-
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.
- Status
Problem is AI fully commits to every war. This makes things like colonial wars and expeditions like this hard to model.
- 5
- 2
You already can't attack Genoa because "Spain is Defender of the Catholic Faith" and then there's this.
- 5
- 1
- 1
Someone posted their Mary of Lotharingia run on Reddit, and the Ottomans clearly got the Crimean event in it.
This was the end result:
I know, I know..."BuT ThE OttOMans WeRE StrOnk IN ReAL LiFE!"
But they weren't this strong and they had their arses handed to them by two world powers that are now almost missing from the map because of this event. Lithuania were dead very early in the timelapse.
Event really just needs to go, and Paradox can help the Ottomans in other ways by stoping them from allying AQ and maybe giving hem claims on the black sea and West Persia.
This was the end result:
I know, I know..."BuT ThE OttOMans WeRE StrOnk IN ReAL LiFE!"
But they weren't this strong and they had their arses handed to them by two world powers that are now almost missing from the map because of this event. Lithuania were dead very early in the timelapse.
Event really just needs to go, and Paradox can help the Ottomans in other ways by stoping them from allying AQ and maybe giving hem claims on the black sea and West Persia.
- 7
- 6
- 1
The year is 1821
Sample of 1
Austria, HRE, France, Denmark Norway, have been wiped out, who exactly is left to protect against the Ottomans?
Turkish East prussia is quite cool tho
- 9
- 5
- 1
I don't view the event as particularly strong. Hordes tend to make poor vassals, and it's not like they get integrated for free. If I'm playing as the Ottomans, the manpower cost of annexing Crimea through war is very small, so I'm basically weighing diplo points vs admin points. I can see how controlling the land blocks Russian and Polish expansion, but taking dotf accomplishes the same, and it's not exactly rich, high priority land.
- 3
- 2
- 1
Not to mention how often horde rebels spawn when a vassal, as you can rarely loot
- 2
Crimea as vassal isn't really the problem. The problem is when Crimea gets annexed between 1465 - 1485, which I've seen happen myriad times. Once Crimea region is Otto it's as OP says. Even Lithuania under Polish union can't survive. Otto's just steamroll through. To make matters worse Muscovy usually declares on Lith / Pol once Otto's have wiped out there armies, then it's all over.
Having played the Caucasus nations extensively I also quit when the event goes the Otto's way. They simply do not need another advantage. The event needs to go or change Crimea to a tributary that can't be annexed.
I also think stopping Otto's from allying AQ would be a mistake. While it may be historically accurate there is no one in the region capable of putting up a defense. Even Mamluks get their arses handed to them.
I really don't know what the answer is; perhaps make (defensive) alliances easier to form between different faiths when faced by a common enemy by removing the religious malus. Something like a localised defensive coalition...
Having played the Caucasus nations extensively I also quit when the event goes the Otto's way. They simply do not need another advantage. The event needs to go or change Crimea to a tributary that can't be annexed.
I also think stopping Otto's from allying AQ would be a mistake. While it may be historically accurate there is no one in the region capable of putting up a defense. Even Mamluks get their arses handed to them.
I really don't know what the answer is; perhaps make (defensive) alliances easier to form between different faiths when faced by a common enemy by removing the religious malus. Something like a localised defensive coalition...
- 10
- 1
it seems none of you played this game before 2019. i am not sure about date but when this event added into the game, OTTOMAN AI WAS NEVER EVER CHANGING CRIMEAN MARCH STATUS INTO VASSALAGE. there was a code that prevent this. BUT AT SOME POINT after SOME DLC(s) released, AI OTTOMANS started to annex them.
so the question is simple, PDX can easily revert this AI BEHAVIOR back instead of removing this event. crimea should be march of ottomans as historically it was, plus we need an event for maghrib pirates too (vassalage of algiers). but right now AI OTTOMANS can not even defeat SUPER OVERPOWERED TECH CHAMPION mamluks before 1600s. mamluks get renassaince via cyprus too early and become tech champ until the ending.
