If he can lay down a four-belt balancer from memory, you are the side hoe to his Factorio addiction.
Four to four balancer ist easy. How about a eight by eight?
I was about to say this. At LEAST wait for a 6 belt balancer to think the man can’t be saved.
Which one? The shortest one with the bump on the side, or the narrow on that is never wider than 8 belts?? Here, let me show yo…. Ohmigawd.
Yeah, my first thought is that the ‘map games’ are the side hoe to my factory game addiction, which is mostly Factorio.
Map man map man map map map men men men
Obscure and good
Who are you, and where’s the map!?
But do they know the difference between Istanbul and Constantinople?
That’s nobody’s business but the Turks.
Why’d they change it?
I can’t say.
Maybe people just liked it better that way?
Could you take me back to Constantinople?
That’s nobody’s business but the Turks.
i think the city had several names and the official byzantine name was after constantine, it makes sense that after the ottomans took the city they didn’t keep honoring the dude they took it from. they started using other names along with constantine’s, and and eventually this one won out.
Official name of Constantinople was Konstantiniye in Ottoman, just pronounciation of same word.
And Actually Istanbul is not named by Turks, it is not Turkish. Most believed theory is that when city grew in 18th century, like circles around old city by suburs and outskirts, Greeks among new residents started tlaks about these areas as stampoli (or however it is written in Greek), translate as “stam” means “to” or “near”, “poli” means “city”. And after a while, since population and area of old city became so small in comparison, by 19th century locals from all nation started called city Stampoli or however they can pronounce, such Turks as Istampul. That became İstanbul (easier to say) and it wasn’t until Turkey it was official name.
But what about Istanbul and Konstantiniyye?
How they hell would anyone not know the difference? It’d be like not knowing the difference between Taylor Swift and Madonna.
Most people don’t have a clue. I remember mentionning the word byzantine at the dinner table when I was a teenager and was told “you play too many games and read too many books, this is reality, there’s no such thing as a byzantine”.
When I showed them the wikipedia page about it, “it’s not because it’s on the internet that it’s true”. Yet here we are, in 2024, where they are glued to facebook believing some of the wildest things.
Yeah, I’ve noticed there’s this weird cross-section of people who ask “do you believe everything you heard on the internet?” about some pretty established facts, and blindly believing Fox News.
It’s a logical fallacy, aka a debate trick for stupid people. Appeal to authority (something can’t be true unless it’s said by someone with the authority to be right) plus a claim that source doesn’t have the authority to be right. Another version of this is when someone acts like citations are proof (or a lack of citations is a disproof).
I mean, there was no such thing as a byzantine. That’s a name we came up with in the modern era to help distinguish between “roman” empires.
To expand on that it was during the enlightenment in the early renaissance where people had a boner over the Roman Empire but still thought the medieval Roman Empire (Byzantine) to not be cool. So they came up with a new name for it. A declining empire that had a massive beauracracy, spoke Greek and had the wrong brand of Christianity (Orthodox) is not nice enough to create a glorious image like the Pax Romana did.
This of course made a lot of people upset in the then Ottoman empire since they identified as Romans but were not counted as Romans according to western people. Think “You’re not Romans with a glorious history, you’re Byzantines” even though they clearly were.
For extra fun the Byzantine/Roman distinction is also unfair.
- Eastern Rome always spoke Greek, even at 200AD.
- Orthodox and Catholic were the same pre-schism.
- During the decline of the Western Empire the capital was moving a lot anyway so “based in Rome” was soon outdated.
- During the decline Italy was just another province anyway so “based in Italy” was soon outdated.
- They were literally the same thing except one half managed to fuck their shit up while getting invaded by hordes of tribes at the same time.
invaded by hordes of tribes at the same time.
Too much treachery. Maybe if they stopped assassinating their rulers and managed their funds better by continuing to properly fund their military and continuing to pay off the tribes they could’ve lasted a bit longer.
It’s so wild that they survived the Year of the 4 (and 5 and 6) Emperors when you think about it. The entire empire nearly collapses in the third century and what do they do to the man responsible for restoring it? They assassinate him. Or if it’s not the emperor then it’s the head of the military who had been responsible for holding off multiple tribes, negotiating with them and attempting to keep the city of Rome from being ransacked (unsuccessfully). And then you assassinate the emperor responsible and then the new emperor decides to provoke the biggest tribe of them all.
Maybe it was a good thing that the Roman Empire collapsed. I just wish it had happened before empowering a cult.
It was. There are no good empires.
Of course, instead of the Republic reforming you got a thousand years of warlords calling themselves kings, but that’s how it goes when people listen to Popes.
Yeah, though I’m learning about Japan’s history and, as much as I don’t like how things went in European history, it could have been much worse.
Like one big moment for me was when I realized that the whole seppuku ritual thing was actually rational and intended to prevent an even worse outcome.
A European King (or church) could only kill so many people even with trials before unrest would start up. A Japanese Lord could just politely request subordinates kill themselves at their earliest convenience.
Fuck their shit up by inventing systemic racism
Oh it’s cute you think the Roman’s invented that.
Also very curious considering that racism as we would recognize it doesn’t have its seeds planted until the 15th century AD.
I didn’t say they were the first!
There are plenty of cultures that developed systemic racism independently, I don’t want to diminish their shittiness.
Humans are pretty racist by default until they realise that everybody is actually also a human being. “Barbarian” is just a different word for “sub-human” that was used back then. Nowadays we use racial/ethnic/religious/housing status or whatever negative term that’s out of the person’s control to justify instead.
What’s fun to me is that Barbarian literally means hairy, referring to cultures that didn’t wear beards as superior
That’s a common misconception. The word “barba” in Spanish and “barbaroi” in Greek have distinct origin of the gibberish “bar bar bar” which is apparently how all barbarian speak. Here’s an excerpt from Wikipedia page on barbarians under “Etymology”.
The Ancient Greek name βάρβαρος (bárbaros) ‘barbarian’ was an antonym for πολίτης (politēs) ‘citizen’, from πόλις (polis) ‘city’. The earliest attested form of the word is the Mycenaean Greek 𐀞𐀞𐀫, pa-pa-ro, written in Linear B syllabic script.
The Greeks used the term barbarian for all non-Greek-speaking people, including the Egyptians, Persians, Medes and Phoenicians, emphasizing their otherness. According to Greek writers, this was because the language they spoke sounded to Greeks like gibberish represented by the sounds “bar…bar…;” the alleged root of the word bárbaros, which is an echomimetic or onomatopoeic word. In various occasions, the term was also used by Greeks, especially the Athenians, to deride other Greek tribes and states (such as Epirotes, Eleans, Boeotians and Aeolic-speakers) and also fellow Athenians in a pejorative and politically motivated manner. The term also carried a cultural dimension to its dual meaning. The verb βαρβαρίζω (barbarízō) in ancient Greek meant to behave or talk like a barbarian, or to hold with the barbarians.
Well clearly the Earth is flat because here’s a picture of some water reflecting off a puddle, and that totally proves it apparently.
Yeah, it’s a pivotol part of European history that has ramifications to the present day. It’s like not knowing the difference between England and a second thing.
As a high school graduate I can totally tell you the history of Europe.
So first it was 1066, then the Victorians, then the second world war, then it was now. That’s it, all of European history. Now perhaps some Americans think another historically important event occurred, but it can’t have, because no one mentioned it.
I think some other stuff may have happened, but none of it was really oil/freedom related so we learned about confederate generals and Mormon pioneer history instead.
And the scariest part about history I learned in school is that the Vikings always took over the world because they don’t need a Cassus Belli.
I know what the difference is and don’t play those map video games.
But I do like shoving little soldiers around the table top. And the only thing historic about those is that most of them are no longer being produced.
I bet you would love some hardcore strategy games then.
The most hardcore “map game” I’m playing is Total War (Warhammer these days). I do love me some Starcraft though.
I do think that counts. Medieval 2 had both byzantines and turks in almost perfectly opposite colors, purple vs green
Oh right, there was that one also. Somehow completely forgot about Medieval 2 (was more of a Rome player).
But my knowledge of their existence comes more from the fact that I was dumb enough to take Latin in school. We had to translate letters by the German ambassador (Busbecq) to the Ottoman Empire from when he was sent to
ByzantiumConstantinopleKostantiniyyeIstanbul (the wiki-article about the names of the city alone is fascinating).
Hoi4 Black Ice?
While I love the Total War combo of strategic map play + in the field tactical control, I think there are a good deal of map games even more technically complex, but they are incredibly niche.
Starcraft is an RTS with no real grand strategy, I don’t think that counts as a ‘map game’.
I know that they are quite different, my point was that I don’t play those more complex games and usually prefer other genres. StarCraft was an example of that while limiting it to the Strategy genre as a whole.
Sorry, I didn’t fully read all of the comments you’d made before, and my inner nerdsplaining came out.
That and I’ve been awake for… 36 hours now? Hooray for incredible pain.
That being said, StarCraft is great!
Oh, I was just answering the comment, didn’t realize I made the “limiting to strategy as a whole” remark in a different one.
