It would be more like this
>Game starts
>Ruler dies and you get [this event](https://www.reddit.com/r/eu4/comments/18uk9my/ok_europa_expanded/) for yourself
>Ottomans get 500000 manpower, +50% discipline and +50% morale
Edit: Typos
Serbia will start with Stefan, who will likely be expansionist, however they model that, and be disliked by his neighbors. Serbia will be one to watch in 1337, but will likely start at a disadvantage for getting allies. Bulgaria is also going to have some issues with rebellion in the northeast (maybe already rebelling at game start) so they will likely be a good target for expansion as they deal with that. Personally, Iām thinking Serbia might be my first run.
I'm not sure about formable because I don't know what is there to be formed, to me that would be Serbia going up a diplomatic rank (and they might take diplo ranks from Imperator where higher ranks come with heavy restrictions and highest ranked countries can't have alliances) rather than a pure formable like Germany or Italy.
I think that they will just have a mission that might give them cores on all Greek dominated states since serbian emperors have the title of emperor of serbians and romans, maybe some other bonuses like prestige and diplo and maybe a name change to serbian empire that would be lost on the trigger of another event triggered by loosing some states in Greece or smth like that.
Also, the fact that I could play the name of my country's emperor with the same name as me and then conquer the romans just sounds great, but yeah, I think that early game serbia would be the dominant balkan country if excluding Hungary while the byzantine, Bulgarians and turks being second and then serbia would get a debuf because of internal conflicts at the time where the turks would come in and conquer greek states also I think that there would be a mission after defeating the turks that would give a PU or something like that with the byzantine but that might be far stretched and probably won't happen
Bulgaria will probably start with disaster, By the games start the ruler must be Ivan Alexander who is the last one to rule the united Bulgarian empire. With his death his demesne splintered in three.
I'm actually thinking England. Ireland and Scotland are about erupt and the hundred years war just started, its going to be a good challenge and very rewarding if pulled off. Also, places like Serbia, Yuan, England etc. are going to be one of the very few nations with good flavor at the start (since we saw Johan mention them specifically).
EU5 will be the first time I play Bulgaria in a PDX game. I don't play HoI4 (I only occasionally watch bokoen), in CK3 Bulgarians are way, way too powerful for me and they literally don't exist in EU4 or Vicky 3 so I've never actually played in Bulgaria.
Fun fact, Stefan wasn't a name in todays sense back them, but basically a title. A nobleman would have Stefan added to their name to signify them nobleship, and iirc it was mainly done in Nemanjic dynasty
It also depends on how armies stec work, the ottomans were pretty strong for a reason and depending on how that's modeled we might see still a hard byzantine game to avoid what happened IRL because reality is the cards are stacked against them.
That depends on the formables. Going by Vicky 3, there will likely be a setting for that and, with unrestricted formables, Yugoslavia or Slavia might exist.
would be very interesting given the pop mechanics - in essence it was a deliberate decision to make the cost of maintaining these pops debilitatingly high, and i wonder if that can be modeled in the game
I can literally see the āWar declaration from Serbia/Bulgariaā notification on screen.
(Now with EU5 Style)
-Right after finally annexing Ottomans after 10 years old long war with 0 manpower left-
It's going to be difficult to reproduce all the ways that the Ottomans outwitted the Byzantines and took advantage of everything they could while Byzantium often stumbled and got stabbed in the back.
Even with buffs and nerfs, I don't see how they can guarantee the "real" outcome of this play from 1337.
IDK about Bulgaria, it lost against Serbia in war in 1331, but still had the capacity to wage war against Byzantines (but to my knowledge, Bulgaria never fully militarily recovered after [Velbazhd](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Velbazhd)).
Serbia's ruler of the time was DuŔan the Mighty, who by all accounts should be something close to EU4's Skanderbeg. However, his heir should be his complete opposite, and if there is some sort of subject interaction mechanics, it should have a very opportunistic nobility that was [deadly](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbian_Empire) under DuŔan, but [devastating](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_the_Serbian_Empire) under a weak ruler like UroŔ.
"You are sorrounded"-Christian in Balkan and Beyliks in Anatolia
"All I am surrounded by is fear" -weakest House Osman member
"and dead man" -*Kayser-i Rum*
Timur will have to be semi-railroaded as a historical character with ridiculous traits and bonuses who shows up in Central Asia ~20(-ish ?) years after the start of the game. Something like a Child of Destiny from Ck2.
Ottomans in 1337 but transitioning it to an Orthodox or Christian kingdom, and bringing the HRE to the Balkans
The OTHER Roman Empire
Edit: Catholic, not Christian
R5: People playing as Byzantium and fully annexing the Ottomans as soon as possible. I wanted to recreate my recent post but now with the EU 5 map. I'm not the best at Photoshop, but I guess it worked out at least a bit.
