• 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.
Welcome to the 24th development diary for our empire building game Europa Universalis IV and today we turn our eyes to one of the most interesting nations and a favorite because of its location and variety – The Ottoman Empire.

Ottoman Possibilities

When your story begins in the Grand Campaign, the Empire prospers under the rule of a line of committed and effective Sultans. In fact, we take our starting date from the dramatic Ottoman victory over an alliance of Christian monarchs at Vama in November, 1444. The Ottomans have flourished economically due to their control of the major overland trade routes between Europe and Asia. The Ottoman Empire is one of the most powerful states in the world – a multinational, multilingual empire.

Will you be able to reign and expand your empire over three continents? Will you be able to become a dominant naval force, controlling much of the Mediterranean Sea as well as become a major player of the European continental political sphere? Will you become the only power with a just claim to the title of universal ruler?

Or will your military and bureaucratic structures come under strain after a protracted period of misrule by weak Sultans. Will you fall behind the Europeans in military technology as the innovation that fed the Empire's forceful expansion became stifled by growing religious and intellectual conservatism? And will the discovery of new maritime trade routes by Western European states allowed them to avoid the Ottoman trade monopoly unless you take over the trade routes?

Choose, and choose wisely. Let the game begin.

Most players make an immediate move to eliminate Constantinople, the capital of a now tiny and irrelevant Byzantine Empire. Turkish missions push you in this direction, too, and it’s a natural opening act (once the Western border is secure). Taking this rich city means controlling all traffic to the Black Sea, greater ability to limit European land incursions into the core Turkish provinces in Anatolia, and a chance to move the capital to the greatest city on earth.

But Turkish expansion is a double-edged sword no matter which direction you go. If you continue to move into Europe, you will add Orthodox and Catholic provinces to a realm already teeming with non-Muslim citizens. Expand west to consolidate your holdings in Asia and you risk alienating Muslim rulers that would be better as allies. And to the South you have the Mameluks, a potential rival for power over the Levant.
The Ottomans start in 1444 with a lot of assets, some in the form of ideas and missions we’ll get to in a bit. They also have a navy that competes only with Venice for power in the Eastern Mediterranean, a starting Sultan of great ability and – for the moment – military superiority to or parity with the European monarchs that wish to drive Islam of the continent.

Ottoman Dynamic Historical Events
As a major power throughout this period, we have written quite a lot of events for the Ottoman Empire, but there are two event series that truly stand out.

The Provincial System
The Empire contains numerous provinces and vassal states, and many were under the control of Beys, provincial governors that ruled over these districts as a general would on the battlefield. Historically, this worked well to keep the Empire running smoothly with local initiative to handle local problems in a land too varied for a one-size fits all policy. But it also depended on a Sultan that knew how to rein them in. In Europa Universalis IV, local Beys, especially in far-off provinces, may demand more autonomy in form of a Provincial System to stay loyal to the Sultan. If they are given too much autonomy, though, you might have problems with corruption of the Beys or revolts from unhappy soldiers that don’t respect the system in place. But then suppression has its own cost if the Beys band together to simultaneously rise against the Sultan...It’s a balancing act that comes into play if the Empire grows too large.

The Janissaries
The Janissaries were the heart of the Ottoman army, and through reforms and granting them more and more rights, the player as Sultan may build up his Janissaries into the elite infantry they represented historically. But beware! Granting them too much power might lead to their decadence, or worse, becoming a threat to the Sultan. Palace Coups or revolts might follow, and in the end, disbanding them might be the only alternative. Can you risk weakening your army in the short term while you find new sources of power?
Both of these event series represent the core problems facing the Ottoman Empire through this period. With a strong Sultan, you can make up for more inefficient government or a slightly weaker infantry, since you can spend your Monarch Power Points to shore up problems caused by a multinational, dispersed and devolutionary government. But a series of weak rules in an Empire that needs to constantly reinforce its legitimacy will face grave repercussions.