ottoman sultans were appointing crimean khans. they were crowning in istanbul. more than that ottoman emperors beheaded a few khans as a punishment (most famous one was happened after failed 2nd siege of vienna, crimean khan who refused to confront polish armies before reaching to vienna and he was also tasked to destroy the roads and bridges between krakow and vienna). can you give an example of an alliance like this ever happened in any other countries? crimean khanate was basically subject to ottoman empire. but they were respected and more independent than others because they had genghis khan's blood in their veins. thats why they were called as khans (equal to ottoman khans) despite they were subject to the ottomans.
but also at some point in early 1600s, emperor murat IV tried to eradicate ottoman dynasty and put crimean khans onto the turkish throne to take control of the empire for getting rid of corrupt governance in the capital.
so the question is simple, PDX can easily revert this AI BEHAVIOR back instead of removing this event. crimea should be march of ottomans as historically it was, plus we need an event for maghrib pirates too (vassalage of algiers). but right now AI OTTOMANS can not even defeat SUPER OVERPOWERED TECH CHAMPION mamluks before 1600s. mamluks get renassaince via cyprus too early and become tech champ until the ending.
ottoman sultans were appointing crimean khans. they were crowning in istanbul. more than that ottoman emperors beheaded a few khans as a punishment (most famous one was happened after failed 2nd siege of vienna, crimean khan who refused to confront polish armies before reaching to vienna and he was also tasked to destroy the roads and bridges between krakow and vienna). can you give an example of an alliance like this ever happened in any other countries? crimean khanate was basically subject to ottoman empire. but they were respected and more independent than others because they had genghis khan's blood in their veins. thats why they were called as khans (equal to ottoman khans) despite they were subject to the ottomans.
but also at some point in early 1600s, emperor murat IV tried to eradicate ottoman dynasty and put crimean khans onto the turkish throne to take control of the empire for getting rid of corrupt governance in the capital.
Last edited:
- 7
- 1
- 1
- 1
As someone else put it on this forum: "The game does a great job at showing how great powers rose to dominance. It however, fails at showing how they fell apart."
Until Paradox shows how the Ottoman Empire starts to decay in the end-game, or how tiny states like Prussia/Netherlands/Portugal can stand up to great powers this problem will never be resolved. Back when attrition wasn't capped, this was absolutely possible and gave you at least 1 possible way of defeating the biggest of enemies. But hey, I guess that's too easy and so we have this atrocious situation where Ming soldiers travel to Moscow through Northern Siberia because hey "that makes for interesting gameplay!".
Until Paradox shows how the Ottoman Empire starts to decay in the end-game, or how tiny states like Prussia/Netherlands/Portugal can stand up to great powers this problem will never be resolved. Back when attrition wasn't capped, this was absolutely possible and gave you at least 1 possible way of defeating the biggest of enemies. But hey, I guess that's too easy and so we have this atrocious situation where Ming soldiers travel to Moscow through Northern Siberia because hey "that makes for interesting gameplay!".
- 7
- 4
- 2
Merc and naval rework is likely why attrition got capped. Ottos already have several events for separatists, they just need them to fire more reliably or be redone into disasters
- 1
whenever i don't play in europe, the ottos do tend to decline and/or stagnate. To eventually get outpaced by the colonial powers, while they have a standoff vs opposing european neighbours.
- 1
I think we're going off-topic here a little bit, although it's still valid discussion.
My displeasure with this event is not how strong it makes the Ottomans. It's the expansion route it allows and encourages them to take, on very sketchy historical grounds, and how that messes with the formation of two world powers, one of which quite clearly played an important role in their demise in real history.
If the Ottomans find a natural expansion route into Ruthenia then fine, but this isn't "natural".
My displeasure with this event is not how strong it makes the Ottomans. It's the expansion route it allows and encourages them to take, on very sketchy historical grounds, and how that messes with the formation of two world powers, one of which quite clearly played an important role in their demise in real history.
If the Ottomans find a natural expansion route into Ruthenia then fine, but this isn't "natural".
- 7
- 2
Once again, it has to be admitted before providing additional comments, that the event was not seen as a game-changing, world-breaking one, until reading the posts in this thread. After @Travis_Bickle's ardent claims, the author started to seriously question the plausibility of the crimean throne being handled to the ottos, in the universum of eu4.