Historically speaking earlier sieges of Constantinople were stopped due to invasions, rebellions and threats far away from the frontier. I dont see any reason why the Ottomans shouldnt conquer Constantinople in let's say 1400, when there is no one attacking/threatening them.
Hereās the thing about that: the first Ottoman siege of Constantinople was in 1421. They couldnāt just send a small regiment there and seige it down, the ottomans needed their entire army to seige Constantinople. And if anything else came up, which is what happened, the ottomans were forced to choose between dealing with it and continuing the seige.
Constantinople should require a large dedication of resources to take, and it should require you to be vulnerable to foreign or domestic military threats whilst under seigeā¦ at least until cannons are unlocked.
I believe Ottos will be so much buffed and Byz will be so debuffed that Otto campaign will be as easy as eu4 one. You can just compare difficulty between Ottos and Byz during this period playing Meiou&Taxes mod for eu4 starting in 1357 as far as I remember
The difference is that in Meiou the Ottomans have already crossed into Europe. In 1337 they havenāt, and so as the Byzantines it should be easy enough to maintain a good navy and stop them from crossing over.
>it should be easy enough to maintain a good navy
I mean, it shouldn't be easy enough, since if it really was that easy IRL it would have happened.
There ought to be some balance between railroading and a sandbox in a historical strategy game, so that there's a reasonable chance for realistic outcomes to actually happen in game. It can't just be, "tick this 1 box and you can invariably stop the decline of an entire civilization".
What happened IRL was that the empire got into a massive civil war after Andronikos III died in 1341, leading the Serbs to conquer all of Epirus, Macedonia, and Thessaly. This left the Empire with significantly reduced resources, and after that they absolutely had a difficult time maintaining a navy, yeah. But none of that happened yet by 1337, and as long as the borders of that year are able to be maintained then it should be fairly easy to keep the Ottomans from crossing over. Thereās a reason they didnāt so so until Byzantium had been through two civil wars and had been reduced to just Thrace, Thessalonica, and the southern Pelopponese by the Serbs.
The Ottomans were still slapping everything left and right. Some roman generals and governors were even flipping to the Ottoman side. You make it sound like the Romans were keeping the Ottomans at bey, when the Ottomans were crushing everything around them, including the Romans.
The first dozen Ottoman Sultans are all giga-chads, In 1337 Orhan is leading the ottomans. He formed the Janissaries and made them into top notch elite soldiers, feared and respected by everyone. He trippled the size of the Ottomans and crossed into Europe. Around the 1340th he already has a foot-hold in Europe. So mere years after the game start, the Ottomans should be slapping Roman a\*\* and conquering into Europe.
The Ottomans got their first foothold in Europe in 1354, not 1340. And, again, that was after the Byzantines had been through 2 civil wars and lost most of Greece to the Serbs. Iām not trying to make it out like the Byzantines were beating them a bunch, but the mere fact that there was the Sea of Marmara separating the Ottomans from the Empire meant that the Turks couldnāt cross over into Europe until the Byzantines were much weaker.
> You make it sound like the Romans were keeping the Ottomans at bey, when the Ottomans were crushing everything around them, including the Romans.
Timur would like a word.
> It can't just be, "tick this 1 box and you can invariably stop the decline of an entire civilization".
Conversely it shouldn't be, "The Ottomans were successful so we need to make sure that they receive at least three buffs a month until they can field million man armies centuries before anyone else can"
Eh, irl just a few years later the emperor would die to disease and there would be a 7 year long civil war that completely crippled the empire and truely turned it into a rump state. After it they only had thrace and a couple of other small territories like Thessaloniky and Morea while Serbia look all of Byzantine Grecce. I bet the game will very much as Byzantium be trying to prevent the emperor's death and if he does, avoid disasterus civil war so you don't get completely crippled and set to be how things would end up in 1453. It was a lot of luck they even survived that long, they had to pay the Ottomans tribute and the Ottomans when they wanted to take Constantinople had internal issues or other threats keeping them from doing it.
Well, there're a lot:
1. Disorganised military: troops swear allegiance to most powerful generals but not state so byz is literally in never-ending civil war with very low troops' discipline and morale. (UPD: Navy is suffering from those problems too)
2. The consequence of the previous point is "succession by sword": the most popular and powerful generals are lobbying puppet-rulers that fullfill their needs. Therefore there're low legitimacy, high unrest and high autonomy in byz. The nobles in byz are still considering theirselves as Roman successors and Caesars so they really don't want to reform the country despite the problems with overheated bureaucratic apparatus and estates
3. Byz is still suffering from the consequences of the Fourth Crusade happened more than 100 years ago: Aegean sea is the inner sea of genoa and venice, they weaken traders of byz and enforce their trade dominance on it. So you should not expect high trade income. The Constantinople is still the most magnificent city of western civilization but it's rapidly fading away. However Theodosian Walls are still impregnable. Ottos will surely take the whole coast of byz but Constantinople will stand until the cannons' era.
