Quote Originally Posted by Will_YouFight_ForME
i would say Romanised diplomacy is more complex than Medieval diplomacy
because its imperialistic but then again barbaric
i have no idea how it would work, except for 'eye for an Eye' concept
rome total war tried to convey this with the computer running the senate and you doing their bidding
but really me contemplating roman politics at this hour is not really what my brain wants todo

it was complex to say the least, but then again not when facing barbarians

i think in Britain they would offer a protectorate - they denied- they get get 'forced' to comply in rtw you cant force to comply anything, you just wipe them out and romanise etc.

Carthage was destroyed because the romans saw they deserved it and they rebuilt it later
That is total twaddle. Roman diplomacy was not "barbarian." The Romans, like anyone imposed conditions when the won, which they usually did. The idea that the Romans would never sign a treaty and just wipe you out instead is just plain wrong.

Rome was Imperialistic, i.e. the idea was to take over. That sort of means there are a limited number of options. As far as barbarian goes, Romano-Hellenic civilisation was more advanced than Enlightenment Europe in some ways and way ahead of anything before that in every way.