Ottoman National Ideas
The Ottoman Empire starts with a 10% bonus to its army discipline, and creates core provinces 33% faster and more cheaply.
  1. Ghazi: +33% Religious Unity & increase manpower when fighting religious enemies.
    Ghazi is a title given to great Muslim warriors, analogous to Khan or Caesar or Johan. It was also a term given to Ottoman warriors that spearheaded Turkish invasions and raids into non-Muslim land. Fight the enemies of Muhammad, and the nation will rally around you.
  2. Timariot System: +15% cavalry power.
    The Timariot Sipahi cavalry were, with the Janissaries, an elite core of troops within the Ottoman army. Tightly connected to the bey system, Timariot soldiers were given land in return for service, ensuring their loyalty.
  3. Autonomous Pashas: -3 Max War exhaustion.
    Powerful and respect governors and generals became known as Pashas. It came with great honors and responsibilities and those given control of territory within the empire became great lords that would work hard to preserve their privileges.
  4. Ottoman Tolerance: +3 Tolerance Heretic, +3 Tolerance Heathen.
    As was customary in many Muslim empires of the Middle Ages and Renaissance, non-Muslims were not forced to convert not were they regularly harassed beyond the occasional higher tax. In Europa Universalis IV the Ottomans have a much lower chance of religious revolts because of this tolerance.
  5. Law code of Suleiman: +10% Tax Income.
    Suleiman is one of the great rulers of history – a soldier, a lawmaker and a reformer. In fact, where the West knows him as Suleiman the Great or Magnificent, in his homeland he is called The Lawgiver. A central part of his reforms was re-examining the taxation of Turks, especially taxes levied on Jews and Christians, taxes for manufactured goods and anti-corruption measures.
  6. Tulip Period: +10% Trade Income.
    Named for the high priced flower that became a symbol of refinement, the Tulip Period was an early 18th century attempt to Westernize the Empire. A strong viziers and a time of peace allowed the Ottomans to focus on new trade relations and greater experimentation with foreign art and architectural styles. It was also a decade of decadence and distraction, in the eyes of many Turks, and subsequent failures on the battlefield ended this period of innovation and garden parties.
  7. Imperial School of Naval Engineering: 20% cheaper ships.
    Always a major naval power in its region, the Ottomans didn’t found a proper naval academy until the 1770s. Naval engineering was one of the centerpieces of the curriculum.

When the Ottoman Empire has reached it full capabilities and unlocked all of its National Ideas, it also get a +20% bonus to manpower recovery speed. With these ideas, they are a really expansionist military country, that have far fewer problems with holding a realm with diverse religion. Lower war exhaustion and stronger religious unity in the early game will help greatly with the rapid growth the Ottomans need to keep from falling too far behind its Western neighbors.
attachment.php


Bonus Detail: Westernization

Experienced players are now thinking about how to goose the Ottomans so they can remain a dominant military and technological power. As you know, the Western tech group gains knowledge faster than others, and as the Ottomans do not belong to it they will eventually trail them.

In the original version of Europa Universalis III, you could sometimes get a random event (if the stars aligned) and you could upgrade into a better technology group. With later expansions this was transformed into a set of complex decisions and events that worked fine for the power user that understood all the consequences, but had severe drawbacks for new users and the AI. Westernization should be an option, but it should also be a clear statement of policy, not something you stumble or exploit your way into.

In Europa Universalis IV, Westernization is a completely defined feature, integrated in the technology system. If you don't belong to the Western technology group, you will now always see whether you have the chance to “level up”.

To start the westernization process, you need to have a neighbor of the Western tech group that is a fair number of levels ahead of you in technology, and you also need to have +3 stability. When you start the process, your stability drops to -3 and all your monarch power is wiped. You have switched to the western technology group, but you paid a heavy price for undoing centuries of tradition.

Then, each month, your progress towards being fully Western goes either forward or backwards. It can never go below 1%, but when you reach 100% you end the process, and get western units as well. So how does the progress work? Well, every month, your current stability is added to the progress. And there are fun events giving you -1 stability or hurting you somewhere else. Westernization should not be a decision taken lightly, especially for large empires. Your nobles and people will often resist and you may need to slow down your progress from time to time to avoid larger pains.