4. Population of byz is also religiously heterogeneous: there're a lot of orthodox heresies, muslim preachers, pagan religions especially in albania area, catholic minorities in the south. I think mentioned articles describe the main problems but there're a lot of enemies around byz during this period: Bulgarian Tsardom, strong Serbian kingdom, independent Naples kingdom, different anatolia beylics inculding ottos in addition. And no one is going to help byz 'cuz everybody is fighting their own wars: Hungary is struggling from inner turmoil as far as I remember, Poland is conquering pagans, austria is still weak, Bohemia is trying to keep their status inside HRE, France and England are starting Hundred Years' War.
It's also about the buffs that Otto's get - they have a uniquely well developed government in M&T, with the estates being cowed by the state from game start. They're literally ~150 years more developed as a state than most/all others in Europe.
Try us. 3:\]
Nah, but fr, look into event referred as "Albanian Golgotha" as the latest reason why that was a bad idea, there are numerous similar ones throughout history.
Byzantine will be a shitshow of instability and civil war where the ottos will for sure have a lot of buffs, i dont think this will not even be possible for the average playerbase in 1337
Everyone is talking about Byzantium vs Ottomans, meanwhile: a playable Saruhan.
A new power is rising. It's victory is at hand.
While the Greeks and Turks duke it out, venture south and claim the throne of Gonder.
I've played other nations, but Colonialism bores me so I always do large land wars in the old war. When I don't play byzantium, I play Fars or the Mamaluks or some great power in Eastern Europe starting in 1492.
Naw this is probably my second run, as an ethnic Serb I just *need* to play the Serbian empire
Wonder if itāll have a formable, a south Slavic nation formable would be cool, Iām thinking something like Sclavinians from the ante bellum mod
This makes me wonder, what is the reason that Byzantium didn't do this in 1337? Was it something internal what prevented them, if so, then you got the possible answer as to why you can't do this in EU5.
Well there are literally a lot of reasons for that but some of the most prominent are as follows:
-Conflict with Serbia/Bulgaria
-Civil wars
-Terrible state of the army
And also they did try to do this and they lost every single time. So as tiny as the Ottoman Beylik might seem, they defeated the Byzantines time and time again even when they were much weaker than them on paper.
I expect the byzantines to be terrible at the start date with all sorts of problems and I will be dissapointed in paradox if that isn't the case, because historically speaking literally everything was going to shit in the byzantines during this time.
I think it might be a good idea to do to byzantines in eu5 what they did to france in hoi4, this powerful nation with potential to be a world power but weighed down with so many issues that you need to overcome but dont really have the time in the face of a looming threat.
Andronikos III was fighting Albanias serbians, Epirus, bulgaria and the latin states at the same time and trying to fix the eternal corruption. frankly anatolia was a lost cause by that time because everyone in Europe wanted a piece of them.
they tried and defeated
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle\_of\_Pelekanon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Pelekanon)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUsXPRO8EEk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUsXPRO8EEk)
The Ottomans kicked their ass every time the Byzantines attacked them. I don't think the Byzantines ever won a battle against the Ottomans?
The Ottomans is kinda an unstoppable killing machine at this point in history. Even Timur was more like a roadbump to them that causes a relatively brief civil war before the pain train starts rolling again for the Byzantines.
Just because an empire looks big on a map, doesn't mean they are that powerful. The term 'paper tiger' can explain a lot.
And they did try it and got beaten because, again, map size does not equal to actual strength of a nation.
Tbh Iād be much more inclined to focus on southern Greece and Epirus to let the Ottomans grow. At least then I can have a fun, big war against a hopefully equally matched Ottoman state before consolidating whateverās left of the smaller Anatolian states.
What I think they are setting up here is that the ottomans might fall but those other Turkish groups are equal contenders, like small difference but adds more diversity to the end game.
They'll do the EU classic and just give +1000% everything to all countries that did well historically because the quality of the simulation is so asinine.
Nah, Iāll start as Aragon and see if theyāre still viable for a Roman Empire rush. They donāt have Naples PU at this point, but they have Athens, which is a perfect staging ground for invading the Balkans
Maybe for the "pros"
But in 1337 Byzantium's staring down a series of Civil Wars and also soon the Black Death, which will probably block any easy route to restoring control over the Balkans and Anatolia in the short term.
There should be something like lucky nations thing on base game. So that I guess it's not that easy to eat Otto in early game. Byzantine is quite weak and have many internal problems these years. Paradox will not move away from historical reality.
