Crusader Kings 2 Redux

[Valmy]

I'd flip it back to you. Would you consider modern Egyptians or Greeks to be the same as their ancient/celebrated counterparts?

Wait do you honestly think Tamas is claiming he is a dark age person?  Anyway of course a Greek is going to feel kinship with Ancient Greeks.  Not only does he sorta speak their language and write with their alphabet but he lives among their ruins.  I am not sure about most Egyptians but I know Copts feel they are the modern versions of Ancient Egyptians.  If a Chinese person talks about his people's Han Dynasty and their great philosopher Confucious would you give him or her this kind of nonsense?  Or a Jew talks about 'his people' during Passover you would call BS?

I mean I am not an 18th century person so the Constitution and Declaration of Independence is not 'mine' and 'ours' but rather belongs exclusively to that generation?

[Maladict]

It makes plenty of sense if you are announcing the ability to play Norse and pagans going forward.  I highly doubt they are going to make an expansion about explorations that happened 50 years+ before the game starts.

As opposed to the Aztec DLC, which made perfect sense. 

A New World expansion would appeal to the Pagan fanbois, make the Aztecs fractionally less ludicrous, and everyone not retarded enough to care about pagans or Aztecs might buy it because it moves the start date back.

[Syt]

The Aztec DLC is more a gameplay gimmick: it mostly mirrors the Mongol Invasions, only in the west.

I play with them turned off.

[garbon]

I'd flip it back to you. Would you consider modern Egyptians or Greeks to be the same as their ancient/celebrated counterparts?

Wait do you honestly think Tamas is claiming he is a dark age person?  Anyway of course a Greek is going to feel kinship with Ancient Greeks.  Not only does he sorta speak their language and write with their alphabet but he lives among their ruins.  I am not sure about most Egyptians but I know Copts feel they are the modern versions of Ancient Egyptians.  If a Chinese person talks about his people's Han Dynasty and their great philosopher Confucious would you give him or her this kind of nonsense?  Or a Jew talks about 'his people' during Passover you would call BS?

I mean I am not an 18th century person so the Constitution and Declaration of Independence is not 'mine' and 'ours' but rather belongs exclusively to that generation?

This kind of nonsense? What useful information does it convey to say "we" when talking about an ethno-cultural identity of people several at least 1,000 years in the past?

Also, I find it interesting that your test seems to be whether or not a person feels he belongs to that group - whereas my question asked Tamas to be an objective observer of two somewhat analogous cases. Are you taking the stance that if you claim an identity - you are that?

[Maximus]

Where is this line drawn, pray tell me.

You(personal) weren't alive in the 10th century, ergo there is no "we" in the 10th century.

[Martinus]

This whole debate is retarded. People use "we" to denote groups of people they do not physically belong to, but feel kinship to, all the time.

Fans referring to their favorite team winning the game and people who have never been in war referring to their nation's army winning the war as "we won" is pretty common.

[garbon]

Spoken like Eastern Europe.

[Tamas]

garbon is using this thread as his shitcan it seems. First that 34 pages debate over Johan's mod thread. Now this.

Valmy summarized my point exactly, I won't repeat him.

[garbon]

Whatever (hyperbole much, Marti), I actually posted something recently solely specific to CK2.

Also, back to the question I asked earlier, but has anyone else had issues with Crusades being called on Anatolia at the 1081 (Alexia) start? Kinda problematic unless I play Byzantine Empire and take Anatolia for myself.

[garbon]

It makes plenty of sense if you are announcing the ability to play Norse and pagans going forward.  I highly doubt they are going to make an expansion about explorations that happened 50 years+ before the game starts.

As opposed to the Aztec DLC, which made perfect sense. 

A New World expansion would appeal to the Pagan fanbois, make the Aztecs fractionally less ludicrous, and everyone not retarded enough to care about pagans or Aztecs might buy it because it moves the start date back.

Like I asked before, what would they do about tech unless I guess you just quit playing before the 1453 end. Otherwise, seems like tech would be maxed out quick.

I'd also rather they didn't add more gimmicks (as Syt said) and focused on some of the core gameplay.

[Tamas]

well yeah I'd much rather see a Catholicism DLC, a HRE That Works DLC, or heck, even a Steppe Bandits Errr Nomads DLC than some Norse fantasy shit.

[The Minsky Moment]

Seriously people if you deny continuity between present Hungarians and the ones in the 7th century AD I just don't know what to say.

I wouldn't deny such continuity but that undermines, not supports, indentification with "Magyarism"
Once you strip away speculation and wild guesswork, there really is very little of substance left concerning what we know about "magyars" other than the linguistic facts of the Hungarian language.
But even if one accepts the Magyar conquest myth as fact, it is more likely that a present day Hungarian would trace back to the pre-conquest substrate, barring some unusual Genghis Khan effects.

[Tamas]

Seriously people if you deny continuity between present Hungarians and the ones in the 7th century AD I just don't know what to say.

I wouldn't deny such continuity but that undermines, not supports, indentification with "Magyarism"
Once you strip away speculation and wild guesswork, there really is very little of substance left concerning what we know about "magyars" other than the linguistic facts of the Hungarian language.
But even if one accepts the Magyar conquest myth as fact, it is more likely that a present day Hungarian would trace back to the pre-conquest substrate, barring some unusual Genghis Khan effects.

yeah altough do not forget the magyars invading this basin were quite numerous, and much of the country not habitable in terms of agriculture and herding,  compared to present conditions.

Anyways, the existence of our language, which is quite clearly not from the slavs and assorted people we subjugated here seems to indicate that magyars could not have been THAT little minority. latin then german quickly became the "official" language of the nobles, until the 19th century the language survived through its use by the general populace, so it simply cannot be true that it was only spoken by the upper class and spread from there. Hell, some of our famous 19th century nationalists/language revivalists could barely speak  what they wanted to save, being nobility.

Also, it is a matter of cultural identity. Especially so for Hungarians, yes (eg. I am the minority in this region to only know about magyar-last named ancestors, everybody has german and slavic ancestry running around somewhere, possibly me as well it is just not so clear).
But that is true for everybody except for the most isolated.

[Martinus]

Spoken like Eastern Europe.

Not really. I find this mannerism to be silly, but I find it equally silly to be so surprised by it as you guys are.

[PDH]

All the ethnic stuff is imagined anyway.  I have no problem with Tamas denying his Gypsy background and instead pretending to be a Mongol.