Byzantium vs Eastern Roman Empire?

[Enkidou51]

Did Byzantium participate in the battle of Varna? At the time, was it known that the battle's (or campaign's) result would decide the fate of Byzantium?

The two main players were Hungary and Poland, which were very powerful at the time.
Ladislas III and John Hunyadi, very feared by the Turks, are also the two monarchs least involved in the crusade.
Followed by less powerful states such as the Teutonic order which has been in decline for several years, Bosnia and Wallachia which do not want to suffer the same fate as Bulgaria and Western French, English and German volunteers.
This crusade is very important because if it had succeeded it would have resulted in the union of the Catholic and Orthodox churches.
the aim was to redraw the map of the Balkans as before the catastrophic reign of John V.

 

[GenericUsername1444]

I'm number 4. Maybe number 5, even.

Which are you?

 

[Superdark33]

Did Byzantium participate in the battle of Varna? At the time, was it known that the battle's (or campaign's) result would decide the fate of Byzantium?

Speaking of Varna and post numbers,

Um.... That Just Happened!

The two main players were Hungary and Poland, which were very powerful at the time.
Ladislas III and John Hunyadi, very feared by the Turks, are also the two monarchs least involved in the crusade.
Followed by less powerful states such as the Teutonic order which has been in decline for several years, Bosnia and Wallachia which do not want to suffer the same fate as Bulgaria and Western French, English and German volunteers.
This crusade is very important because if it had succeeded it would have resulted in the union of the Catholic and Orthodox churches.
the aim was to redraw the map of the Balkans as before the catastrophic reign of John V.

That union would be shaky at best and with a massive power imbalance in favor of western catholicism, i doubt that the Ottomans couldnt recover from a defeat like that and return to win another war.

 

[The Russian Empire]

I'm number 4. Maybe number 5, even.

Which are you?

Probably 2. I enjoy the Greco-Roman world and am a collector of (primarily Roman) ancient coins. I even possess a 2nd to 3rd-century Roman votive plaque, but I'm not too interested in propagating Roman narratives about various things. But yes, the term Byzantine is a largely Western European invention designed to denigrate the "Greek" Roman Empire and promote the idea that, somehow, Charlemagne oversaw the transfer of the Roman Empire from the Greeks to the Franks.

 

[Aquila SPQR]

We've entered the EU IV era! We need a Jagiellon!

View attachment 1202221

I'm number 4. Maybe number 5, even.

Which are you?

As someone of Vlach ancestry it's in my blood. 11/10. Everyday at 14:53 I weep a little.

 

[viola]

1453 is indeed almost upon us.

After that what do we do? Keep going straight until 1922?

 

[Aquila SPQR]

1683.

 

[BugStupidDummy]

Did Byzantium participate in the battle of Varna? At the time, was it known that the battle's (or campaign's) result would decide the fate of Byzantium?

Directly as in Romans fighting there? No

Did she help the campaign however?

Yes she provided galleys to try and prevent Ottoman soldiers from crossing into Europe and participating (total size of the crusader "fleet" even with that was laughably small however), and in addition the future Constantine XI started an expedition. It was not known that it was the last chance (see Constantine XI and his attempt at continuing the act of union in order to continue appealing to the Pope and trying to make the west help them to get enough of their land back to become a durable state and not be gobbled up by the Turks proving Constantine XI thought there was a chance).

They didn't know Varna was the absolute end of support they would get (The pope trying to get western Christians to protect Constantinople and help the pro-union dynasty to get some of their land back couldn't even get the Knights of Saint John to lift a finger) but with hindsight we do.

As much as I absolutely love rebuilding the Eastern Roman Empire in EU IV we have the hindsight to know Varna was the end. Even if Orban tripped on an apple seed and broke his neck cannon was developing rapidly at this point so that probably doesn't buy Constantinople much time.

I am grateful that the game doesn't start at the same time as the last EU game did because the Eastern Roman Empire is my favorite EU faction and starting when the empire has an extremely viable chance is very much to my liking. Even if it started the day before instead of after Varna.

By the way 1453 is almost here, I have some mixed feelings.

 

[honkajoki]

I am grateful that the game doesn't start at the same time as the last EU game did because the Eastern Roman Empire is my favorite EU faction and starting when the empire has an extremely viable chance is very much to my liking. Even if it started the day before instead of after Varna.