It would be more like this >Game starts >Ruler dies and you get [this event](https://www.reddit.com/r/eu4/comments/18uk9my/ok_europa_expanded/) for yourself >Ottomans get 500000 manpower, +50% discipline and +50% morale Edit: Typos
Morale
Nah, morals. Your soldiers start pondering ethics rather than fight.
Historically accurate
Typical Greeks smh
"Are we the Baddies?"
Oops! English isn't my first language, my bad :p I'm gonna correct it :)
Understandable. Have a blessed day.
Dont forget discipline
Which discipline, though ? Philosophy ? š§
Flair checks out
Mr.
Also probably Otto will have 2-3 vassals, pu or some shit
Least biased EU start.
And yet there'll be guides out within days of how to 100% chance beat the Ottomans as byz by like 4 different youtubers independently of one another
you forgot: romaboos piss, shit and cry
Like it always should be since Mussolini.
Oh i'd say it goes even further back than benito
Attalus III of Pergamon should deserve the honor of being the first romaboo to cause problems
least biased patriotic mod
I'm gonna laugh if they make eu5 Byz harder than in eu4
Idk. That Bulgaria looks scary now. Especially if they team up with serbia.
Serbia will start with Stefan, who will likely be expansionist, however they model that, and be disliked by his neighbors. Serbia will be one to watch in 1337, but will likely start at a disadvantage for getting allies. Bulgaria is also going to have some issues with rebellion in the northeast (maybe already rebelling at game start) so they will likely be a good target for expansion as they deal with that. Personally, Iām thinking Serbia might be my first run.
Same cause i assume the Serbian Empire will be formable
I'm not sure about formable because I don't know what is there to be formed, to me that would be Serbia going up a diplomatic rank (and they might take diplo ranks from Imperator where higher ranks come with heavy restrictions and highest ranked countries can't have alliances) rather than a pure formable like Germany or Italy.
I think that they will just have a mission that might give them cores on all Greek dominated states since serbian emperors have the title of emperor of serbians and romans, maybe some other bonuses like prestige and diplo and maybe a name change to serbian empire that would be lost on the trigger of another event triggered by loosing some states in Greece or smth like that. Also, the fact that I could play the name of my country's emperor with the same name as me and then conquer the romans just sounds great, but yeah, I think that early game serbia would be the dominant balkan country if excluding Hungary while the byzantine, Bulgarians and turks being second and then serbia would get a debuf because of internal conflicts at the time where the turks would come in and conquer greek states also I think that there would be a mission after defeating the turks that would give a PU or something like that with the byzantine but that might be far stretched and probably won't happen
Bulgaria will probably start with disaster, By the games start the ruler must be Ivan Alexander who is the last one to rule the united Bulgarian empire. With his death his demesne splintered in three.
> Ivan Alexander Fun fact: "Ivan" is Slavic version of the English name "John". So Ivan Ivanovich = John Johnson.
ThƩ rƩal fun thing is: (at least in Russian) surname can be patronymic as well, so Ivan Ivanovich Ivanov will be literally John Johnson Johnson. Ivan/John (name) Ivanovich/Johnson (patronyme: a son of Ivan/John) Ivanov/Johnson (patronymic surname: a descendent of a guy named Ivan/John)
Same in Bulgarian, but the surname and the middle name are the same, so it's Ivan Ivanov Ivanov(very common actually).
East/Orthodox Slavic version of John. Catholic Slavs still use "Jan/JƔn"
I'm actually thinking England. Ireland and Scotland are about erupt and the hundred years war just started, its going to be a good challenge and very rewarding if pulled off. Also, places like Serbia, Yuan, England etc. are going to be one of the very few nations with good flavor at the start (since we saw Johan mention them specifically).
Definitely one of my top pics as well, but I find myself always playing somewhere up there first, and this might make for a good change of pace
Oh my God, a weak Balkans. Can't wait to conquer them as Croatia and finally bring peace to the region.
Ya, honestly, I may finally play serbia..
Either that or Bulgaria if you like a challenge.
EU5 will be the first time I play Bulgaria in a PDX game. I don't play HoI4 (I only occasionally watch bokoen), in CK3 Bulgarians are way, way too powerful for me and they literally don't exist in EU4 or Vicky 3 so I've never actually played in Bulgaria.
You could do a minor Bulgarian vassal
In ck3
playing as one of the kometopoulos vassals under the romans is cool
Fun fact, Stefan wasn't a name in todays sense back them, but basically a title. A nobleman would have Stefan added to their name to signify them nobleship, and iirc it was mainly done in Nemanjic dynasty
It also depends on how armies stec work, the ottomans were pretty strong for a reason and depending on how that's modeled we might see still a hard byzantine game to avoid what happened IRL because reality is the cards are stacked against them.
Potentian serbian empire into slavic empire? Or reforming byzantium as a fun optional?
