also mean some changes in factions, since Epeiros really weren't a contender any more, and the Leagues in Greece were different in structure and alleigances.

**Spartan198** · 05-02-2008, 04:32

Originally Posted by Lord Curlyton

No Chremonidean League, no wars between Pyrhhus and Rome yet, no Galations tearing up the Maks and others yet, even further away from baktria's official decalration of independence, possibly even no Aedui/Arveni civil war yet. I'm sure there are others.

Ah, okay.
But I'd thought that the Chremonidean League was the Athens / Rhodes / Sparta alliance seemingly portrayed as Koinon Hellenon?

**Korlon** · 05-02-2008, 04:36

Originally Posted by Spartan198

Ah, okay.
But I'd thought that the Chremonidean League was the Athens / Rhodes / Sparta alliance seemingly portrayed as Koinon Hellenon?

It didn't exist at 280 BCE. I believe I've heard it didn't even exist at 272 BCE, but they were already basically in an alliance, just that the official alliance didn't happen a few years later.