Why doesn't this region interest me? It's so big but if you take out Malaysia and Indonesia it's nothing special

>Why doesn't this region interest me?
>take out Malaysia and Indonesia it's nothing special.
Because you've got shitty fucking taste.

'nam, Thailand, Cambodia and Singapore are a fuckload more interesting than Malaysia and Indonesia.

Archipelagos are hot.

Indochina/Mainland SEA is very interesting.

The problem is aside from Thailand they all became Commie tier.

Malaysia is very meh
Indondesia has lots of tribes you can discover.
Bali alone can culturally exhaust you

Philippines is just lulz why is this included again?

Tell that to the French and Americans OP

One very interesting thing about island south east asia is the dispersal of the austronesian language from Taiwan to all of SEA then to polynesia and madagascar.

Philippines was a ragtag of kingdoms and trading posts while Indonesia was an Empire.I don't know why you'd say that it's uninteresting

Philippines was a ragtag of kingdoms and trading posts while Indonesia was an Empire.Malaysia was a group of Kingdoms while Vietnam was a region of China

>while Vietnam was a region of China

That's like saying French history is boring because it was a region of Rome

>Vietnam
>kicks the ass of France, US, and China
>saved Cambodia from Pol Pot
>gets its own economic boom
>not interesting

Vietnam is like a watered down China with a lot of jungle 2bh

Most east Asian countries come off as watered down China.

Vietnam is just China with a lot of Jungle

>implying it's not just a cheap knock-off of Indian and Chinese culture
It's called Indochina for a reason.

>Thailand
>one of the few countries to never be colonized by the West and with an ancient, rich culture
>a million military coups yet most resulted in no one dying and the worshipped king kept things stable
>ladyboys galore
>nothing special
Pleb-tier taste user

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Rajahs

There's the White Rajahs of Sarawak, but that's the most interesting I think I can give you.

It's called Indochina because of the location.

Vietnam is literally just China in a jungle populated by Austroasiatics

>an ancient rich culture
>literally just khmer's Indianized culture with lady boys

Not quite sure. A lot of people say they aren't interested in Southeast Asia because their culture is a mix of Chinese/Indian influences. Yet people nowadays are obsessed with Korea and Japan despite them both having a heavy Chinese influence too.

Korea and Japan are only popular because they have the pop cultural exports. They both have pretty boring histories, to be honest.

>nothing special
The Strait of Malacca is one of the most important and most trafficked waterways in the world. It's also the gateway to the South China Sea, which is extremely important:

chinapower.csis.org/much-trade-transits-south-china-sea/

Even as someone who has studied Japanese history a bit, I would have to agree. I mean, you can make it sound interesting, just not for very long.

There's just not much to note compared to other regions, and of the noteworthy stuff there's not much to describe in many cases.

I feel Japan's can be pretty interesting if you're into autism tier clan warfare. Meiji restoration and modernization is also top tier as well. At least it's better than 3 kingdoms, mongols, than hermit kingdom

>At least it's better than 3 kingdoms, mongols, than hermit kingdom
What?

Japan's is interesting because it was a feudal shithole of warlords for so long, and unlike most places the population was low enough that anyone could become a part of the warrior upper class. So much random unlikely shit happened in Japan's history.

China and India are the most historically relevant and interesting. Korea and Japan are only big now because of pop culture. This means Southeast Asia are the literal whos that nobody can remember.

Koreas history user

>I haven't heard of it so it must be boring
Veeky Forums, ladies and gentlemen

I thought you were referring to the Three Kingdoms era of China and the Mongol Empire. No way is that stuff boring compared to the Meiji restoration.

>3 kingdoms
At first I was confused but then I scrolled down and found out you were referring to Korea.

this was literally the logic that fucked the French and the US over so bad in the 1950s

It's because it's near Australia. Australia is a black hole of relevance, literally NOTHING significant has ever happened there. Anything near it feels less interesting and relevant purely by association.

New Zealand, for instance. It's often left off of maps because people simply forget it's there. It's because of the Australia effect.

Yeah, they underestimated the jungle.

The wallace line, this is amazing.

youtube.com/watch?v=cvWDO4QSMuQ

atlantis?

>At least it's better than 3 kingdoms
Kek, I thought you were full of shit when I read this but then I realized what you meant.

That's just your opinion. I think all regions have an interesting history and I want to learn as much as I can.

That's what happens when they name their own historical era after a much more famous one from their neighbor.

Not Taiwan.

>Vietnam, Phillipines, Khmer, Champa, and the metric shit ton of thalassocracies in the region

Probably because you're retarded.

Hye, there are people here who think China and India have boring histories and South America did nothing. Only Yuroop matters.

>China and India are the most historically relevant and interesting.
No.
> This means Southeast Asia are the literal whos that nobody can remember.
Because you know nothing about them bar poverty

They're probably retarded, too.

>one of the few countries to never be colonized by the West

and they did so by giving their southern part to brits and their western territories to french cambodia, pretty pathetic desu

really the only reason they arent swallowed up by the colonials were because the brits and the french were smart enough to use them as buffer state, they were irrelevant in the grand scale of things

this, anyway im posting this again, the biggest single collection of Tang dynasty artefacts found in one location, the so-called "Tang Treasure" and a fully intact abbasid dynasty merchant dhows, all found in one location.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belitung_shipwreck

Worked for the Japanese with the warring states period.