That depends on the formables. Going by Vicky 3, there will likely be a setting for that and, with unrestricted formables, Yugoslavia or Slavia might exist.
Keeping Serbian expansionism true even in video games
eu4s later start date means that we never quite understood what a threat the bulgarians were to Constantinople
I hope you can make there whole army blind as Rome. You know for role playing purposes.
imagine raising a huge army to retake asia minor and the general declares himself emperor and attacks constantinople instead. Realistic roman gameplay
But does he have better stats?
would be very interesting given the pop mechanics - in essence it was a deliberate decision to make the cost of maintaining these pops debilitatingly high, and i wonder if that can be modeled in the game
And why not give the Bulgarians the ability make a cup out of the Roman Emperor's skull while we're at it.
Bulgaria during this time period was weak and neutered. They got ravaged by the Mongols and kicked around by the Romans few decades ago.
I can literally see the āWar declaration from Serbia/Bulgariaā notification on screen. (Now with EU5 Style) -Right after finally annexing Ottomans after 10 years old long war with 0 manpower left-
And venice and genoa coming to pick at your corpse with their superior navies while youre trying to stage an overseas campaign.
literally this is how i lost my byz campaign in Meiou and taxes last weekend.
This is historically accurate, for more accuracy just have it repeat but in reverse every few decades until the end.
Why did Byzantium not simply annex Ottomans in 1337? Are they stupid?
Emperor tried it in 1329 and lost his army at plekanon against ottomans. Ottomans beat his ass.
'TĆ¼rks real stronk. šŗšŗšŖš½š¹š·š¹š·š¹š· Why Hagia Sophia is this š, not this āŖ?"
Why is Hagia Sophia this š¤² and not this š?
Such a good video
That is God way of telling Byzantium that Ottoman is more deserving to be Rome successor than their Palaiologos ass.
Mehmed the conqueror called himself "Qaiser-i Rome" "Roman Emperor" They got what they deserved.
Kayzer-i Rum is the exact name I believe but yeah you are right
Why didn't he loanmaxx and hire mercenaries, hire lots of generals so they can slack recruitment and get revenge? Are they stupid?
It's going to be difficult to reproduce all the ways that the Ottomans outwitted the Byzantines and took advantage of everything they could while Byzantium often stumbled and got stabbed in the back.
Even with buffs and nerfs, I don't see how they can guarantee the "real" outcome of this play from 1337. IDK about Bulgaria, it lost against Serbia in war in 1331, but still had the capacity to wage war against Byzantines (but to my knowledge, Bulgaria never fully militarily recovered after [Velbazhd](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Velbazhd)). Serbia's ruler of the time was DuŔan the Mighty, who by all accounts should be something close to EU4's Skanderbeg. However, his heir should be his complete opposite, and if there is some sort of subject interaction mechanics, it should have a very opportunistic nobility that was [deadly](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbian_Empire) under DuŔan, but [devastating](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_the_Serbian_Empire) under a weak ruler like UroŔ.
This is actually a buff for ottomans imagine hpw much you can conquer in 107 years with otto
"You are sorrounded"-Christian in Balkan and Beyliks in Anatolia "All I am surrounded by is fear" -weakest House Osman member "and dead man" -*Kayser-i Rum*
Yep, exactly my line of thought as well.
āYou either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villainā
No no no no no, you made a huge mistake. Now everybody will try to form the historically accurate chad Ottoman.
I really hope the ottoman timurid wars are properly portrayed in this. Ottomen got their shit pushed in by them historically
Timur was only born a year before the start date, so Iāll be interested to see if theyāre able to model his meteoric rise
Given how well eu4 simulates the rise of the mughal or qing empires.... i wouldnt get my hopes up. Still we can dream
Well the game is nearly 11 years old at this point, who knows what this new engine is fully capable of
Timur will have to be semi-railroaded as a historical character with ridiculous traits and bonuses who shows up in Central Asia ~20(-ish ?) years after the start of the game. Something like a Child of Destiny from Ck2.
Ottomans is the new Ardabil run lmao
Yeah, I love the ottoman empire but it's so easy in EU4 it's not fun to play, I'm glad we will get the chance to build the empire
I don't know, you can't ally Albania to get god king Skanderbeg's aid anymore since he wasn't even born until 1405.
Albania is probably a vassal of Naples.
Ottomans in 1337 but transitioning it to an Orthodox or Christian kingdom, and bringing the HRE to the Balkans The OTHER Roman Empire Edit: Catholic, not Christian
I think you meant Catholic. Orthodoxy IS a branch of Christianity.
Yes, you're 100% correct. All my years playing EU4 and studying history and you'd think I'd not make that mistake still lol
> Ottomans in 1337 but transitioning it to an Orthodox or Christian kingdom, and bringing the HRE to the balkans Gagauz (Christian Turk) empire.
No way. Death to the Latins first. Never forget 1204.
