Inspired by the discussion of which leaders didn't control all of their country, which part of the world has been owned by the most in-game empires now that the new empires have been announced? I'm suspecting somewhere in the near east.
Inspired by the discussion of which leaders didn't control all of their country, which part of the world has been owned by the most in-game empires now that the new empires have been announced? I'm suspecting somewhere in the near east.
I believe it's Egypt. That, or the Dardanelles.
I'm gonna guess France.
I think the Dardanelles Civ is a good option but I'd have thought it would be the "Hose" Civ as traditionally Hosers waive the flag a lot over a lot of turf but don't really control all that much economically or culturally and a lot of citizens identify with other civs.
The owners of the Dardanelles that I know of were the Greeks, Romans, persians, Byzantines(unless you count them as Romans), Turks, and I think maybe Russia but I'm not totally sure on that one. Any I missed?
France, Rome... isn't that it? Unless you count the bits that were owned by England and Germany at various points, I guess.Originally Posted by builder680
France
Various barbarians (before it was France, to be fair)
Romans (same as above, but we're talking about a "part of the world")
England
Germany
Germany (again, lol)
I'm sure there are other examples of France getting pwned. I'm also sure there are lots of other places that have been conquered totally, frequently, and ruthlessly. I just find France to be an especially amusing example.
Oh, France have been repeatedly pwned. It's a national traditionBut I interpreted the question as 'which region has been controlled by the most in-game empires', and given that neither Germany nor England ever conquered all of France, I'm not sure if they count. If you narrow it down to, say, Paris, or Normandy, on the other hand, you might be talking. Paris has changed hands more times than a hot potato in a hot potato-themed game of Catch.
I'm being annoyingly pedantic here, but I'd only count Germany once - yes, they did it twice, but the question relates to the number of empires, not the number of conquests.
Although I guess we can potentially now include the Celts as an in-game Civ which at one time controlled France...
I'd have said somewhere in the middle east, particularly Iraq:
Babylon
Persia
Greeks
Romans
Mongolia
Arabia
Ottomans
England
That's eight. Unless I missed one or so. It sure beats France, and I don't think even the Dardanelles can get close. The middle east really has been trampled by loads of people.
Of course, its not in Europe, so maybe we should just ignore it.
According to the famous historian Leopold von Ranke: "There have been 53 major wars in Europe, France had been a belligerent in 49 of them; UK 43. In 185 battles that France had fought over the past 800 years, their armies had won 132 times, lost 43 times and drawn only 10, giving the French military the best record of any country in Europe"
I rest my case. So saying France got "pwned" in multiple wars is not right. If you want to know why France lost it's more recent wars with Germany I will be more than glad to tell you.
I'd argue France taking a nap on military modernization for a century or so after Napoleon had a lot to do with it. And whichever general signed off on the Maginot Line should have been smacked when Germany went through Belgium and Holland to avoid going straight into France's defensive lines; you know, like they did in WWI.
Eh, Leopold von Ranke never lived to see the two world wars. I will not argue that France took a huge nap from the late 19th century to the 20th century. They lost to Prussia in the late 19th century due to poor officers and slow moblilization, and lost to Germany in World War 2 due to the way of thinking that everyone else but Germany had, Tanks only support infantry. Also, Germany went through Belgium and Holland to get to France during World War 2. Both armies where push overs compared to the Germans at both times.
It just isn't correct to assume that France loses every single one of their wars. The French are some of the best soldiers in all of history. It is a national tradition to win every single battle.
France has a strong military history and had one of the greatest overseas Empires behind Britain. They get a bad rep due to their losses in World War 2. Compare this, though, to World War I where with British help they held the Western Front while Russia got its ☺☺☺☺ slapped left and right by Germany.
Back on the discussion, probably Mesopotamia or something.
England has been owned by many:
Celts, Romans, France, England itself (ingame,) Vikings (Denmark) and of course various barbarian tribes
My money is on Iraq. Purely based on in-game Civs, we have Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome, Arabia, Mongolia, Ottomans, and England representing this land (and if you wanna be REALLY nitpicky, throw in America for the lulz). With Assyria, Sumer, Akkad, and the Mamluks representing the non-Civ peoples you get a grand total of at least 12 different major Civilizations that owned this land at some point in history. I'd challenge anyone to come up with more major players that owned one piece of land.
Israel has had eight in-game civs as well: Egypt, Babylon, Greece, Persia, Rome, Otttoman, Arabia, and England...Middle East is a hot-spot...it was also controlled by another world power that has yet to make the game: Assyria...
Yes, and historically Assyria is very deserving. At their height of power they had the largest army on the planet, and they invented new ways to siege as well.
Israel was owned by the Byzantines too (they're a separate in-game civ).
Going by in-game civs, and from what I remember on Shiav's post, the Dardenelles have been occupied by:
Ottomans
Greece
Russia
Byzantium
England
France
Persia
Rome
And more. I think the Dardenelles win for ingame civs, and Mesopotamia wins for general nations in the area.
When did England and France control them? During the Napoleanic wars Russia controlled them with the support of England or are you talking about sometime during the Crusades?
I think we need to qualify what "owned" means here.
There's a difference between a military occupation and sovereign control. I was expecting we were talking about areas which had been recognized sovereign land of a particular Civ. The normal handwaving over what "sovereign" applies here, but it shouldn't be hard to get a rough consensus.
If we count "military occupation" as "owned", then I'll add America, France, Egypt, Russia and Germany to the list of countries controlling Iraq.
Yes, I meant sovereign control.
Actually, it could very well be Syria. Take all the above and add in Egypt, the Byzantines and France while removing England, making 10 in-game civs. The Dardanelles don't even come close (Persia, Greece, Rome, Byzantines, Ottomans. Not too sure if the claims of England, France and Russia are valid, but even then they can't compete with Syria)I'd have said somewhere in the middle east, particularly Iraq:
Babylon
Persia
Greeks
Romans
Mongolia
Arabia
Ottomans
England
I didn't even think of them when compiling my list, thank you...so that's nine in game...
Sadly, it seems the number to beat is 10.
The lead remains with Syria.
If you think of the phrase 'middle east' it kinda makes sense that they'd be in the middle of a lot of different Empires/conflicts/what have you.
Indeed.
And the name doesn't even fully describe the situation. The "Middle East" sits at the crossroads between Africa, South Asia, and the Mediterranean. Additionally, If you want to go between Europe and anywhere in Asia that isn't Siberia, you're best route is to keep south of the Himalayas and pass through some part of the Middle East.
The fact that three (or more) world religions started there just makes it worse.
...and the discovery of oil there is proof that the universe has sadistic tendencies with its practical jokes.
As I've said before, the Dardanelles.
Ottomans, Romans, Austrians, Russians, Byzantine, English, American, Persians, Greeks, French, Germans, Arabians for sure, Huns/Mongols maybe
Respectfully:
I can find no evidence that the Huns ever held the Dardanelles as sovereign land.
I can find conclusive evidence that the Mongols never held the Dardanelles as sovereign or tributary land.
The US has never held the Dardanelles as sovereign land.
I can find no evidence that the French ever held the Dardanelles as sovereign land.
I can find no evidence that the Germans ever held the Dardanelles as sovereign land.
Again, there was a question as to whether "owned" meant "occupied" or "controlled" or "were recognized as the sovereign owners of". The OP clarified that it was the third. If we are counting occupation or military/political control, then I'm pretty sure that Iraq would leapfrog over Syria to take the lead again.
Ah. "Owned". Thought it was controlled. In which case all of those (minus huns) happened for WW2/Crusades
Umm Austria, the US, Russia, England, France and Germany all never laid claim to the Dardanelles... occupied yes, but never claimed it as part of their nation.
Actually the main overland trade route aka "The Silk Road" ran through the middle east, northern Mesopotamia, Bactria(Afghanistan area) north of the Himalayas, and into China.
There was another that ran through India, and the naval route (obviously) ran past India.
However, the upper Silk Road is certainly more famous thanks to Marco Polo (although this was just after the fall of the Mongols, so I'd imagine taking the path through central Asia would have been safer than India).
Didn't the Mongols conquer Israel too? I doubt we'll find much to separate Israel, Syria and Lebanon.
Yes, I should have clarified: I was more referring to the movement of populations, than the movement of trade. While the Silk Road was a major route, it didn't really coincide with the paths used by major population migrations (er...if memory serves).
The point was that the Middle East, and Mesopotamia in particular, was a crossroads for any population attempting to move or spread in the area. If you were a major empire in the area, eventually you'd have to spread through the Middle East. For the most part, this is boringly obvious. If Persia wants to expand, it only has a few options: India, the Caucasus, or Mesopotamia. If Egypt wants to expand, it's got the Sahara, or the Middle East via Sinai. Rinse and repeat for loads of empires.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote