Crusader Kings 2 Redux

[Syt]

Byzantards are on the same level as Confederitards and Holocaust Deniers.

[Barrister]

Byzantards are on the same level as Confederitards and Holocaust Deniers.

Don't make me chop off your nose.

[Syt]

Seriously, I don't see the appeal of a humourless empire of religious zealots that was on a downhill trajectory ever since failing to defend Egypt against the Arabs.

[Razgovory]

Well it figures that the next DLC will be focused on the Orthodox, after all, they seem sort of the odd man out now.

[sbr]

Hopefully the dlc after that makes the hre more powerful.

[garbon]

Seriously, I don't see the appeal of a humourless empire of religious zealots that was on a downhill trajectory ever since failing to defend Egypt against the Arabs.

I don't see anything wrong with be interested in an Empire that was in a downward spiral for around 800 years from the point you mention.

[Barrister]

Seriously, I don't see the appeal of a humourless empire of religious zealots that was on a downhill trajectory ever since failing to defend Egypt against the Arabs.

What's not to get?  It's a combination of:

A: It's the direct continuation of the Roman Empire; and
B: that 800 year death spiral itself is pretty fascinating.  Sure they "lost" in the end.  But why can't a tragedy be compelling?

[garbon]

B: that 800 year death spiral itself is pretty fascinating.  Sure they "lost" in the end.  But why can't a tragedy be compelling?

Only issue for me is that many of the p'dox kids and Syt's Byzantards seem to hold on that for much of the CK2 period that the Byzantine Empire wasn't a beleaguered bulwark but rather easily capable of besting all its foes -and only fragmentary notions of why they didn't do so.

[Barrister]

B: that 800 year death spiral itself is pretty fascinating.  Sure they "lost" in the end.  But why can't a tragedy be compelling?

Only issue for me is that many of the p'dox kids and Syt's Byzantards seem to hold on that for much of the CK2 period that the Byzantine Empire wasn't a beleaguered bulwark but rather easily capable of besting all its foes -and only fragmentary notions of why they didn't do so.

Well the early part of the CK period Byzantium's destruction wasn't assured - pre-Manzikert and all that.

For the later periods, in particular the period where it lingers on into EU, of course it's destruction is all but assured - which is what makes it such an interesting and challenging nation to play.   Grenada has a similar dynamic to it.

[garbon]

Well the early part of the CK period Byzantium's destruction wasn't assured - pre-Manzikert and all that.

Destruction, no - but future problems had already been seeded prior to Manzikert. One of the bits that the p'dox kids often decry is that the Byzantine often get smashed in the first few decades (though I rarely see that myself) which is only right and proper.

[Razgovory]

I wonder if there were a lot of humorous empires at the time.

[Solmyr]

The HRE was pretty humorous.

[Valmy]

Seriously, I don't see the appeal of a humourless empire of religious zealots that was on a downhill trajectory ever since failing to defend Egypt against the Arabs.

You have got to be kidding me.  Do you also not see the appeal of chocolate cake and ice cream?

[Valmy]

The HRE was pretty humorous.

Darn right it was.

[Valmy]

Destruction, no - but future problems had already been seeded prior to Manzikert.

Yeah Manzikert was a symptom.  And if it had been in decent political health it would have easily survived Manzikert.  The army never survived Basil II's criminal disregard for the succession.  He could have appointed a regency of clowns and had a better result.  At least then Syt would have found it a humorous empire of religious zealots.