Oooh, Alexander of Macedon...aka Alexander The Great. Let me clear up a few things. When I was in college back in the 90's before I had to quit and go to jail, I had two majors. At first I was a History Major, but then changed over to Computer Science. At the time I was un-decided on if I wanted to go into computers or try to get a job teaching history. Also, money was a factor and I could only afford to go for a Associates Degree. Getting a job as a History Professor required a lot more schooling then I knew I'd have money for even with student loans. Anyway, on to the topic of Alexander.

Alexander, according to historical records, was in love with his childhood friend, Hephaestion. Indeed though he did take a wife, two wives in fact and not just the one shown in the movie, Roxana of Bactria. There is mention of a third wife as well but historically she can't be proven to have existed. Alexander also supposedly fathered a child with Roxana but that has never been "proven" historically though there are records of his son being used in the succession wars that followed after Alexanders death in Babylon in 323 BC. Alexander was indeed what we would call today homosexual, though as has been mentioned, he understood the need for an heir to carry on his rule after after his death. In ancient Greece homosexuality was a accepted part of culture as was pedophilia and many other practices such as human sacrifice that are not always accepted by today's views of morality. The ancient Greeks didn't place as much importance on a persons sexual preference as we do today. These views were the dominant views of society for well over a 1000 years in the ancient world. Even Julius Cesar was said to have slept with men when he needed to too further along his political career. In ancient Roman society, which borrowed Heavily from the ancient Greeks, violating another man or a boy showed the dominance of the one doing the violating. It was a way of proving you were more powerful than them and often had very little to do with a persons sexual preference and more to do with political leverage and posturing.

When it came to the sheer size of Alexander's empire, he ruled at the time what was known as the entire world. Sadly he wasn't able to officially finish his campaigns before his death. While it can be said that he borrowed some of his military strategies from his father Philip and his teacher Aristotle, to say all his military conquests were taken from their ideas and not his own is completely false and that can be backed up and proven with historical record (if the records can be believed). Philip's ambition and original plans were to stop after he conquered Babylon and Persia, while Alexander's ambition was to conquer the entire world and to bring the people together under one world order. Alexander never officially conquered much of northern Europe including what is England today, but those peoples Did pay tribute to Macedonia just as they later paid tribute to the Romans who did physically go there and conquer the local population. Unfortunately Alexander died before he was able to carry out his planned conquest of northern Europe. You have to keep in mind as well that a lot of what our scholars first believed to be "Historical Fact" was later found out to be embellishments made by the authors of the records. Most of the actual "Facts" we know today about Alexander and his life were taken from the records written by the peoples he conquered and not by his own historians or fellow Greeks.

Victors always embellish history which is obvious as it has happened through-out all of human history. Just imagine what our history books would say today if the Nazis had won WW2. If the Nazis had won WW2 then I would be certain that our history books today would all talk about how evil the Jewish people were and how they needed to be cleansed from the Earth. Obviously we know that's not true, but, if the books we learn from as children say the opposite then that is what people will grow up to believe. Case in point, the discovery of the "New World", America. It is a Scientifically Proven Fact today that Christopher Columbus in fact did NOT discover the new world nor was he the first European to try to settle the American continent. The Vikings, led by Leif Ericson, were the First Europeans to settle here in North America. Ruins of some of their massive Longhouses have been found in New England that pre-date Jamestown by more then 300 years. The vikings came in contact with the Native Americans who later killed the viking settlers. Leif Ericson decided he didn't have the man-power to keep fighting to make a permanent colony here in the US. This is Proven Fact, and yet American school children all over the country are still taught that Christopher Columbus discovered America in 1492, which is a complete lie. Why haven't our school books been updated to reflect this? Because new school books cost money and it's easier to perpetuate the lie that Christopher Columbus was here first.

In my opinion, which also happens to be the popular collective opinions of most strategic historians, the two greatest military strategists in Human History were Alexander the Great and Sun Tzu who is famous for writing "The Art of War" who's strategies are relevant even in today's world. No one in all of human history has conquered so much of the world in his life-time as Alexander did in his. Even the Nazis at the hight of their power, when they controlled basically All of Europe and Most of Africa, did not conquer as much land as Alexander did in his life-time. Homosexual or not, pedophile or not, Alexander was one of the greatest warriors and strategists who EVER lived, period. Who gives a shit who he liked to corn-hole? I don't!!! And who-ever he liked to sleep with, that isn't going to stop me from admiring the many things he accomplished in his life-time, nor should it anyone who has half a brain.

the point being here that both being gay and being a pedophile for example are represented as 'minorities' now, such as could also be represented in ancient Greece generally, in comparison to Sparta where it was practiced by the 'majority' of Spartan 'citizens'...

this is meant to be a fun game for the majority... lets not get into peoples personal psychological fantasies of male sexual domination.. you can mod that in if you really want..

