Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries
Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Europa Universalis IV 82777 EUIV: Bug Reports 1349 EUIV: Suggestions 19382 EUIV: Technical Support 6898 EUIV: FAQ & Strategy Guides 241 EUIV: AAR's, Let's Plays, and Fan Fiction EU IV: Alternate History Short Story Contest Contr 30
Previous dev diary Next dev diary
Show only dev responses

EU4 - Development Diary - 3rd of October 2017

Good day all, today is a very exciting Tuesday, as we'll be coming to the conclusion of our EU4 Dev Clash Multiplayer Campaign, complete with trophies and congratulations to the winners and commiserations to those who did not make it to the Top 3. We'll be live over at our twitch page at the usual time of 1500 CEST.

Until then though, let's cover a few more changes we have in store in the upcoming Persia Update and it's accompanying expansion. Last week we covered changes over in Persia, so today let's look over towards Anatolia.

Firstly, let's talk the Ottoman Government. This recently introduced government type is a strong boon to the Ottoman nation, but as of the Persia Update it will be attainable for other nations too via the decision to Restore the Sultanate of Rûm.

decision.jpg


Any ambitious Turkish nation can, after wiping tactfully removing Ottomans and Byzantium from the map, take the decision to form Rûm. The requirements will also ask that they hold key provinces in the region. This will grant their nation a new name, flag, colour and National Ideas for their Sultanate of Rûm.

Rum.jpg


RUM_ideas = {
Traditions = {
manpower_recovery_speed = 0.2
land_morale = 0.1
}
Ambition= {
land_forcelimit_modifier = 0.25
}
trigger = {
tag = RUM
}
free = yes

rum_abul_fath = {
discipline = 0.05
}
"We have enemies in all directions making a strong army is a necessity for a state such as ours. Fortunately we are not a weak people. From the irregular Gazis and the Akinci raiders to the Sipahis of the Ottoman Empire the world have come to know the military might of the Turkish people. Let us build an army for an Empire, taking inspiration from wherever military competence can be found while also drawing from the strengths and experiences of those that came before us."

rum_king_of_the_east_and_west = {
core_creation = -0.20
num_accepted_cultures = 1
}
"Since the fall of Rûm the Turkish people have been divided, serving minor beys from the bosphorus to the mountains of Kurdistan. It was our duty to restore the legacy of the Seljuk Sultans of Rûm and unite the Anatolian Turks. Our ambition however must be much higher than that. The Seljuk Turks once ruled one of the greatest empires known to man, it is evident to anyone who sees our empire that the restoration of this state is now our destiny, as is the reclamation of the Roman lands that were once ruled from what is now our heartland."

rum_shahanshah = {
legitimacy = 1
}
"Rûm was not only an Anatolian state but also one that strongly honored the Persian traditions of kingship. Especially as Persia itself fell to Mongol conquerors. Under the sultans before us Persianate culture blossomed and Persian poets and scholars found patronage. Men such as Najm-al-Din Razi, Qane'i Tusi, Baha'-al-Din Walad and Rumi himself made their homes under Rûm’s protection and the Sultans themselves were versed in Persian literature and poetry.\nWe must cherish our Persian legacy as well as our Turkish and aspire to make our homeland a paragon of Persianate culture, the foremost of Islamic nations."

rum_sultan_of_rum = {
tolerance_heathen = 3
}
"The Sultans of Rûm ruled over the people of Anatolia, Muslims and Christians. It was during their reign that Islam became the dominant religion in the region but their policies accepted all subjects. Often inviting even Christians from the nearby lands to seek out the domain of Rûm. We would do well to learn from their example."

rum_sulan_al_bahrayn = {
naval_maintenance_modifier = -0.15
}
"Like the Rûm sultans of the past we must establish a strong and durable navy that can withstand both Christian pirates and the fleets of other Muslims. The ability to control and expand over the Mediterranean and protect our coastlines is going to be one of the main challenges of our Empire."

rum_sultan_al_muazzam = {
build_cost = -0.15
}
"The greatest of Sultans require grand monuments and buildings. Let us make the lands of Rûm the envy of the Islamic world, with mosques, madrasas, caravanserai, gardens, canals and palaces unlike any other. Through architectural patronage we can create an enduring and unique legacy for our dynasty."

rum_protector_of_dar_al_islam = {
global_heretic_missionary_strength = 0.03
}
"Our predecessors were always ready to defend the righteous and to combat the spread of heretical sects. So too must we do our utmost to promote the pure forms of religious worship and limit the the influence of heretical rulers who would otherwise try to seduce and mislead the faithful."
}
Click to expand...