And yes, as a New World nation you can switch directly to western once the Europeans show up, but you have a fair amount of catching up to do anyway.
 

Attachments

  • eu4_16.png
    eu4_16.png
    2,5 MB · Views: 47.389
Having taken part in the megathread about the topic, I know that well enough. Still, I'd think even the simplest, most simplified but still inherently simulational system would have a better claim to both realism and historicity and make for a better game than just using arbitrary tech group penalties.

Ah I remember starting that mega thread, but I do agree that taking a hint from magna mundi would have been nice, unique units core from tech groups, and it is difficult but not impossible to westernize.
 
I would have preferred it if Trade had a more decisive influence on westernisation. Having trade links with a more advanced power should have a decisive influence on westernising, and be a substitute for bordering them. It should also be possible to maybe westernise to other groups. For instance, you could argue the Indonesian/Malay Sultanates "Westernised" to the Muslim techgroup from the Indian/Chinese techgroup at the beginning of the period.
 
Historically there were numerous examples of countries trying and failing to Westernise - there's even one mentioned in the dev diary, the Ottomans in the 'Tulip Period'. Japan under Nobunaga and Hideyoshi would be another good example. In the 19th century, Egypt attempted to westernise but instead went bankrupt and fell into unrest. But in EUIV as currently described, that's never going to happen. Westernisation progress might slow down if you hit negative stability, but it will never actually cease: and assuming you keep stability at 1, that's just 100 months = 8+ years to finish the process.

Maybe allow the westernisation level to drop below 0, and if it hits -20 you go back to your old tech level? Or add a voluntary decision to cancel Westernisation that gives you a big boost to stability and legitimacy, and, say, a free investment in stability for the next 20 years, but drops you back to your old tech level and also blocks you from attempting to westernise again for the same time period.

I'm not sure but it seems to me that at negative stability westenisation level would decrease back to 1, while with "funny" westernisation events dropping stability you may be never able to increase stability to positive, so that in fact any progress would cease indeed. I agree that for such situations it maybe should be possible to fully interrupt process, if it's not in already, but simply allowing to drop to -20 and stop? Sorry, but that won't work, when you start at -3 stability after pressing button and having lost all admin power it would took you too long to restore stability to at least 0. Even if you have great ruler\advisor — 10MPPs/month, and very stable (stab cost halved to 50 MPPs), it still would take you to -29 before you stabilise. And in more real situations it could go even worse. Now, -100 would be a more feasible border for failed westenisation, but still, meh, don't know.
 
...
Maybe allow the westernisation level to drop below 0, and if it hits -20 you go back to your old tech level? Or add a voluntary decision to cancel Westernisation that gives you a big boost to stability and legitimacy, and, say, a free investment in stability for the next 20 years, but drops you back to your old tech level and also blocks you from attempting to westernise again for the same time period.

A decision to stop the progress makes sense. Perhaps in combination with some immediate advantages, eg increased military levels during the process.
 
A decision to stop the progress makes sense. Perhaps in combination with some immediate advantages, eg increased military levels during the process.

From the way the DD words it, we will probably have something like EU3, where some events can put the process on hold after the initial decision has been taken.
 
From the way the DD words it, we will probably have something like EU3, where some events can put the process on hold after the initial decision has been taken.

I missed that. I was musing on the assumption that during the process a nation is 'flagged' and westernization related events happen triggered by that. In that scenario being able to stop the process and return to the starting position might be an interesting option in contrast to pausing it with the events still happening. Or perhaps a revolution that stops the process. But that is pure speculation of course.
 
You honestly think creating an army of enslaved child soldiers is a _good_ or _tolerant_ thing?

yes it is. that army protected their brothers and sisters in villages from being raped or murdered or assimilated by another empire that wouldnt even give half the tolerance ottomans were giving.

another note; children werent being kidnapped in ottomans and nobody was getting murdered or raped because they were christian. that is a great myth. surely there were some few cases happening but that is Russia to be blamed for their pan-slav propaganda.

there are reasons why these christians, jews and muslims, tens of different nationalities have lived under the same empire over 500 years. there was tolerance.
 
