You now have Baba Yetu playing in your head
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQfa5E1o_tc
More seriously, how accurate the descriptions, related bonus and chosen main character for each nation in Civilization is ?
Would you have EVERY TIME chosen Napoleon for France as the best and only leader ? Would you EVERY TIME decide their best troops to be mousquetaires ? Or giving them only cultural bonus ?
Let's discuss:
> Major nations not in any games and that should be there.
> Changing some "best leader" for existing nations
> Proposing new bonus if you know the game enough.
> Explain why Gandhi is a fucking psychotic killer in every game.
I'm pulling all this from vague memory but I remember reading somewhere that ghandi has the lowest aggression level but something happens and it loop lowers his aggression from 1 to 10 because of how the game works. Making him bloodthirsty. Someone else might have more details.
Let's start with France:
> Leaders
Louis XIV: It's the highest point of French might if you consider Charlemagne isn't french. We ruled Europe and bongs were too weak to opposite at the time. He's also the first absolute king, sharing no power and having no rivals in the kingdom.
Philippe-Auguste: He shaped the modern shape of France, took back half of it and made kings important again. He also beat the crap out of Richard Lionheart and King John. Oh and he was a crusader.
Henri IV: Stopped religious wars, put a clean break from degenerate kings and create a lasting peace in the kingdom. He created several laws and rules making France a rich country and powerful again. He's probably the reason why Louis XIV got such a powerful France in his hands.
Joan of Arc: Almost mythic but still reason heroine, managed to rally France at his lowest point in History, managed to win several battles and reverse the situation in the century war. She was a wise strategist with modern artillery tactics and every man in her army saw her as a living Saint.
All of them would be better than "hey let's ruin forever the only thing France has in its favor compare to Europe: it's population" Napoleon.
> Bonus
Should be an agricultural bonus obviously. France is "le pays de caucagne" the most fertile country in Europe and people didn't need advance agricultural technics to get a good crop. France was also an exemple of pure feodalism with the largest peasant population in Europe. We're good at building religious stuff too.
> Best troops
What about frigging knights with Francisques ? Those guys terrified arabs for generations and hacked light cavalery like it was nothing. It was the most effective troops the French people ever had.
Modern Legion Etrangère is also a good and renown troops with a very interesting use and possible set of rules (in the game). We would also consider WW1 infantery.
Also Germany is arguably best because of leader traits and Dat assembly plant, also panzers
What caused the French revolution to spiral out of control?
>>706103
The arrogance of the royalty and nobility combined with the suffering of the huddled masses.
Look at Syria.
>>706103
French monarchy
>>706103
The decision to spread the revolution through war.
Sikhism was born from the soil of Punjab and often gets dismissed. Sikhs get abused and thrown insults at because they wear turbans, but throughout history Sikhs have literally done nothing but good. They do have a shorter history than the larger religions of today, but the religion itself seems to make a lot of sense, and is focused around individual spirituality and caring for your fellow man. Every Sikh temple in the world allows free food to everyone; not exclusive to caste, creed, religion or race.
So /his/, what are your thoughts on Sikhism? I haven't seen many threads here regarding the Sikh empire or the religion itself. It'd be interesting to get your views on the religion. I'm not a Sikh myself, I am a Muslim, but I'm very interested in the history of the faith.
Kafir dogs, just genocide them
>>705897
>literally just posted in /k/ about considering converting to Sikhism and my reservations about it
>feel the sudden urge to go to /his/
>this is the first thing I see
I feel like something is happening, man
These are the posts I made by the way
>>>/k/28946048
>>>/k/28946101
>>705897
>So /his/, what are your thoughts on Sikhism?
It's okay
Why didn't the British ever retake the USA?
Why would they?
Not really worth the effort.
IIRC there was some hope immediately post-Revolution that the Canadian Colonies would demonstrate the superiority of the British form of government and lead to the Republic's collapse or petition to be readmitted into the Empire.
>>704270
wasn't worth the effort. being humiliated twice was enough.
Why did Turkey feel it was necessary to exterminate their Christians?
>>703402
It was more a case of amernians and greeks being extreemly hostile and subversive to the turkish state to the point they were willing to assist and align with foreign nations.
christians are scum
How common actually is hanja mixed script in Korea nowadays? The impression I get is 'not very'. What contexts is it still used in, if any, and why did they stop using it very much?
>>702656
They should just use Hangul only.
>>702656
They stopped using it because it doesn't serve a highly aggluative language will and hangul is an incredibly good phonetic writing system that you can learn in literally in 30 minutes
>>702664
Hanja: 修道 (spiritual discipline), 囚徒 (prisoner), 水都 (city of water), 水稻 (paddy rice), 水道 (waterway), 隧道 (tunnel), 首都 (capital city)
Hangul: 수도 (spiritual discipline/prisoner/city of water/paddy rice/waterway/tunnel/capital city)
What was it that allowed the British to become as dominant as they did?
Forced into colonization due to lack of land in Europe.
England is the most geographically perfect place on earth
The collective naivete and good-nature of the rest of mankind, which prevented them from stooping to the moral lows of perfidious Albion.
Why didn't the native americans tame this shit and ride them instead of genociding them?
They rode horses with no saddles and zero guidance.
>>701384
have you ever tried riding a Paraceratherium? They're pretty cantakerous and because they are so big and strong you can't really control them.
One of my mates fell off and got his skull crushed by a stray foot when he tried to ride one.
>>701392
We domesticated fucking aurochs, those redskins have no excuse.
The skeletal structure on all the animals listed is actually worse, both calorie and juke wise, than the homo sapien, so there's no point in riding them. The only thing they can do better is top speed, and that's fucking worthless in a winter fucking hellscape where the meta is finding dead corpses and fighting over them, where packs of homo sapien cannot be contested at all.
It would take a few hundred thousand years of domestication for them to be useful in battle, since their psych doesn't have things like honor, and the natives didn't have that long. They had animal for and spears to survive the winter and the megafauna wasn't just competition, it was the only means of survival.
Shout out to any dead indians that raised young megatherium and used them in battle, you weren't metababies.
What went wrong? Militarily, these guys were shit. Asses kicked in WW1 by Austria-Hungary multiple times at Isonzo, and then were utterly fucked in WW2 by the allies. The only times they really won a war was their annexation of Libya and I guess the Austro-Prussian war.
Incompetent and antiquated leadership.
It only got worse during fascism, since how much you agreed with whatever Mussolini said was a core factor for having a career in any field.
>>700900
Italians are vain and lazy. You can only expect outsiders to do things for them
>Italy annexed territories non stop until WW2 getting their asses constantly kicked
I think we're good, think what would have happened if we dominated our opponents
okay, /his/, i need help. I am in denial of religion, but i feel i must belong to a group. suggest me some religions, /his/
>>700210
What is wrong with atheism? There mere fact that there are so many religions with so many die hard believers all claiming their god 'the true god' is what keeps me from ever believing
you could always worship mars
>>700247
ive actually been trying atheism, but it feels so weird. i was christian for the longest time, then i tried paganism, but now, idk what to beleive
Patton was right in wanting to attack Russia after WWII avoiding the Cold War and the Berlin Wall?
What exactly would humanity as a whole stand to gain from that? Oh boy, another world war with millions of deaths immediately after the last one. Great fucking idea.
>>698793
Probably not. Even in a best case scenario, an attempt to topple Russia would have caused tens of millions of deaths and the wholesale devastation of most of Europe.
Absolutley. Communism must be stopped wherever it is
>eww math
Why do humanities majors say this?
You will never use Theory of Groups in real world anyway.
ive never said that
i dont like doing maths because i find it difficult, doesnt mean i have anything against mathematics or mathematicians
>>696649
Group theory is useful as fuck you idiot
What went wrong with the decolonization of Africa? Did they rush it or did it not come fast enough? I noticed that Francafrique still acts as the french empire lite
Black people were free to chimp out again, so Africa returned to how it was before colonization (with AKs instead of spears)
Colonization was the problem. It established economies that were dependent on exporting to the western world, and installed or supported governments that would keep it that way. Nothing much about this changed over the course of the twentieth century.
>>693273
Back to /lit/, PoC apologist
Where should I start and focus to get a good grip on Evola?
The Upanishads
>>682986
Start by killing yourself
>>682999
Well, trips don't lie.
See you, space cowboys.
Is Rome series historically accurate?
>>682978
No, but I'm always reminded that I'm old when I encounter people who did not watched it.
It was very popular back a decade ago, and it still holds well.
Very, very loosely.
First season was great though and the second was good for what it needed to do.
how historically accurate does a film, show, or play have to be to be considered historically accurate?
Would a movie that is 75% historically accurate be considered a historically accurate movie?