• 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.
Hmm...silk production. Interesting.
An alliance of sorts would be fun, but too much chaos would just get annoying. How about a coalition of Muslim nations if they get too big in Asia?
 
Byzantine silk production was lesser quality than China's, but it was a highly profitable franchise...

And, as I said, it was definately the "cash crop" so to speak, of Thrace.

Here's a quote from a site about the history of silk:

Then around AD 550, two Nestorian monks appeared at the Byzantine Emperor Justinian's court with silkworm eggs hid in their hollow bamboo staves. Under their supervision the eggs hatched into worms, and the worms spun cocoons. Byzantium was in the silk business at last. The Byzantine church and state created imperial workshops, monopolizing production and keeping the secret to themselves. This allowed a silk industry to be established in the Middle East, undercutting the market for ordinary-grade Chinese silk. However high-quality silk textiles, woven in China especially for the Middle Eastern market, continued to bring high prices in the West, and trade along the Silk Road therefore continued as before. By the sixth century the Persians, too, had mastered the art of silk weaving, developing their own rich patterns and techniques. It was only in the 13th century—the time of the Second Crusades—that Italy began silk production with the introduction of 2000 skilled silk weavers from Constantinople. Eventually silk production became widespread in Europe.

http://www.silk-road.com/artl/silkhistory.shtml
 
Last edited:
Due mostly to Havard and the EEP Random Events thread, many/most/all random events are/were being rewritten to be based on DP slider positions. So, no need to reinvent the wheel here if they're not Byzantium-specific.

I have a random event in the middle of my list called Rise of the Magnates, which is a more severe, mini-civil war. It's based on high aristocracy and low centralization. The easy, default choice exacerbates those conditions. The difficult choice B moves you the other way.

There are also a few events now, written by Idiotboy and me, that start to worsen relations with Venice and Genoa as you economically develop (after the Thrace COT and such) and expand. You can also offer to buy the Black Sea colonies from Genoa at a certain point.

Has there been, in the Beta forum or wherever, any discussion of changing Thrace's trade good? I think we should go ahead and change it to ... what the hell is closest to silk? ... spices, say. And give Constantinople a level 3 fortress. That should go into the next (first) EEP Byzantium release.

Also, everyone - while it might be nice to see a historical or historically probable alliance (with or against Byzantium), keep in mind that creating one would really f*ck up the diplomacy of the nations involved. Say you're Hungary, in an alliance with Brandenburg and Bohemia (or whatever). Planning to vassalize them. Then suddenly you're allied to/against Byzantium? And Poland diploannexes them and everyone else in northern Germany?

driftwood
 
Can't we unilaterally change the good? If it goes in a patch, we'd need to see if the Turks made silk or anything of that nature during their time. Otherwise, we'll need to do the work.
 
Reformists in Byzantium

I think (along with some of the others) that Reformists would be more likely to thrive in Byz., but for different reasons. For one, Orthodoxy still had enormous tensions between Pelagian and Augustinian theories on free will; evidenced today by Orthodox and Catholic differences on original sin.

Although Pelagianism was (and is) still officially heresy, the Augustinian theories never really had as firm a hold on Orthodoxy, except where hierarchy was involved. Think of it as the equivalent of a Russian "old-believers" event under Peter I; the capital and large cities (20K+) convert to reformist; out in the boonies, Orthodoxy still prevalent? Stab hits of -2 to -4, maybe... or revolt risk +3%. Serfdom -1, Centralization -1.

What do you think?
 
I would go just by population of provinces (if possible). Or maybe Euro provinces would go reformist.
 
Oh, crap. Hadn't thought of that. What a silly bugger I am.
 
Hey all, going through the ottoman files i found something VERY interesting. Check this out.


#The Decentralizing Effect of the Provincial System#
event = {
id = 3379
random = no
country = TUR
name = "EVENTNAME3379"
desc = "EVENTHIST3379"
style = 3

date = { day = 1 month = january year = 1615 }
offset = 300

action_a ={ # More power to the Beys
name = "ACTIONNAME3379A"
command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = -2 }
command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = -2 }
command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = -2 }
command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = -2 }
command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = -2 }
command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = -2 }
command = { type = domestic which = CENTRALIZATION value = -2 }
command = { type = domestic which = ARISTOCRACY value = 2 }
command = { type = domestic which = SERFDOM value = 2 }
command = { type = stability value = 2 }
command = { type = technology which = muslim }
}
action_b ={ # Limit the concessions.
name = "ACTIONNAME3379B"
command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = -1 }
command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = -1 }
command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = -1 }
command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = -1 }
command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = -1 }
command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = -1 }
command = { type = domestic which = ARISTOCRACY value = 1 }
command = { type = domestic which = CENTRALIZATION value = -1 }
command = { type = revoltrisk which = 12 value = 6 }
command = { type = stability value = -1 }
command = { type = technology which = muslim }
}
action_c ={ # Rein them in
name = "ACTIONNAME3379C"
command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = 1 }
command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = 1 }
command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = 1 }
command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = 1 }
command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = 1 }
command = { type = provincetax which = -1 value = 1 }
command = { type = domestic which = ARISTOCRACY value = -2 }
command = { type = domestic which = CENTRALIZATION value = 2 }
command = { type = domestic which = SERFDOM value = -2 }
command = { type = desertion which = -1 value = 5000 }
command = { type = desertion which = -1 value = 5000 }
command = { type = desertion which = -1 value = 5000 }
command = { type = revoltrisk which = 48 value = 8 }
command = { type = stability value = -6 }
command = { type = sleepevent which = 3378 } # The Shusf rebellion
}
}

I didn´t even know that tech-groups could be changed with events. Now we really could play with that orthodox tech-group which we DON´T like and make it at least a quasi-legitimate change to latin.. Who´s got ideas??
 
I really like that event. But, yes, in 1.02 you can change tech groups. Do so, but only if you're prepared to call down the wrath of all the EU2 regulars.

It's just that the tech groupings have been carefully selected (I won't argue that they're necessarily correct or perfect, just that alot of argument and testing has gone into them). So we'd need a pretty good reason to give Byzantium a tech research boost.

I'd say two good triggers are the way Byzantium handles the Reformation and an as-yet-non-existent event in the late 16th century that is either like that Turkish one or involves the Great Civil War. If you choose the "correct" (but difficult) choice each time, you get to switch to the Latin group. Kind of a "Your support for the Renaissance creates W. European support for your Age of Reason" thing.

driftwood
 
You could further that with a set of events dealing with the clashes of power with the Orthodox Church.... Kind of a "support churhc/support secularism, with revolts et al....
 
Edit: doh, forgot to celebrate my 200th post!

Yeah, we had said earlier that we should have some patriarch-basileus battles (an independent patriarchy or the basileus as God's Viceroy on Earth and Equal of the Apostles), so losing that battle could open the way to a secularization of society, which might also permit more tolerance of Islam.

A good example of taking the harder choice to improve longterm chances.

Idiotboy - I cleaned up your events a tiny bit (typos and stuff) and am distributing them with mine (in the appropriate idiotboy files) for betatesting. Is that ok?

driftwood
 
Last edited:
Hey it´s great. They weren´t intended to be some personal pleasure. The more the merrier I´d say. Will you come up with a few religious-secular events?? Perhaps we could tie them with my succession crisis events I´m about to script (in a few days that is). Make it a kind of time of troubles. Perhaps they could be placed in the 17 th century or something.
 
Oh and while I´m at it should we perhaps make our eventnumbers more ehh the same sorta. Use the same thousand numbers at least. To keep it focused on which numbers byzantium has. Might come in handy later when events start pouring in.
 
Despite the fact that tech groups are based on religion-cultures, I don't think religion was the determining factor in the appropriateness of social organization to technical innovation. So, personally, I would prefer using 17th century "rational government" or 18th century Enlightenment events as criteria, rather than strictly becoming Catholic. After all, it was the Catholic nations previously in the vanguard who ultimately fell furthest behind in the EU2 timeframe (to make a sweeping overgeneralization).

OTOH, converting to Lutheranism or Calvinism during the Reformation could be an indication of rational or Enlightened governance, and hence a trigger for switching tech groups.

I'm really beat from work, so I probably won't be coming up with any event ideas, unless inspiration hits me (which usually only occurs in the shower, which presents some difficulties in recording the ideas). But I'll certainly think about it. My feeling is that if we take things one major event at a time (civil war, religious controversy, etc.) starting from the 16th century, these other ideas should fall into place pretty naturally.

driftwood
 
"The Turks didn't have to do any of that in the brief time it took them to Turk-ize Anatolia."

Correct, and the fact that they didn't do this was a problem later, when the Greeks invaded Turkey after WWI and got support from the Greeks living there. Fortunately for the Turks however, the Greeks tried to go too far and Ataturk routed them.


"As a matter of fact, there where several occasions during the previous 1000 years when the Emperors in Constantinople had done exactly what I'm proposing here."

True, but the Turks were a very large group of people, and considering they were in both the Balkans and Anatolia it would be impossible to remove their influence entirely.

"I don't see why the revolt risk would be raised anywhere besides Constantinople - can you imagine how pissed people would be at having 40,000 urban residents resettled?"

Right, and having 40,000 urbanites suddenly placed out in Anatolia and required to do all sorts of functions they aren't used to doing would cause problems enough to merit a large loss in base tax value.

"Having played through a good chunk tonight (up through the Byzantine Revival events, but not the Anatolia events), I can tell you it's not real pretty."

Well that's good, seeing as how it not being really pretty was the historically accurate situation for the Roman EMpire at the times.



", most of them had moved to the better lands of the Balkans."

But this isn't represented in EUII, because there are no Moslem provinces in the Balkans at the start. Either, if the Roman Empire Reclaimed Greece and Anatolia, it'd have a large Moslem minority that would not easily go away.
 
I don't think that was a function of religion, but of national vitality. After all, Catholicism had kept literacy alive in the West throught the middle ages. In fact, Catholic Ireland was the center of learning at one point during the darkest part of the dark ages.

I think this stereotype of "Catholic nation=backward" that is carried out in the game comes from the fact that Spain was the bulwark of Catholicism (at least as a major power), and that they fell into decline in the 1600's and beyond, more because of a string of very BAD rulers (excessive Habsburg intermarriage was one cause of this) that is the weakness of any autocratic society.

People tend to forget that France was also largely Catholic, and that from it the Enlightenment launched, just as the Renaissance before it likewise launched from very Catholic Italy...

In 1419, Spain and Portugal are the two "Great powers" of Western Europe. By 1600 they were in decline and gradually being replaced by England, France, and The Netherlands.

Of course, a Catholic nation, Austria, was responsible for being the baliwick that held back the Ottoman Turks from Italy, Germany, and France.

Sorry for the OT rant. I happen to be Catholic (and Catholic educated), which might explain my dislike for these stereotypes. Certainly modern Catholicism is no barrier to innovation.