The claim has a point in regards to the rather interesting relationship between the house of osman and the house of giray, and how simplistically it is depicted in eu4. That is, they are represented only as a simple march due to the event, which is immediately revoked to a vassal status at the hands of the code. The code never keeps a vassal, whether they are useful or not; it only annexes them.
Naturally neighbouring the ottos causes a sudden danger, and accelerates the inevitable death of lithuania. Again, the author has already expressed own suspicion on the event having drastic regional effects, let alone global effects. After this thread, it was decided to go and test with yet another run in continental europe. Of course, as the sample size is only one, the observations cannot be extrapolated for a general view. The case example is used only to provide the perspective of the author, how the thread's claim is agreeable to a certain extent (or rather, understandable), and how the doubt of the author is reasoned.
1456: The event fires as early as possible, sigh. As an unrelated info, the player is lübeck; not-so-aggressive play, but decided to go for the unsafe path -no austria alliance.
1456: Only nine days passed, and the code-ottos revoked march status of crimea to vassal.
- In this case, the author agrees, that this situation is unacceptably rapid.
- For the player, it is favourable, as the lithuanians already tried their chances on conquering riga; and yet they were beaten even with a lübeck trade league of below-average size (only 8). It does not matter if the ottos are closer or not; the lithuania tag is already vulnerable. The reason of this will be given later before the conclusion part of this post.
1486: Lithuania mauled muscovy a bit; surprisingly poland did not invade wallachia (another poisonous behaviour observed after the austria patch). But by this time the ottos is close to annex crimea, and they are already in the process of annihilating genoa in the region.
- The conquest of genoese holdings in crimea, as early as this case, is plausible from a historical perspective. Needless to say, in eu4, the shadow kingdom event, and the incompetence of the code-emperor (austria) is the main catalyst.
1499: Lithuania trashed the great horde, harassed muscovy; but its impending doom has started. Like clockwork, the ottos declared on lithuania. Not shown in the image is, france is the catholic defender of the faith (naturally, sigh), and will be beaten badly.
- Again, the author agrees to the claim that annexation of crimea accelerates the downfall of lithuania.
- The author still doubts as this is the main cause. Explanation will be provided later, as mentioned before.
- Referring to author's own claims: The moronic code decides to stay allied, and only to AQ; code-ottos' previous allies were tunis and karaman. Tunis fell for some unknown reason; karaman was eaten by the ottos (and ramazan-mamluks) in an ally-war.
1507: After the lithuanian war, ottos target serbia. Note that in the previous war, they only conquered former great horde lands, and lower don from lithuania. Not clearly visible, but at the same time, denmark declared on lithuania for the baltic lands. Muscovy is having a bad time.
- Getting closer to the point of the author; but before, it has to be mentioned that, denmark starts this war as it has already conquered livonian order; fine. But after integrating norway, they go berserk. Integration of titles is outrageously simplistic; in the case of denmark-norway, it is inevitable.
- Still, lithuania's demise will not come by this danish invasion.
1554: Remember muscovy having a bad time? Not exactly. When the code denmark is able to swallow both norway and sweden, then it is highly possible to see a muscovy-free map. But the player is lübeck; this means denmark will fall; natural result is muscovy forming russia, and its first target is lithuania. Tsardom strikes back; lithuania is out.
1556: An unrelated but brief pause to support the author's own claim: The ottos at the hands of the imbecile code take admin, and quantity (sigh), after an influence opener. The code takes the influence only for the idiotic reason of annexation bonus, whereas the influence for a player is beneficial only, and only, for two tags: When playing austria, or any hre emperor tag (the other one is ashikaga-or japan opm daimyo legion run). Yet, the code decides to take it as ottos, and has no vassals, as if that would make any difference. Utterly unnecessary, incredibly deranged.
- What is the result of this?, one may ask.
1561: The result is mamluks declaring on the ottos. At this point ottos already wasted all their economy, manpower, monarch points on the unnecessary wars in ruthenia; mamluks surpassed them by a factor of 2,5. Mamluks vassalise ramazan, annex them, and declare on the ottos.