TL;dr Can you guys please take it to PM?

While that may be true, my friend, I don't consider "amount of land conquered" to be the number one defining attribute that makes the "Best Conquerer". To me it's about logistics and battle strategies. Alexander was Almost Always out-numbered in battle and yet managed to win battles consistently. His men were trained with superior fighting skills and tactics. They were better equipped then their enemies in almost every case and the Macedonian soldiers fought as Free Men, which gave them more reason to fight then that of a slave forced into combat at sword-point. These are the reasons why the Spartans were so successful against the Persians. Every Spartan soldier was worth 10 Persians in combat.

If I had to rate what I consider to be the best Conquerers in History it would be like this.

1. Alexander the Great (which is arguably the best conquer in Most Professional Historian's views)

2. Napoleon Bonaparte

3. Emperor Quin Shi Huang, first Emperor of China

4. Genghis Kahn

5. King Richard the Lionhearted of England

Sun Tzu himself wasn't actually much of a Conquerer, but his teachings were used by Conquerers throughout history and are still considered to be among the best military strategies today. He's one of the Greatest military minds who Ever lived, but he's no Conquerer. Also, on a side note, you really, Really, shouldn't use "Wikipedia" as a source of "Accurate" information. Any dumbass can edit those Wiki's and no-one fact checks them. Then people get online and see them and think they're facts. Check a text book. They're much more accurate (unless they're out-dated).

I'm pretty sure that technically the "British Empire" controlled more land (not counting water) at the hight of it's power than any other empire in history. There was a time when the British controlled All of England, parts of France and Spain, most of India and almost all of the civilized parts of North America (13 colonies) at one time. The Empire spanned half the globe. Not to downplay Genghis by any means. He was definitely a great conquerer and the Mongol Empire was the biggest in it's time, just not of "all time". Alexander conquered the whole world, but the "whole world" was Much Smaller in his day than it is in ours.

Note: when saying the whole world was smaller, obviously I don't mean in terms of land mass, I mean in terms of "civilized/populated area". Just to make sure that's clear. Obviously the planet hasn't shrunk or grown bigger or anything lol.

Once again, I refer to the 'conquering' part rather than 'controlling'...

p.s you dont have to convince me on Alexander.. my name is Alex and i've done my share of Macedonian history research.. Is the Sarissa in Elemental?

You forgot about  Attila the Hun & Augustus -> Both of them should be in the top5 imo.

This whole history thing... All I want to know is did Nepolean use hax? He was french right?

I mean Genghis was a little rusher, the Brittish turtled and boomed, Romans teched up and so on.

Surely the easiest way to work out who is best is to look at the world rankings (1v1) leaderboard.

Probably minatursation.

Edit: Or miniaturization.

Minatursation is mkaing something into a minotaur.

Or an enemy dragon into a sheep.

The same sex thing could be something interesting for a mod. Presumably as the leader you can Do What You want, and if your dude wants to marry a dude there's no-one to stop you. From what we've seen of the Fallen and their Might Makes Right attitude this would be even more true for them. But then what of children? You could hand-wave it with magic or surrogates or what have you, you could also go an adoption route with promising 'candidates' popping up to be chosen or dismissed by the player. Heirs chosen that way could be seen as less legitimate by other rulers and be more difficult to use in arranged marriages.

Actually you could just divorce the adoption concept from that completely and have it be an alternate option for, eh, "traditional" marriages as well, advantages being able to pick and choose candidates, disadvantages being legitimacy issues or whatever.

Sorry I'm navel-gazing while starcraft 2 installs

Must....hold back....dirty reply....

This doesn't have anything to do with the ongoing debate, but I wanted to bring it up regardless:

I'm kind of concerned that the create-a-faction option is still missing from the next build... Much as the premade ones are rich in history and everything, I'd kind of rather stomp them into the ground or ally with them than lead them. Too much metaplot riding on their shoulders, you know? I'm just wondering if the faction creation system was entirely scrapped.