Starting a day before a battle and expecting different results would be hard with EU4, armies would already be locked in movement (or one of them already arrived) to the site of the battle. Given the length of battles in EU4, if the in game battle was started on the day of the historical battle it would go on to a later date, or if it was set up to end on the historical day it would have already gone on for weeks at the game start.

By the way 1453 is almost here, I have some mixed feelings.

Perhaps we'll get @Johan himself using his moderator rights, locking the thread at #1453 and commenting "if I'd known this thread was the result, I'd never done the game rule"

 

[Enkidou51]

Speaking of Varna and post numbers,

Um.... That Just Happened!





That union would be shaky at best and with a massive power imbalance in favor of western catholicism, i doubt that the Ottomans couldnt recover from a defeat like that and return to win another war.

Catholicism would indeed have been predominant.
In this reality the Ottomans are no longer as powerful and can no longer invest in ultra-modern artillery used during the siege of Constantinople in 1453.
In addition, the 100 Years War is ending and states like France, England and Burgundy can be immediate threats if the Turks try to recross the Bosphorus.

 

[High Speed Flying Gladius]

Next reply closes the thread.
Choose your words carefully. ;P

I don't think moderators will actually do it, but i think it would be really funny.

 

[Thrudgelmir2333]

I think there's a hole in my wall.

 

[Lord Lambert]

Alright, we hit 1453. Back to the topic at hand;

The default name for the state with its capital in Konstantinoupolis should be the Empire of the Romans. It is an English translation of what the Romans who lived there actually called themselves; Basileia tōn Rhōmaiōn

Also, options wish, Basileia tōn Rhōmaiōn should be one of the options you can set in the game rules.

 

[Aquila SPQR]

I think there's a hole in my wall.

Alright, we hit 1453. Back to the topic at hand;

The default name for the state with its capital in Konstantinoupolis should be the Empire of the Romans. It is an English translation of what the Romans who lived there actually called themselves; Basileia tōn Rhōmaiōn

Also, options wish, Basileia tōn Rhōmaiōn should be one of the options you can set in the game rules.

Thankfully PDX games are easy to mod and any decision of the devs in this matter can be easily "fixed".

 

[Lord Lambert]

Thankfully PDX games are easy to mod and any decision of the devs in this matter can be easily "fixed".

True, though I'd prefer it baked in, as I run regular MP games with EU4 and I can't imagine it would go across so well if I forced 40+ people to download a mod just for a rename

 

[Aquila SPQR]

True, though I'd prefer it baked in, as I run regular MP games with EU4 and I can't imagine it would go across so well if I forced 40+ people to download a mod just for a rename

I've never played any MP game, but since it's based on localisation files (I changed them myself) - then perhaps it's a totally "local" thing and doesn't require everyone to have the same changes applied? IDK.

But maybe it blocks ironman or achievements, IDK, never cared about those.

 

[Lord Lambert]

I've never played any MP game, but since it's based on localisation files (I changed them myself) - then perhaps it's a totally "local" thing and doesn't require everyone to have the same changes applied? IDK.

But maybe it blocks ironman or achievements, IDK, never cared about those.

Unfortunately that doesn't work that way in EU4, and I doubt it will in EU5 either

 

[honkajoki]

No lock. Anticlimactic.

 

[Lehnaru]

Alright, we hit 1453. Back to the topic at hand;

The default name for the state with its capital in Konstantinoupolis should be the Empire of the Romans. It is an English translation of what the Romans who lived there actually called themselves; Basileia tōn Rhōmaiōn

Also, options wish, Basileia tōn Rhōmaiōn should be one of the options you can set in the game rules.

Personally I find Empire of the Romans awfully clunky and prefer Eastern Roman Empire. It's just as wordy, but I think it flows better. It's just Roman Empire but with Eastern attached as a geographic designation. Unlike Byzantine/Byzantium, it doesn't deny or obfuscate the legitimacy or the identity of the Roman state in Constantinople. It's also better for specifically identifying the roughly post-classical medieval predominately Greek period of the Roman Empire, in my opinion.

 

[bokorthedust]

No lock. Anticlimactic.

Not gonna lie, I was half expecting a moderator to lock the thread at #1452 just to troll everybody.