Also, it's funny because during most of the Korean "three kingdoms" period, there were actually four entities in the Korean peninsula (though admittedly, one wasn't an actual kingdom).

Yes, Taiwan.

To be fair, Indian history is indeed pretty boring.

Some cool stuff happened way back then around the time of Ashoka and a few centuries afterwards, but from decline of the Gupta Empire onward it is boring as fuck. Delhi Sultanate, Mughals and British Raj are a complete bore.

Why didn't they colonize Australia?

Australia was discovered very recently.

It's 'boring' because you know nothing about it. I'll admit that the Mughals after Akbar and before Aurangzeb was boring but that's because it was a stable state.

The DS was a clusterfuck from the beginning up to until it finished. That's not even including the Deccan which was responsible for spreading Indian culture across South-East Asia and other things. If you're from Europe then you'd probably find the part between the fall of the Guptas and the coming of Islam the most interesting since it resembles Medieval Europe the most with stuff ranging from massive 'crusades' to baby eating cults.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pushyamitra_Shunga
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chola_dynasty
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thuggee
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gurjara-Pratihara
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vijayanagara_Empire
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maratha_Empire
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Mysore

etc etc

Stop describing every little thing as "autism" you retarded redditor newfag.

FUCK the word has lost all meaning

Some Makassans knew about Australia and traded with the Aboriginals, but it was such a dry and harsh continent nobody bothered to settle there.

I'm not European, but I'll admit I have no idea what you mean by those so-called crusades.

I will read up some more, but unfortunately, I'll probably find it very hard to be as engaged with an post-Gupta "warring states" period, considering it will seem fruitless (in the way that a tournament that is stopped midway leaves a bad afterthought). Chinese and Japanese "warring states" ended up uniting the whole country. European "warring states" ended up forming very strong nation states that would go on to colonize the world. Indian "warring states" got overrun by Muslim invaders, making all the struggles seem futile.

>European "warring states" ended up forming very strong nation states that would go on to colonize the world
Thanks to román/greek knowledge

>I'm not European, but I'll admit I have no idea what you mean by those so-called crusades.
There would be big wars over different sects of Hinduism (or even Jainism).

>I will read up some more, but unfortunately, I'll probably find it very hard to be as engaged with an post-Gupta "warring states" period, considering it will seem fruitless (in the way that a tournament that is stopped midway leaves a bad afterthought). Chinese and Japanese "warring states" ended up uniting the whole country. European "warring states" ended up forming very strong nation states
Sometimes they did end up leaving strong states behind :
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gurjara-Pratihara
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vijayanagara_Empire
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maratha_Empire
These three in particular were essential for India not looking like a modern ISIS state. The Maratha empire especially took over all of India quickly after the Mughals were finished and consolidated it into one state.

But yeah I guess India is a meme. It's always been impossible to keep both the North and South under control.

> Indian "warring states" got overrun by Muslim invaders, making all the struggles seem futile.
It's not as black and white as you think. Some Indian kingdoms would war with the muslims and some would side with them. The Gujarat Sultanate for example was managed by a Rajput convert to Islam. Even the Vijayanagara empire employed foreign Muslims to be some of their royal attendants and had a lot of architecture that was clearly Islamic based.

Also pretty much all of history is "This country had a great man and founded an empire, then it fell. After that another country had an empire. It fell. Then another one."

Also you might be interested in these:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pala_Empire
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashtrakuta_dynasty
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_of_Harsha

Khmer > Burma = Vietnamese > Malay

I like how the Ming tortured and killed Portuguese envoys as retaliation for the Portuguese conquest of Malacca, a Chinese tributary.

>Burma=Vietnam
Please elaborate

If Roman/Greek knowledge was enough to colonize most of the world, they would have done so. Acting like there was no innovation in Europe after the WRE fell is misleading.

Why does center he look more like an Amerindian than an actual Indian?

Alternatively, why is an Amerindian at the center of a "Rise of the Rajas edition"?

Burma/Myanmar was top dog in SEA (the rest of continental SEA except for 'nam were tributary states) before getting Britt'd.

Good post bro. But
>forgetting the Sikh empire
>forgetting how a bunch of backward farmers came together from Mughal oppression and then kicked the collective assess of pretty much everybody around

>Why does center he look more like an Amerindian than an actual Indian?
>Alternatively, why is an Amerindian at the center of a "Rise of the Rajas edition"?
SEA has been Hindu for a long time...
Well it's a mix of everything really.

What is the difference between Burma and Myanmar?

>SEA has been Hindu for a long time..
I don't think you have understood my question.

I'm saying that the center character looks like a feather Indian, not like a dot Indian.

Because they're southeast asians not south asians/Indians
From left to right : Siam/Thais - Java/Indonesians - Burmese

He looks SEA to me I don't what you're on.

I thought the Burmese guy was Indian wtf

>tfw you can't see the Vietnamese because he's hiding in the jungle.

Tbh. he could be any ethnic from indocina but the headgear is typically Burmese

All of Southeast Asia belongs to Burma.

I was mainly saying in terms of their campaigns. The Burmese missions were good, with exception of the first, whilst the Vietnamese 1st mission was annoying as fuck and the Battle of Hanoi mission was broke for me. Malay maps were just awful naval maps, and Khmer had a good amount of variety for play
In terms of gameplay, Burma > Vietnam > Khmer > Malay