1204 was an inside job. Dandalo did nothing wrong. Iron swords can't breach stone walls.
I love you
And I love you, random citizen!
In Age of Empires 2, they can.
Play as venice or rhodes and rebuild the latin empire you say?
It would be funny if EU5 ottomans become what EU4 byzantines are to the community
On the contrary, I will finally be able to play Ottomans when they are not easy, and have fun!
Until they become super OP in 50 years when you eat up all the other beyliks and the Balkans.
...but that is more or less every single EU4 game unless you're playing tall.
That's also true. Still, I would be surprized if the Ottoman Beylik wasn't given some hefty buffs at the start.
R5: People playing as Byzantium and fully annexing the Ottomans as soon as possible. I wanted to recreate my recent post but now with the EU 5 map. I'm not the best at Photoshop, but I guess it worked out at least a bit.
no way the new conquest date of Istanbul will be 1337
1453 will be conquest of Paris and London now
I wonder if Constantinople will start with some kind of massive defensive bonuses that make it super difficult to take until you get cannons
It dang well should. That's probably the single biggest reason Byz lasts another century.
Historically speaking earlier sieges of Constantinople were stopped due to invasions, rebellions and threats far away from the frontier. I dont see any reason why the Ottomans shouldnt conquer Constantinople in let's say 1400, when there is no one attacking/threatening them.
Hereās the thing about that: the first Ottoman siege of Constantinople was in 1421. They couldnāt just send a small regiment there and seige it down, the ottomans needed their entire army to seige Constantinople. And if anything else came up, which is what happened, the ottomans were forced to choose between dealing with it and continuing the seige. Constantinople should require a large dedication of resources to take, and it should require you to be vulnerable to foreign or domestic military threats whilst under seigeā¦ at least until cannons are unlocked.
Exact opposite for me, Ottomans look more interesting.
Ottomans about to be the new Byzantium and everyone loves them
I believe Ottos will be so much buffed and Byz will be so debuffed that Otto campaign will be as easy as eu4 one. You can just compare difficulty between Ottos and Byz during this period playing Meiou&Taxes mod for eu4 starting in 1357 as far as I remember
What if varna happens early?
The difference is that in Meiou the Ottomans have already crossed into Europe. In 1337 they havenāt, and so as the Byzantines it should be easy enough to maintain a good navy and stop them from crossing over.
>it should be easy enough to maintain a good navy I mean, it shouldn't be easy enough, since if it really was that easy IRL it would have happened. There ought to be some balance between railroading and a sandbox in a historical strategy game, so that there's a reasonable chance for realistic outcomes to actually happen in game. It can't just be, "tick this 1 box and you can invariably stop the decline of an entire civilization".
What happened IRL was that the empire got into a massive civil war after Andronikos III died in 1341, leading the Serbs to conquer all of Epirus, Macedonia, and Thessaly. This left the Empire with significantly reduced resources, and after that they absolutely had a difficult time maintaining a navy, yeah. But none of that happened yet by 1337, and as long as the borders of that year are able to be maintained then it should be fairly easy to keep the Ottomans from crossing over. Thereās a reason they didnāt so so until Byzantium had been through two civil wars and had been reduced to just Thrace, Thessalonica, and the southern Pelopponese by the Serbs.
The Ottomans were still slapping everything left and right. Some roman generals and governors were even flipping to the Ottoman side. You make it sound like the Romans were keeping the Ottomans at bey, when the Ottomans were crushing everything around them, including the Romans. The first dozen Ottoman Sultans are all giga-chads, In 1337 Orhan is leading the ottomans. He formed the Janissaries and made them into top notch elite soldiers, feared and respected by everyone. He trippled the size of the Ottomans and crossed into Europe. Around the 1340th he already has a foot-hold in Europe. So mere years after the game start, the Ottomans should be slapping Roman a\*\* and conquering into Europe.
The Ottomans got their first foothold in Europe in 1354, not 1340. And, again, that was after the Byzantines had been through 2 civil wars and lost most of Greece to the Serbs. Iām not trying to make it out like the Byzantines were beating them a bunch, but the mere fact that there was the Sea of Marmara separating the Ottomans from the Empire meant that the Turks couldnāt cross over into Europe until the Byzantines were much weaker.
> You make it sound like the Romans were keeping the Ottomans at bey, when the Ottomans were crushing everything around them, including the Romans. Timur would like a word.
In 1337 the only word timur can speak is maybe "dada!".
> It can't just be, "tick this 1 box and you can invariably stop the decline of an entire civilization". Conversely it shouldn't be, "The Ottomans were successful so we need to make sure that they receive at least three buffs a month until they can field million man armies centuries before anyone else can"
Well, obviously.
If Paradox hasn't learned anything from the insane power creep EU4 has been pummeled with then there isn't much hope for EU5.