So with Ottoman Government attainable, we also have some new toys for them to play with.

As part of the accompanying expansion, the Ottoman Government will have access to Pashas and Janissaries

Firstly Pashas. In States, a nation with Ottoman Government can assign a Pasha. This will reduce unrest and the State maintenance cost for those provinces while also raising the cost of new buildings and units from them. This will prove useful in keeping costs and revolts down in provinces far from the capital, however revoking a Pasha will result in increased unrest for 10 years.

pasha.jpg


Janissaries on the other hand, have seen some changes. No longer a countrywide boon for all units, the Janissaries are now special elite units. These can be recruited for a set cost of 50MIL from a given state. For every 10 development of heathen-faith land in a state, 1 Janissary unit will be spawned, making high-development concentrations of wrong-religion land desirable . These special units cost twice as much to reinforce but are able to withstand damage much better, taking 10% less shock and fire damage in battle. Similarly, the Janissary Decadence disaster has been altered, now to fire if a nation relies too heavily on Janissaries relative to their forcelimit.

You know I think it's not fair that we look so much at the Ottomans. For the upcoming Persia Update, it's actually the Mamluks who start in 1444 with higher development between the two. We'll take a look at what we have in store for them but that'll have to wait for next week, as there are trophies to polish for now.

See you next week!
 
Sort by date Sort by reaction score
@DDRJake What do u mean by trophies for polish ? Something same scale like with Persia ? Something with golden liberty, better sejm and szlachta, or just achievments :p?
By the way, i think ottoman changes are good, well could be better but the way is good, because their army were historically more of "quantity" than quality, Jannisaries were elite not because of being well equipped(they've got muskets in 1566, not very quick, bow jatagan and spear aren't really impressive for elite) in but because of harsh training from young ages connected with fanatical faith education in order to create loyal soldiers. Well but my point is they shouldn't be more expensive than normal soldiers, i think it should just replenish slower than normal units (based on dhimmi influence maybe or infidel mil development, more, better) or maybe taking all of raze loots for themselves, and discipline is important for Jannisaries, this formation was really disciplined, their strength came from discipline.

And yea Ottomans were op multiplayer, killing coalition of bohemia muscovy hungary and austria alone early game, good this bonus will be taken off the game, but i think jannisaries needs discipline bonuses anyway, no damage.
Pashas are amazing part and very accuracy to Ottoman, sad they are only for states.
 
Tavior said:
Just want to clarify something about taking non-core land vs taking land that you have core claim on.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the explanation but I literally meant "free cores from missions". I know missions give claims only but maybe they'll do something special for Ottomans.
I still can't believe how hard Ottomans are hammered. We will need lots of extra admin points to core (not just because of the removal of the Anatolian cores but also because of the reduced core-creation cost modifier from ideas) and military points for janissaries (not sure if anyone bothers to raise them, though).
This is, unfortunately, another example of an attempt to fix a problem by creating another one. If the institutions mechanic is fixed or at least balanced better as it was mentioned by many people, Ottomans would not be on par with Europe in technology late game. Therefore, the balance of power would change against Ottos and we would more likely see an Ottoman decline in power and land which would satisfy everyone including Ottoman haters (maybe not :confused:).
 
correctamundo said:
Sooo? So they should have damage reduction and damage reduction then?
Click to expand...
Well lets say they have 5% discipline and 10% damage reduction.

That'd math out to 20% infantry combat. They'd deal 5% more damage, take -15% damage.

Meaning Janissaries would only be on par with Prussian/Swedish infantry

Honestly the big problem I have with Janissaries is that you're paying 2x reinforce for what other countries will get vanilla. How do you make the 2x reinforce worth it?
 
harezmi said:
Thank you for the explanation but I literally meant "free cores from missions". I know missions give claims only but maybe they'll do something special for Ottomans.
I still can't believe how hard Ottomans are hammered. We will need lots of extra admin points to core (not just because of the removal of the Anatolian cores but also because of the reduced core-creation cost modifier from ideas) and military points for janissaries (not sure if anyone bothers to raise them, though).
This is, unfortunately, another example of an attempt to fix a problem by creating another one. If the institutions mechanic is fixed or at least balanced better as it was mentioned by many people, Ottomans would not be on par with Europe in technology late game. Therefore, the balance of power would change against Ottos and we would more likely see an Ottoman decline in power and land which would satisfy everyone including Ottoman haters (maybe not :confused:).
Click to expand...