- This is nothing, of course. Ottos, even at the hands of a brain-dead code, armed with an alliance ring of anizah, yas, AQ, tunis; loaded with influence, admin, quantity; with half of potential manpower; are still able to obliterate mamluks, as it will be in this case.
Coming to the point:
- The author agrees that the crimean event is oversimplified, and is not reflective of the actual events between the ottos and the crimean khanate.
- It is still not convincing to see this event as the main reason for the lithuania's fall. Judging by the observations, the main reason is another event: Successor of wladyslaw the third, as it was in this example.
- Yes, before everything else, poland chose not to form a personal union with lithuania, therefore leaving the ruthenian plains vulnerable to all: denmark, muscovy-russia, in most cases bohemia, in few cases austria-hungary (the code is also mostly incompetent to form that), and naturally, the ottos. In one extreme case, the author observed a wallachian turbo-kingdom over entire ukraine (such occurrences happen more frequently when one plays in americas or indonesia).
- Commonwealth is a fickle one, as it may or may not survive into the late game; but when poland and lithuania do not form the union, the catastrophe is certain. Needless to say, when the player is brandenburg-prussia, whether poland or commonwealth, it has to go in order to play.
In conclusion, it is agreed that the crimean event is highly problematic, and it belongs to the list of eu4 universum's oversimplifications. It is agreed that it accelerates the ottos' expansion in the region, but not causes it, as the ottos already claim caffa from genoa, then proceed routinely into crimea, if the event does not grant them march crimea.
It certainly does not matter for the ottos if the event is scrapped altogether (bad design choice), or improved as a disaster-chain (too much work, but the author refrains from giving any suggestions), as the ottos, whether at the hands of the brainless code, or a novice player, is the most powerful tag at the start no matter what happens to them, if not the luckiest (castille), or the easiest (austria), or the largest (ming), or the trickiest (portugal), or the mightiest (ulm
).It is still not convincing to see it as the main reason for the collapse of poland and lithuania tags, as they are bringing their own doom onto themselves, and the other neighbouring tags are causing equal damage, if not more than the crimean event.
Fun final note: Mzab died within the first four months into the game; poor lads, tunis usually gets an estate-mission right from the start; the last patch hit them really hard
.Edit: Corrected the images. Corrected grammatical mistakes.
Last edited:
- 4
- 2
- 1
- 1
@filcat
I thank you for your effort in this post.
I do think your post largely proves my point.
The fact is, if people are worried about the strength of the Ottomans, you should want to encourage them to go into the Levant and Egypt rather than into largely worthless land in Ruthenia and Hungary.
I've noticed the Ottoman AI will generally expand where it sees the weakest target. Thus I can sometimes prevent them going north of Serbia by allying an independent Hungary if I am a strong nation. Poland/Lithuania will be the weakest target if it's a choice between them and Austria/Hungary or the Mamluks.
The Ottomans would be far stronger and richer if they ate the Levant, Egypt and possibly Persia, trade nodes pouring into Constantinople. I'm not saying they shouldn't make an attempt at Hungary or Austria but it's not in their interests that early on.
And as I said, it screws the whole balance of Poland/Lithuania and Muscovy. We can debate the particulars of various demises, in my current Byzantium run (so Ottos dead) an independent Lithuania ate Muscovy then PU'd them and are the 2nd strongest nation in the game behind me (ahead of a mighty colonial Spain in the Great Powers list) so there's no guarantees how that will go, but it shouldn't be hard to see the reasoning that the Ottomans on the border of an independent Lithuania and later Muscovy, at that stage in the game, could lead to their collapse.
I thank you for your effort in this post.
I do think your post largely proves my point.
The fact is, if people are worried about the strength of the Ottomans, you should want to encourage them to go into the Levant and Egypt rather than into largely worthless land in Ruthenia and Hungary.
I've noticed the Ottoman AI will generally expand where it sees the weakest target. Thus I can sometimes prevent them going north of Serbia by allying an independent Hungary if I am a strong nation. Poland/Lithuania will be the weakest target if it's a choice between them and Austria/Hungary or the Mamluks.
The Ottomans would be far stronger and richer if they ate the Levant, Egypt and possibly Persia, trade nodes pouring into Constantinople. I'm not saying they shouldn't make an attempt at Hungary or Austria but it's not in their interests that early on.
And as I said, it screws the whole balance of Poland/Lithuania and Muscovy. We can debate the particulars of various demises, in my current Byzantium run (so Ottos dead) an independent Lithuania ate Muscovy then PU'd them and are the 2nd strongest nation in the game behind me (ahead of a mighty colonial Spain in the Great Powers list) so there's no guarantees how that will go, but it shouldn't be hard to see the reasoning that the Ottomans on the border of an independent Lithuania and later Muscovy, at that stage in the game, could lead to their collapse.
- 1
- 1
The Ottomans start the game with Crimea as vital interest, and Ruthenia as strategic utility. Again, regardless of the Crimea event, they will attempt to expand into these regions.
- 4
Fair points, but will continue to be doubtful about the relation, and insist on global mechanics being more impactful than this event.
- Lithuania's bane is poland's choices; so pseudo-random number generator
- Poland's disaster is the teutonic war; after that misery, it wastes everything it has on hungary, or on the insanity of wallachia conquest; then dies by bohemia
- Commonwealth may or may not happen due to the code's inability as mentioned; a code-prussia is a rare beast, mostly released too late after a peace deal, then it dies quickly
- Great horde's despair is its lack of institution; it has to war starting on 11 december 1444; and yet, the code simulates it as if any other tag with feudalism, and waits for others' weak moments; then it is too late, and muscovy eats them in a single war
- Hungary's pest (so smooth filcat, so smooth) is austria; code-austria can rarely make pu; then hungary goes alone for balkans only to crash into ottos; if austria makes an alliance, they go together to defend liege against burgundy; after balkan and hre wars, bohemia and poland take their chances on it, as austria abandons; when austria is not allied, then even before everything else, austria goes for hungarian lands
- Muscovy's curse is denmark, that swallows norway and sweden, then forming a monster-scandinavia
- Bohemia's plague is hre; it rivals the emperor, then does nothing but waits; if austria surpasses, then goodbye; if austria fails, then puts itself into a deadlock by going catholic league, even when protestant or hussite
- France's poison is the defender of the faith; it takes it immediately and runs from jutland to balkans, lombardy to urals against all protestants, sunnis, orthodox until it collapses
- England's trouble is the channel; sometimes it builds their chad-fleets right after the start, but other times, even france is able to beat the royal navy and embark on the island
- Spain is always lucky, unless castille is destroyed by aragon; in that case, aragon forms spain, in every possible run, so that is a recursive function
- Timurids' demise come from shah rukh event, naturally; in any case, if they survive and form mughals, then their catastrophe is themselves, as they are unable to make any reasonable alliance (when mughals form, check the tag's desired provinces in the diplomacy tab: It is like an inside-joke, as they designate vital interest almost the entire world, probably due to the mughal diwan)
- Mzab dies no matter what happens
Also:
Fixed the text
Edit-Note: Obviously, the ottoman in the last quote was striked through to stress out that the overall AI expands targeting the weakest tags, as opposed to only the ottomans' AI. Such a format -fixed the text- is viewed as a sketch-joke, and it does not have anything to do with the referred tag.
Last edited:
- 3
- 1
Attempt to expand and expand are two separately different things
.And once Mehmed the Conqueror dies they often end up with a Diplomatic ruler who will only focus on their immediate claims.
- 1
For the record, I'm not okay with other rule-bypassing events either. Which ones are put in the game is arbitrary, and I'd much rather see mechanical interactions that allow for such outcomes organically. If that can't fit in the scope of the game, then don't shoehorn it either.
We "need" a BI or Crimea event about as much as we "need" an Aq Qoyunlu conquest of Persia or Qing owning all of China. As in, we don't.
- 4
- 2
Hard coded mughals we don't need due to the interregnum which wasn't guaranteed to have them come back. But the burgundian inheritance massively changes the fate of Europe. Austria rises to rival France, so allies Spain to contain France, who then allows Ottomans to contain Hapsburgs and then all follows from there. Try playing a game with BI disabled
- 1
- Status