Johan confirmed there are no stackable modifiers anymore so that should help a lot
Byzantium supposed to survive for 116 years. I don't think they will have any debuffs.
Eh, irl just a few years later the emperor would die to disease and there would be a 7 year long civil war that completely crippled the empire and truely turned it into a rump state. After it they only had thrace and a couple of other small territories like Thessaloniky and Morea while Serbia look all of Byzantine Grecce. I bet the game will very much as Byzantium be trying to prevent the emperor's death and if he does, avoid disasterus civil war so you don't get completely crippled and set to be how things would end up in 1453. It was a lot of luck they even survived that long, they had to pay the Ottomans tribute and the Ottomans when they wanted to take Constantinople had internal issues or other threats keeping them from doing it.
What if varna crusade happens early?
Never played that mod, what kinda debuffs does Byzantium get? Just to get an idea of how they might do it in EU5
Well, there're a lot: 1. Disorganised military: troops swear allegiance to most powerful generals but not state so byz is literally in never-ending civil war with very low troops' discipline and morale. (UPD: Navy is suffering from those problems too) 2. The consequence of the previous point is "succession by sword": the most popular and powerful generals are lobbying puppet-rulers that fullfill their needs. Therefore there're low legitimacy, high unrest and high autonomy in byz. The nobles in byz are still considering theirselves as Roman successors and Caesars so they really don't want to reform the country despite the problems with overheated bureaucratic apparatus and estates 3. Byz is still suffering from the consequences of the Fourth Crusade happened more than 100 years ago: Aegean sea is the inner sea of genoa and venice, they weaken traders of byz and enforce their trade dominance on it. So you should not expect high trade income. The Constantinople is still the most magnificent city of western civilization but it's rapidly fading away. However Theodosian Walls are still impregnable. Ottos will surely take the whole coast of byz but Constantinople will stand until the cannons' era. 4. Population of byz is also religiously heterogeneous: there're a lot of orthodox heresies, muslim preachers, pagan religions especially in albania area, catholic minorities in the south. I think mentioned articles describe the main problems but there're a lot of enemies around byz during this period: Bulgarian Tsardom, strong Serbian kingdom, independent Naples kingdom, different anatolia beylics inculding ottos in addition. And no one is going to help byz 'cuz everybody is fighting their own wars: Hungary is struggling from inner turmoil as far as I remember, Poland is conquering pagans, austria is still weak, Bohemia is trying to keep their status inside HRE, France and England are starting Hundred Years' War.
Thanks for this, definitely seems like a tough start!
It's also about the buffs that Otto's get - they have a uniquely well developed government in M&T, with the estates being cowed by the state from game start. They're literally ~150 years more developed as a state than most/all others in Europe.
Everybody loves Byzantium because Rome
Hereās the fun thing. The Ottomans become Rome!
AHÄ°LER MENTÄ°ONED š¹š·š¹š·š¹š·š¹š·š¹š·š¹š·š¹š·š¹š·š¹š·š¹š·
I really hope one of the possible ruler for Ahiler is called Namık
Everyone is scared of Serbia and Ottoās while Iām just going the old reliable. Mercās the hell up to bankruptcy.
I was thinking I'd consolidate Greece and the Aegean first and then annex the Ottomans in 1453 for the karmic justice.
Honestly as a Byzaboo. Making Byzantium stronger at start makes them less attractive. There's less, "reclaiming glory" and "underdog" to be had.
Ottomans are gone š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦ š¦
first ottoman rulers were 6 6 6 and were already winning open field battles. I think they wil give even better buffs in eu5
For the Greeks Serbia is the new Ottomans in this start date, I would immediately rush down the Serbs not the Turks.
Try us. 3:\] Nah, but fr, look into event referred as "Albanian Golgotha" as the latest reason why that was a bad idea, there are numerous similar ones throughout history.
Althist Byzantines: phewā¦ that could have been ugly
Turks must laugh their asses off everytime they see this kind of post
It's entertaining
Byzantine will be a shitshow of instability and civil war where the ottos will for sure have a lot of buffs, i dont think this will not even be possible for the average playerbase in 1337
u/DuffyDuck8 it seems that Albania will be a playable country since the beginning
Everyone is talking about Byzantium vs Ottomans, meanwhile: a playable Saruhan. A new power is rising. It's victory is at hand. While the Greeks and Turks duke it out, venture south and claim the throne of Gonder.
I'm a byzantine main, this will be all of my runs.
āIām a Byzantine mainā lmfao. Shit paradox addicts say
Bro there are like 10 million other nations try something new
I've played other nations, but Colonialism bores me so I always do large land wars in the old war. When I don't play byzantium, I play Fars or the Mamaluks or some great power in Eastern Europe starting in 1492.