Well right now they have been in a strong position for a long long time now.

I only had like maybe 1 game where they fell apart and every other time they just pick quantity, argh really? I often found myself having to take pro-aggressive stance against them to just slow them down even if I can't afford to.

Most of my end-game plans usually boil down two things. Take more land/trade so I can grow quicker and help AI out against Ottoman aggressive wars. There was even one point where I sign an alliance with a tag under attack by Ottoman barely 2 month after truce between me and Ottoman. I jump in and forced them back into a corner where they had to spam Mercs. Then they still declared a third war afterward the second one. I just quit the game at that point as it was no longer fun.

I agree that adding Janissaries in this manner was weird. Why not make it based on corruption like they did with Manchu? Oh well.


TL;DR: Same end-game gets old pretty fast and Ottoman nerf was badly need.
 
Bebou said:
....Wow Ottos got hit hard...I never thought I would utter these words in a EU4 forum but...ugh...maybe the Ottos got hit too hard? I mean I have to agree with some of the things said in previous posts. The Jannisaries were feared for a reason and were absolutely an elite fighting force for the period. At this point looking at the new mechanic, the streltsy are a much cheaper and better option. You click a button every so often and bam a fighting force is ready for you, for free.

Don't get me wrong I LOVE the new mechanic of recruiting them separately from regular troops, and having the Jannisary bonus apply to the entire Ottoman army of 200k+ was completely ridiculous however, if they are going to cost this much they are simply not worth it.

In my opinion the Jannisaries should deffo have more modifiers, like more discipline and morale however, be more expensive to reinforce given that they were formed from Christian boys. Furthermore, you should only be able to recruit them from conquered Christian lands/states. This would make them both strong and limited. I also liked the idea of the disaster firing if they make up more than a certain percentage of your army. It should help the Ottomans scale better into the late game (keeping the Jannissaries permanently) however, this is ONLY IF they receive more battle modifiers such as increased discipline and morale. As they are now they are just not worth the effort or the mil points.

The only other alternative is making Jannisaries an age bonus although that seems like very temporary thing and perhaps not as fun or interactive.
Click to expand...
early game you have extra mil mp which you use to level some cities to 20, now youll build up some jannisaries
 
MateuszNH said:
@DDRJake
By the way, i think ottoman changes are good, well could be better but the way is good, because their army were historically more of "quantity" than quality,

And yea Ottomans were op multiplayer, killing coalition of bohemia muscovy hungary and austria alone early game, good this bonus will be taken off the game, but i think jannisaries needs discipline bonuses anyway, no damage.
Pashas are amazing part and very accuracy to Ottoman, sad they are only for states.
Click to expand...
yaaay historically more quantity than quality thats why ottomans fought against 15 european countries in same war? ottomans didnt take soldier from arabians, armenians etc. but they had armies of millions because back in these days %99 of world population was turkish you must be a very smart guy
and about coalition thing i should say something there is dozens of examples in history so ottomans were able to defeat such european coalitions and it must be represented in game also
 
JonSnow said:
yaaay historically more quantity than quality thats why ottomans fought against 15 european countries in same war? ottomans didnt take soldier from arabians, armenians etc. but they had armies of millions because back in these days %99 of world population was turkish you must be a very smart guy
and about coalition thing i should say something there is dozens of examples in history so ottomans were able to defeat such european coalitions and it must be represented in game also
Click to expand...

Don't be surprised when your one sheet of money (20 euros) worth more than three sheets of money (three 5 euros).

Battle of Varna

The mixed Papal army was composed mainly of Hungarian, Polish, Bohemian (whose combined armies numbered 15,000) and Wallachian (7,000)[4] forces, with smaller detachments of Czechs, Papal knights, Teutonic Knights, Bosnians, Croatians, Bulgarians, Lithuanians and Ruthenians (Ukrainians).

...Late on November 9, a large Ottoman army of around 50,000 men approached Varna from the west.
Click to expand...
 
Haydar said:
Don't be surprised when your one sheet of money (20 euros) worth more than three sheets of money (three 5 euros).

