Rome VS Sassanids Nationalism thread

[Legio Comitatenses!]

This thread is a gatering place for all fans of Roman, and those of Sassanid empires. We Will fight!

"Katafraktarii, Lock formation and attack!"

- "Elefents, trample them !!!" "Sepahbod, charge !!!"


.
.
.
Who Will prevail? Who Will win? In real history the two empires were sworn rivals, but also equals that respected each other. The Sassanids were the only people expect themselves that the Romans did not consider "barbarians". Although the severe war between the both empires is arguably the main reason for their eventual decline, they actually became allies just before the Arab conquest took out the Sassanids.

Copyright images removed

[The Mongol]

TWC is already plagued with nationalism, I don't think we need a thread dedicated to it.

[Legio Comitatenses!]

TWC is already plagued with nationalism, I don't think we need a thread dedicated to it.

LOL. We're talking about positive and brotherly "nationalism" here

[Aeratus]

lol maybe there are some Roman fanbois, but there are no roman nationalists.

[iloveyourz]

thats because rome roster is awesome


they do they have strong frontline melee? do they have shock troops to send into the breach or devastate flanks? can they counter horses pretty well? are the cities beautiful?

IF ALL OF THESE are yes THEN THAT FACTION IS rome! the eastern ones not the west :p

rome has one of the most sexiest and balanced rosters everyone else leans one or 2 ways rome has everything =)

[Roboute Guilliman]

The roman empire seized to exist and has gotten sacked many times, while the great persian empire is flourishing under the Khamenei dynasty till this day.

Debate over.

[crucify_ego]

To the op... its roman empire btw.

[kanzy]

The roman empire seized to exist and has gotten sacked many times, while the great persian empire is flourishing under the Khamenei dynasty till this day.

Debate over.

Cool Signature. +rep

[Poniatowski1991]

The Emir of Rome. That would be a gastly sight for the future. (Spits it out)

[kambiz]

Let's do a simple calculation , first by dividing total war players into different categories :

- Western Players : This includes whole of Europe , nearly all people of American continent plus people in Oceanic & South Africa. which of course contains the majority of total war players. As players of this category feel tied with Graco-Roman history and consider them their forefathers (!) so if they had to choose between Iran or Rome ,99% (if not all) will choose Roman empire !

- South-East Asian ,South Asian and African players : People of this category has no special (or as OP says Nationalistic) orientation towards either of them ,So they probably either choose by knowledge or randomly by chance. Still the choices would not be balanced because western Media (which usually is powerful in their regions) will hype them towards Graco-Romans. Yet in case of participating in such a poll compared to Western players I guess more people of this category will choose non-Roman side but in the end Roman empire will be the winner !

- Middle Eastern players :majority of the population of this region is either Arab (or Arab speaking) or Iranian ,thus two sub-categories
Arab players : Just like previous category and unlike westerners they feel not tied to either empires historically. But as anti-iranian attitudes are high amongst many of them so in polls like this they most certainly choose Rome !
Iranian players : Just like western players nearly all of them will choose Iranian empire if they had to choose just one side (due to obvious reason!)
*note : there are too few total war players in this category so their choice has not much significance anyway !


As can be seen the western players (of 1st category) can alone guarantee the outcome in favor of graco-romans in any such polls ! so I'm wondering what the intention of OP is ?!?

[Rostam_e_Iran]

I just want to clear something up first regarding the downfall of the Sassanid Empire. The "Exhausted" argument is not the MAIN contributing factor for the Sassanids collapse and demise. The main reason was internal power squalling which lead to a period of 10~ rulers in their final decades. There was no effective leadership and so chaos ensued. Similar to the recent Iranian political change in 1979 when the Shah of Iran was deposed and replaced by shah khomeini. With all the change and confusion Iraq invaded and nearly accomplished it's goals. Though, modern communications had other ideas.

Anyway back to OP, this thread would have been a lot more interesting if there was a fraction of information on the Sassanid Empire as there is the Roman Empire. Most of what there is to know comes from the Romans and that will have to be taken with a grain of salt, so there could never be any successful neutral debates.

Actually on second thoughts I'm looking way too deep into it.

Long live the Persian Empire!

[Aeratus]

In terms of popularity, Rome is ahead by a little:

Eastern Roman Empire - 0.9% of total players on steam have completed grand campaign
Western Roman Empire - 0.6%

Sassanid Empire - 0.9% of players

[xjlxking]

Historically, these two nation just kept fortifying the only 3 routes that were capable of sustaining an invasion. Both empires also heavily fortified the borders and cities near the border like Antioch. A huge drain would have been used to actually capture these by either empire. My point is whichever empire was stronger, it was not significant enough to change the situation that happened in that region. Had it been a location like where the Punic wars occurred, the outcome would have shown


however I think the ERE was more stronger and resourceful than the Sassanid, but it was not significant enough. I also think the lack of a good leader was what strained ERE a lot more than it did the SE.