From what I have seen, Europe was always richer than the rest of the world since Ancient Greece, as can be seen in the relatively high GDP per capita*, realistic art, architecture, philosophy and weaponry, among other great achievements, of the Roman Empire. Despite this, some users who I have interacted with claim that Europe is not worth conquering for, and I paraphrase "some steel and coal". Clearly, if Europe was to ascend to such heights, it had some resources unique to it.
But even if one were to entertain the notion that Europe was poor and undesirable to any would-be conqueror, it would be likely that Europe would try to scour the world for resources like IOTL. Could it be possible that, from anywhere between 1-1800 CE, a non-Western polity outside of Europe or the Mediterranean launch a decisive and successful expedition against a Western power, including the torching of a major capital city and/or destruction of a major fort? Less emphasis should be put on political intrigue or other such technicalities, and the Western power must not have a noticeable disadvantage, such as a general collapse. The Eastern Power may use Western troops, equipment and methodology in the expedition, but must be able to reach a stage where they can conduct everything with a great level of independence from Western advisors, suppliers, superiors or any other direct influence. Swarm tactics and other crude and obvious advantages are forbidden.
As always, "Western" here refers to countries in Hellenic or Christian Europe, including potential predecessors in cases such as the once-Pagan Baltic States, or potential successors such as colonies, both current and former.
*Admittedly from the unreliable Maddison, though he is the only historian that provides data for comparison, even if he may prove to be an example of why such a thing cannot be fairly done.
EDIT: Inclusion of political intrigue and the like, though with a reduced emphasis.
EDIT #2: Some Western influence in the expedition is allowed.
PS: "Never Considered" means that an expedition to Europe is never considered, regardless of whether or not the Eastern polity has an ability to launch one.
But even if one were to entertain the notion that Europe was poor and undesirable to any would-be conqueror, it would be likely that Europe would try to scour the world for resources like IOTL. Could it be possible that, from anywhere between 1-1800 CE, a non-Western polity outside of Europe or the Mediterranean launch a decisive and successful expedition against a Western power, including the torching of a major capital city and/or destruction of a major fort? Less emphasis should be put on political intrigue or other such technicalities, and the Western power must not have a noticeable disadvantage, such as a general collapse. The Eastern Power may use Western troops, equipment and methodology in the expedition, but must be able to reach a stage where they can conduct everything with a great level of independence from Western advisors, suppliers, superiors or any other direct influence. Swarm tactics and other crude and obvious advantages are forbidden.
As always, "Western" here refers to countries in Hellenic or Christian Europe, including potential predecessors in cases such as the once-Pagan Baltic States, or potential successors such as colonies, both current and former.
*Admittedly from the unreliable Maddison, though he is the only historian that provides data for comparison, even if he may prove to be an example of why such a thing cannot be fairly done.
EDIT: Inclusion of political intrigue and the like, though with a reduced emphasis.
EDIT #2: Some Western influence in the expedition is allowed.
PS: "Never Considered" means that an expedition to Europe is never considered, regardless of whether or not the Eastern polity has an ability to launch one.
Last edited: