What do you think Pyrrhos would have done if he won the battle at Argos?

[Subotan]

No one's forced to read this thread. Me, I like these "what if" discussions.

Meh. That's just my opinion.

... providing clichéd sensationalist 'alternate history' scenarios without a solid factual backdrop of well-done historical research and an healthy dose of skepticism - that's really 'bad history'. I understand your point - ideologically loaded historical revisionism, ... - but 'alternate history' can be a quite entertaining intellectual exercise, if you keep in mind that what would have really happened - that any 'alternate history' scenario is a more or less well informed speculation, which cannot mirror the sheer complexity of real history and should not be taken too seriously.

Of course, they are important for making computer games and films and the like. I wouldn't play historical Strategy games if I didn't find it entertaining. But it's obviously not proper history.

[Apázlinemjó]

Pyrrhos had an EPIC FAIL death, why would you ruin that?

[Lvcretivs]

But it's obviously not proper history.

...guess why I put 'alternate history' in quotation marks - of course it's not proper history, and should never be mistaken for such. It's a 'speculative fiction' devised to entertain, no serious academic historian would - and should ever - consider to bother with - except for quick laughs - and his own amusement (EB!) ;)

[jirisys]

He goes to taras again and moves to rhegion, tries to capture it, but he is thrown of his horse when noticing that the roman army had the idea first (but arrived later) and are behind them, and the rebel army is standing in the front and he gets sandwiched, and dies because a rebel found a tile in his pockets and threw it to his head and then a principes kills him, the romans take rhegion and negotiate Taras for phyrros' head and then ambrakia for his body, then (the city in dalmatia) for his limbs, then (any other phyrric city) for his fingers and nails, and the romans start an early blitz and conquer all the peloponesos and thrace, and by 87 BCE they control the whole world (excluding america... and the land of the Bartix) and no emperor, since there was no need for it, and we live happily ever after

~Jirisys (so what "bartix" and what faction replaces armenia go then?!!)

[Marcus Darkstar]

He goes to taras again and moves to rhegion, tries to capture it, but he is thrown of his horse when noticing that the roman army had the idea first (but arrived later) and are behind them, and the rebel army is standing in the front and he gets sandwiched, and dies because a rebel found a tile in his pockets and threw it to his head and then a principes kills him, the romans take rhegion and negotiate Taras for phyrros' head and then ambrakia for his body, then (the city in dalmatia) for his limbs, then (any other phyrric city) for his fingers and nails, and the romans start an early blitz and conquer all the peloponesos and thrace, and by 87 BCE they control the whole world (excluding america... and the land of the Bartix) and no emperor, since there was no need for it, and we live happily ever after

~Jirisys (so what "bartix" and what faction replaces armenia go then?!!)

How Ghoulish of the Romans!

[Unintended BM]

How does it make any sense to call "What if" questions bad history on an EB board? The whole game is a what if question. When I play as Carthage, I'm not going to expand historically like they did and then stop and wait to be conquered by the Romans, I'm going to play as if Carthage won out against Rome, creating my own alternate history. I just don't understand how making that statement on this forum makes any sense. If I was in some thread where people were researching Pyrrhos and Epirus and I came in and asked "What if Pyrrhos hadn't been killed?", now that would be inappropriate, but I see no problem with discussing the question here. I know when I play as Epirus, I don't immediately send Pyrrhos down to get killed near Argos.

Anyways, thanks for the answers so far. Somehow, in my Epirus game, I got lucky and Rome never attacked me at Taras. I built up some MICs there and made a bunch of troops, then sent a separate army led by Pyrrhos down to Rhegion and Sicily. Then I sent one of the sons, I don't remember which, to Taras. The Romans finally attacked after I wiped out Carthage in Sicily, but I'm easily defending against them with some levy pikemen and peltasts.

[Brennus]

How does it make any sense to call "What if" questions bad history on an EB board? The whole game is a what if question. When I play as Carthage, I'm not going to expand historically like they did and then stop and wait to be conquered by the Romans, I'm going to play as if Carthage won out against Rome, creating my own alternate history.

Precisely, I have the Aedui in Caledonia at the moment.

I have to agree with satalexton and Bucefalo I think he would simply have taken the next quick route to glory. Possibly in Pyrrhus own mind he could see himself uniting the realms of the Diadochi but if his record in Sicily and Italy are anything to go by my best guess would be he would go wherever he saw a nice opportunity.

[Duguntz]

Meh. That's just my opinion.

Opinions are like bacteries, everybody have, but it's better to keep them for ourself