Then again i'm definetely for a better representation of the close link between trade and technological spread.

I'd agree with that. Having close trade ties via a trading port would make a lot more sense than having adjacent provinces.

In fact I find it strange that if Russia under Peter the great is the example of this that adjacent provinces come into this at all. Peter's plan involved conquering the area around St Petersburg in order to get into contact with the European center of ideas via having a port. He certainly wasn't trying to get a land route into the west. If you want people to replicate the same sort of decisions that Peter did then surely you would tie westernisation into having a port (maybe in the same trade zone as someone who is ahead by enough tech levels) rather than adjacent provinces.
 
It never was the westernization tech progression in eu3 that was the goal, but the more advanced western troop types without which you could never win any wars.
 
yes it is. that army protected their brothers and sisters in villages from being raped or murdered or assimilated by another empire that wouldnt even give half the tolerance ottomans were giving.

another note; children werent being kidnapped in ottomans and nobody was getting murdered or raped because they were christian. that is a great myth. surely there were some few cases happening but that is Russia to be blamed for their pan-slav propaganda.

there are reasons why these christians, jews and muslims, tens of different nationalities have lived under the same empire over 500 years. there was tolerance.

Jannisary soldiers before their decadence were made up of small christian boys kidnapped to be indoctrinated into being religiously fanatical soldiers; there is no defense for that and the alternative to Ottoman Invasions was generally self rule, with some exceptions like Crete.
 
Jannisary soldiers before their decadence were made up of small christian boys kidnapped to be indoctrinated into being religiously fanatical soldiers; there is no defense for that.
Yes, the system was so horrible that it eventually collapsed... because Muslim families were jealous of the devshirme system and wanted their own sons to be eligible for it too, not just the Christian children...
 
IMHO the title of the post is misleading when I read I thought of HRE or Napoleonic France or the Empire of Russia I cannot associate The Ottomans with the concept of "The Heir of Rome", they claimed to be but in reality they was "The Destructor of Rome", the Turks sacked and destroyed the City of Man's desires and changed its name to "Istanbul"... probably I'd admit I suffer of Byzantilie disease...
 
IMHO the title of the post is misleading when I read I thought of HRE or Napoleonic France or the Empire of Russia I cannot associate The Ottomans with the concept of "The Heir of Rome", they claimed to be but in reality they was "The Destructor of Rome", the Turks sacked and destroyed the City of Man's desires and changed its name to "Istanbul"... probably I'd admit I suffer of Byzantilie disease...
Given that they occupied the same territory as the Roman Empire and their rulers claimed the throne of Caesar ('Kaiser-e-Rum') I would say the Ottomans had a far better claim than Russia, the HRE or any western European nation. They also didn't change Constantinople's name, that's a common misconception. True, they followed a different religion and the ruling elite spoke a different language, but the same could be said of the Byzantines when compared to the ancient Romans.

And of course, by practising domestic slavery and sacking enemy cities they were merely following an age-old Roman tradition...
 
Given that they occupied the same territory as the Roman Empire and their rulers claimed the throne of Caesar ('Kaiser-e-Rum') I would say the Ottomans had a far better claim than Russia, the HRE or any western European nation. They also didn't change Constantinople's name, that's a common misconception. True, they followed a different religion and the ruling elite spoke a different language, but the same could be said of the Byzantines when compared to the ancient Romans.

And of course, by practising domestic slavery and sacking enemy cities they were merely following an age-old Roman tradition...

Also, all Ottoman Sultans from Murad I onwards were linear descendants of Emperor Constantine I, due to marriages between Ottoman Sultans and Byzantine princesses.
 
Good changes but Anatolia needs to have more provinces IMO

not really. The whole world map in general has less provinces than we are used to (if you play Vicky2 or CK2) but I agree it does look weird.