Well, after 36 hours it’s well about time to finally get some sleep.
I was finally able to sleep!
Torn and dislocated tendons suck.
Big maps, little movement, lots of stuff to track; Hearts Of Iron is made for folks like you and me.
Nah, a 4’x6’ table is a big enough map for me most days.
I’m more of a Total War gamer than something like Heart of Iron anyways. Or better yet: some good old Starcraft, if we limit it to strategy alone.
What is the difference?
The difference between what?
Those map games and shoving little plastic soldiers over the table top?
Those map games are huge, having many armies on the map and managing your state. While shoving soldiers over the table top usually just involves your one army with no state management at all and the map just consisting of the game you are playing.Our context is the tweet in the post and that mentions the difference between the Ottoman and Byzantine empires.
The context is also my comment you replied to. Didn’t know what difference you meant.
To make it simple: the Orthodox Christian Byzantine Empire was the eastern Roman Empire that continued on after the western Roman Empire went under.
The Ottoman Empire is the Muslim Empire that took over after the Byzantine Empire got conquered.
Just paint a map on your skin and ask “conquer me”…
original?
Clearly photoshopped, can’t be. Words are not aligned
yeah, but where’s the original?
Tell me more about the SSD.
Ah i thought you were asking if that was the original, don’t mind me lol
Still going to need casus belli
You didn’t religious ideas for the Deus Vult casus belli?
Not when I am surrounded by heathens.
Oh my god this would work
It is ABSURD how long Turkey’s focus tree takes in HOI4 unless you’re okay with making Ataturk cry.
And how could you be?
The problem with the Ottomans is that they just try to walk it in.
Doesn’t sound like you have an Iron Heart with that attitude
Who doesn’t know the difference? One is green, the other is purple, it’s simple.
One has a good sword unit early game, the other gets grenadiers mid-to-late game.
Um, it’s called RTS. Helloooo.
It’s probably called a GSG (Grand Strategy Game). Almost all “map painting simulators” are GSGs.
Pretty sure they’re talking about something more like Crusader Kings or Europa Universalis than Age of Empires.
unless it’s civ which is turn based
I wonder what RTS Civ would be like 🤔
Age of Empires II?
Total War. Turn based map movement and economy, RTS battles.
Civ is prehistory to futuristic. AoE2 is mediaeval.
Empire Earth or Rise of Nations would be a better answer to @Agent641@lemmy.world’s question.
Fuck yeah, loved both of those. Especially empire earth. Great campaign.
I’ve never actually played them. Would love to try them out, but I’m afraid they’d be too dated. Would love to see them get a Definitive Edition similar to what Age of Empires has received.
I’ve got empire earth gold on gog. It’s an old game, with old graphics, but it’s still fine, tbh. Gameplay-wise it’s pretty timeless, imo.
Here in europe both are taught in elementary school.
Edit: spelling
Not in all of Europe, they completely ignored everything west of Germany in the medieval period here.
But both are east of Germany, so why are they ignored? Or did you mean that they only focused on stuff that happened west of Germany?
Yeah, could have written that clearer I suppose. China only started existing during the rise of communism for example.
Whereas they ignored everything East of France over here.
Actually, I went to school in Scotland so our teachers also tried to ignore everything south of the border too.
“Today we’ll learn about the Picts”. I went to school in Iceland, they taught us a lot of Icelandic history and only allocated one week to 600 years of legalised slavery.
People were not property in Iceland, but, if you didn’t have enough land to support something like 3 cows you were forced to go into service of a farmer for a year. During that year you could leave and die, go to another farm and hope they have food for you or die or swap and get beaten up for not working all waking hours and only maybe die.
The church backed the people up when Iceland was Catholic but with protestantism land was transferred to Denmark and then leased to the farm-archy (agrarchy?).
Iceland was poorer than Romania 120 years ago because fishing villages were illegal. All fishing was property of the farmer that was the current master of the person. They also made law that banned people from getting married without permission of the farmer and supposedly there was a lot of gay sex back then.
I found out about this when I was 30 lol.
“Taught.”
I apologize for English.
Never apologize for what the Sea Germans and Sea Germans From France did to us
My bad
Just one more turn…
Adjacent. Pivotal difference is not turn based.
Not always true, sometimes it’s Elden Ring
Oh yeach there is that one eu4 streamer with a girlfriend. Truly a rare breed.
OK, now I understand that Yeah Yeah Yeahs song.
Oh say say say?
It does not. Why do you think all the rich people resort to drugs and shit? They’re just chasing that dragon because they’ve forgotten what it’s all about.