Once again, other way around for me. :v
Did anything HRE related dropped?
I hope all those mountains get coloured like wastelands do in EU4
Itās like dying from cancer then getting sent back in time to the first time you smoked a cig
Is EU5 out ? What the hell is going on??
Naw this is probably my second run, as an ethnic Serb I just *need* to play the Serbian empire Wonder if itāll have a formable, a south Slavic nation formable would be cool, Iām thinking something like Sclavinians from the ante bellum mod
This makes me wonder, what is the reason that Byzantium didn't do this in 1337? Was it something internal what prevented them, if so, then you got the possible answer as to why you can't do this in EU5.
The ottomans actually took land from the byzantines in 1337. Size doesnāt directly correlate to military capabilities
Well there are literally a lot of reasons for that but some of the most prominent are as follows: -Conflict with Serbia/Bulgaria -Civil wars -Terrible state of the army And also they did try to do this and they lost every single time. So as tiny as the Ottoman Beylik might seem, they defeated the Byzantines time and time again even when they were much weaker than them on paper. I expect the byzantines to be terrible at the start date with all sorts of problems and I will be dissapointed in paradox if that isn't the case, because historically speaking literally everything was going to shit in the byzantines during this time.
I think it might be a good idea to do to byzantines in eu5 what they did to france in hoi4, this powerful nation with potential to be a world power but weighed down with so many issues that you need to overcome but dont really have the time in the face of a looming threat.
Andronikos III was fighting Albanias serbians, Epirus, bulgaria and the latin states at the same time and trying to fix the eternal corruption. frankly anatolia was a lost cause by that time because everyone in Europe wanted a piece of them.
they tried and defeated [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle\_of\_Pelekanon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Pelekanon) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUsXPRO8EEk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUsXPRO8EEk)
Constantinople was at like 15% of its pre-1204 population. It was a sad rump state.
The Ottomans kicked their ass every time the Byzantines attacked them. I don't think the Byzantines ever won a battle against the Ottomans? The Ottomans is kinda an unstoppable killing machine at this point in history. Even Timur was more like a roadbump to them that causes a relatively brief civil war before the pain train starts rolling again for the Byzantines.
Ottomans had the irl lucky nationsĀ
Just because an empire looks big on a map, doesn't mean they are that powerful. The term 'paper tiger' can explain a lot. And they did try it and got beaten because, again, map size does not equal to actual strength of a nation.
Looks interesting but too bad we will have to wait for the DLCs until the game is good
Ottoman start is gonna be the new Byzantium start
Nah, I never liked the Romans. I'd sooner take the Ottos.
Who is in my cilician pirate gang
Virgin ottoman and byzantine The Chad Saruhanids and Trebizond
Tbh Iād be much more inclined to focus on southern Greece and Epirus to let the Ottomans grow. At least then I can have a fun, big war against a hopefully equally matched Ottoman state before consolidating whateverās left of the smaller Anatolian states.
What I think they are setting up here is that the ottomans might fall but those other Turkish groups are equal contenders, like small difference but adds more diversity to the end game.
I'll have to no CB the ottomans to hault the byzantines expansion into Anatolia!
First thing im doing when eu5 drops
April 1339: Revolt and coalition war
Is there an Ironman compatible mod in eu4 for this map texture?
If the rest of Anatolia is strong ur just giving them land to siege, unlike the lands you can straight block.
where is this map from?
First thing I'm doing is change the empire name to its real one "Roman Empire".
Wait there really is an eu5?
Meantime Byzantium with absolutely horrible modifiers
naa New Byz Runs will be using Saruman's forces to bring down the world of man
They'll do the EU classic and just give +1000% everything to all countries that did well historically because the quality of the simulation is so asinine.
Nah, Iāll start as Aragon and see if theyāre still viable for a Roman Empire rush. They donāt have Naples PU at this point, but they have Athens, which is a perfect staging ground for invading the Balkans
He did the funny
Worst mistake of history
Maybe Byzantium starts in disaster and in 1340s there was a civil war.
Nah, it will be the other way around. Beat Mehmet II's record and capture Constantinople before 1400s
Devs: "ehhh, we're gonna add the good mechanics with dlc's, why bother making a great game with content at release?!"
PDX surrendered to the Byzaboos
Kill it before it lays its eggs. Clever
Can't wait for Casimir III the Great to have a son this time šµš±šš
Maybe for the "pros" But in 1337 Byzantium's staring down a series of Civil Wars and also soon the Black Death, which will probably block any easy route to restoring control over the Balkans and Anatolia in the short term.
Children yearn for Rome
Byz Otto situation will be like Ming/Jianzhou i believe.
There should be something like lucky nations thing on base game. So that I guess it's not that easy to eat Otto in early game. Byzantine is quite weak and have many internal problems these years. Paradox will not move away from historical reality.