Battle of Varna
Click to expand...
if you want to believe these western historicans which were as romantic as you and others in this forum, i cant argue that but i cant believe that kingdom of england+kingdom of france+kingdom of hungary+wallachia+bulgarian 'empire'+holy roman 'empire'+poland+bohemia+navarra+spain+genoa+venice+knights of order deployed 7.500 soldiers as a crusader army in nicopolis ps:most famous and greatest commanders and knights were in nicopolis too but if you believe the western historicans i cant argue as a say
and its not a good place to argue that have a nice day
 
JonSnow said:
if you want to believe these western historicans which were as romantic as you and others in this forum, i cant argue that but i cant believe that kingdom of england+kingdom of france+kingdom of hungary+wallachia+bulgarian 'empire'+holy roman 'empire'+poland+bohemia+navarra+spain+genoa+venice+knights of order deployed 7.500 soldiers as a crusader army in nicopolis ps:most famous and greatest commanders and knights were in nicopolis too but if you believe the western historicans i cant argue as a say
and its not a good place to argue that have a nice day
Click to expand...
It was the nature of historiography in the West. The Ottoman armies were almost always depicted as an innumerable horde and western historians tended to exaggerate their size in numbers. They were the bad guys after all. Fortunately, modern historiography is more rational than it used to be.
 
grand_Turk said:
It was the nature of historiography in the West. The Ottoman armies were almost always depicted as an innumerable horde and western historians tended to exaggerate their size in numbers. They were the bad guys after all. Fortunately, modern historiography is more rational than it used to be.
Click to expand...

With all due respect, it isn't like Turkish historians are more realistic than western ones. There are a number of things I've read from Turkish sources that are just as hilariously unbelievable.

Example 1 Death of Sultan Murad. In western/south european version the Serb knights made their way to the camp either through battle or under the pretext of surrender and there one of them kills Murad, whilst in the Turkish version, Murad was apparently walking around the battle field on his own after the battle and there a knight pretending to be dead jumped up and killed him...Yes because a Sultan would be wandering around a battle field without any protection...or wandering around there at all for that matter.

Example 2 the Battle of Ankara vs Timurids, I've heard claims that the Turks believe that Timur brought an army of 400k....which is ridiculous in every single possible sense of the time.

Truth be told exaggerating numbers when losing or winning has happened around all 4 corners of the world by practically every people imaginable and was done for a variety of reasons, including saving face, making yourself seem better than you are, inability to estimate or simple awe coupled with the former etc etc. Still claiming that western sources are somehow worse than Turkish sources is pretty hilarious. I think it safe to assume that the Turks brought about 150k to Vienna and still lost to a force practically 2/3 or half their size. Not to mention the beating they received from Eugene of Savoy, who again only commanded half the number of men and still won, and won hard.

On topic, nobody is disputing that Jannisaries were an elite fighting force, or at least they shouldn't be, but to say that the Ottomans didn't often have an advantage in numbers is silly. Also, just fyi, when sources like wikipedia say that certain countries were a part of certain wars, that does not mean they sent their entire armies to fight. It means they usually sent a detachment of 50-200 knights or something like that. So to the people who are saying that historically the Ottomans defeated huge coalitions, they were never coalitions which included every country's entire army, given that this would leave them open to being eaten by their European neighbors.
 
Vienna isn't that great example because they've got surprise attack, polish forces drowned mortars on the edge of forested highlands Winerwald and after 11,5 hours of impunity shooting and scouting 20 000 of hussars made 30 minutes charge winning battle.
(but they are crushing more numerous armies by definition like both Khotyn or with other countries Kircholm,Klushino,Berestechko and smaller )

Ottomans were in the jaws and Kara Mustafa was incautious, so it's not that much about quality of armies, but the fact is most of battles Ottomans were more quantity than quality, good examples is battle of Keresztes(called decisive victory for Ottomans but still casualties greater than coalition),
but there are more: Saint Gotthard (2x more ottomans), first Khotyn (2-3x more ottomans),Tashiskari, Calugareni etc etc.

Of course there were battles Ottomans totally destroyed stronger armies but in general Ottoman army was into quantity(of course they had very high quality soldiers, but Jannisaries were more about training than equipment, as i said musket in 1566, it's not bad compared to other easter European countries but 50 years later than western countries), but it's good bonus overall is going more to specified units, i hope they won't be too weak after patch btw)

and the derision about 99% people in Ottoman, well 35 milions was one of the highest of all countries in 1600(All Europe had 89 milions in 1600), losing probably only to China.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back