Most Overrated Battles (as PoDs)?

Okay, maybe I misread, but:



And "slow, painful, gradual" is the opposite of what you appear to have said here.

So, help a fellow historian out - what are you trying to say here?

Steep decline dosnt mean instantly. It means that over that can be an extended period of time that rebellions increase ( that they did) and persia's influence was actually quite quickly replaced by greek influence. After salmeis we see greek mercanaries, artists,diplomats being exported all over the world, with greece becoming an internatiional language of diplomacy. Persia meanwhile, and the idea of being part of the persian empire suddenly was replaced by the individual subject nations view of themselves.

I think the maybe the main misunderstanding here was are different interpratation of " steep decline," you see it as a fast phenomanom, i see it as a slower process. Sorry for any confusion!
 
Steep decline dosnt mean instantly. It means that over that can be an extended period of time that rebellions increase ( that they did) and persia's influence was actually quite quickly replaced by greek influence. After salmeis we see greek mercanaries, artists,diplomats being exported all over the world, with greece becoming an internatiional language of diplomacy. Persia meanwhile, and the idea of being part of the persian empire suddenly was replaced by the individual subject nations view of themselves.

I think the maybe the main misunderstanding here was are different interpratation of " steep decline," you see it as a fast phenomanom, i see it as a slower process. Sorry for any confusion!

"suddenly"? And Greek mercenaries and diplomats at work (I'm assuming by 'the world" you mean "the Mediterranean world" or at best "the Western Eurasian world", since I know that you know that they didn't go to say, the Americans) doesn't mean that the Archaemenid Empire is disintegrating any more than for instance Swiss mercenaries being employed by France mean France was disintegrating.

Persia's rule in this period was very hands off, so I think the subject peoples were already viewing themselves as (whatever) - but that didn't matter to whether or not the empire was holding together.

And no worries now that you've explained.
 
I find the Battle of Waterloo at least as overrated as the Battle of Gettysburg. Let's be honest to ourselves : There wasn't much Nappy could change in the long run, even if he won the battle - and by won, I don't mean a tie with the Prussians and Brits, but their defeat and retreat.
 
I find the Battle of Waterloo at least as overrated as the Battle of Gettysburg. Let's be honest to ourselves : There wasn't much Nappy could change in the long run, even if he won the battle - and by won, I don't mean a tie with the Prussians and Brits, but their defeat and retreat.

Too true- but dont forget the other long term consequences aside from napoleons still immenent defeat- defeat at waterloo would give austria and russia more leverage in europe and exclude britain from many key proceedings-increassing tension in europe.
 
I find the Battle of Waterloo at least as overrated as the Battle of Gettysburg. Let's be honest to ourselves : There wasn't much Nappy could change in the long run, even if he won the battle - and by won, I don't mean a tie with the Prussians and Brits, but their defeat and retreat.

True. And we should also remember that Napoleon asked for a peace with all the other European nations when he took the throne a second time. They mistrusted him, and went to war anyway. So I don't Nappy would re-start his quest to conquer Europe after that.
 
True. And we should also remember that Napoleon asked for a peace with all the other European nations when he took the throne a second time. They mistrusted him, and went to war anyway. So I don't Nappy would re-start his quest to conquer Europe after that.

Why not? Other than the limits of his ability to do so.
 
But, cimon's right about Sealion being totally feasible. Check out my TL, Hitler's Republic. Airpower DID rule in the day over seapower as Pearl Harbor and the RN's uselessness at Crete showed, and the Luftwaffe was anead of RAF in numbers, so why not?

Of course, it's not easy - it took a 1901 POD to be ABLE to turn Hitler into something like a reasonable man.
 
Top