The Mongol Empire never fell. It extended through all of Eurasia,

Settled nomads lose any trace of old ways, so not very different. One world government since XIII century, on other hand, will inevitably change human civilization.

>>49572965
>How does the Mongol Star Empire work?
It wouldn't. Strong cultures stagnate society, and stagnant societies don't innovate.

>>49573325
>hi-tech == shit culture
At least not in real life, and definitely not in imaginary setting.

>>49572965
As the Mongol Empire was never an empire, just a tribal congomerate that had temporary hegemony over 3/4 of the Eurasian landmass, that fell into disorganized bickering immediately after those with actual memory of the founder died; I find you scenario... lacking.

Try again.

>>49575397
>hi-tech==shit culture
So, 'Murica?

>>49575437
>it wasn't an empire because it didn't last forever
Anon, what do you think an empire is?

>>49572965
Through war, the Mongol way evolved from seasonal nomadic hunting to stripping every resource from an area and moving on after destroying what's left to prevent reprisal.

File: 1355619419977.jpg (2MB, 1178x1500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1178x1500px

>>49572965
>Look to the stars, children of the dust, and heed my coming
>I am the First among Travelers, Lord of the Night Sky, the Dragon with a Thousand Wings
>My people are no longer in hiding
>And now we darken your sky...
>...like a murder of crows.

>>49575397
You can have high or low tech with strong or weak cultures, but you can't change tech levels with strong cultures.

"Strong" here being "resistance to change" or "tendency for the culture to remain (stable or) the same".
And that *is* the meaning of strong when referring to culture.

It didn't fall though. It disintegrated.

>>49577312
This sounds like an interesting subject. Can you elaborate on it?

>>49577359
The difference being?