The Ottomans are stupidly broken and ruin the game for everyone so that 5% of the game exploiters can feel "not bored"

[st360]

EVERY other nation in the game you can ally 2 big nations in the region and handle them.

Except for this green cancer where every campaign half of the world map needs to be ruined so that people who cheat in a video game can post stuff like "L0L iT sKiLLL!!!1 Just no CB Byzantium day -7, go Pakistani culture, take 3 mil ideas, conquer Asia, trap them in Ireland and after 1810 they drop hard you will be able to kill them, wheres the problem!!??"

No, I'm sorry you're right. They historically lost to Albania and other OPMs in 10 separate wars so we need to keep EU 4 a broken game for """""historical""""" reasons. Kinda like how Muglahs conquered India historicaly so every EU 4 game Afghanistan gets an army 400% the size of the second and third world powers combined and you have to no CB Shri Lanka in 1444 if you want to play a game as Japan in peace. Oh wait no, that's not a thing, only the Ottomans are broken and its for zero reasons.

List of wars involving the Ottoman Empire - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Where? Where are these mythical EU 4 "300 k in a 70k army world" battles? I literally linked you the wikipedia list. Show them to me.

 

[Rexillarius]

You are complaining about a situation which I think you exaggerate. What is the solution then? Removing janissaries or eyalet system which happened historically? If you don't know how to play, you can always watch some videos or learn by playing. Just blocking the strait (Sea of Marmara) will give you great victory against the Ottomans.

 

[Vin55]

EVERY other nation in the game you can ally 2 big nations in the region and handle them.

Except for this green cancer where every campaign half of the world map needs to be ruined so that people who cheat in a video game can post stuff like "L0L iT sKiLLL!!!1 Just no CB Byzantium day -7, go Pakistani culture, take 3 mil ideas, conquer Asia, trap them in Ireland and after 1810 they drop hard you will be able to kill them, wheres the problem!!??"

No, I'm sorry you're right. They historically lost to Albania and other OPMs in 10 separate wars so we need to keep EU 4 a broken game for """""historical""""" reasons. Kinda like how Muglahs conquered India historicaly so every EU 4 game Afghanistan gets an army 400% the size of the second and third world powers combined and you have to no CB Shri Lanka in 1444 if you want to play a game as Japan in peace. Oh wait no, that's not a thing, only the Ottomans are broken and its for zero reasons.

You forget every coloniser like Spain, Portugal or England who have all over 200k troops because of how broken colonial mechanics are concerning force limit^^. You get double the troops in reality it was a manpower drain, so bad, that spain and portugal have till this day way lower populations that the rest of europe, compared to their size. But on this forum you will not find many who agree. They will say get good, or play on easy (the ai will still blob beyond any reason). I still remember the time, when ai wasnt as broken, and not brooke, which was 4 years ago. The most fun at eu 4 you could get there. After that time period stupid mechanics where introduced, to sell their mission trees. They never really fixed them. You cannot destroy development, which really it should happen when a province is besieged, All of central europe has over 30dev by 1650. Lets hope a new pop system will fix this.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

There may or may not be a case against current Ottoman strength vs what it "should" be, but I do not respect accusations of cheating when players do things that are plainly within a game's mechanics.

Aside from that, I am sympathetic to the idea that nations should be strong or weak due to factors on the board, not historical factors which do not exist in that game.

 

[st360]

You are complaining about a situation which I think you exaggerate. What is the solution then? Removing janissaries or eyalet system which happened historically? If you don't know how to play, you can always watch some videos or learn by playing. Just blocking the strait (Sea of Marmara) will give you great victory against the Ottomans.

How about you read my post?

 

[agonistes]

"The road to Rome is salted with the tears of the fallen."

- Marcus Gaius

 

[Cavalry]

The Ottomans is the strongest super power at some time. So it is not like some other powers.

EU4 don't handle real world politics well. If there are 1 super power, then all other powers should not cooperate with it, not against it but not help it to gain more powerful. This should be for AI to apply to all human players too. If the AI is good then they will never ally with human, a Power of course. The little guys may try difference.

 

[st360]

The Ottomans is the strongest super power at some time. So it is not like some other powers.

EU4 don't handle real world politics well. If there are 1 super power, then all other powers should not cooperate with it, not against it but not help it to gain more powerful. This should be for AI to apply to all human players too. If the AI is good then they will never ally with human, a Power of course. The little guys may try difference.

This idea that the Ottomans where some huge overwhelming powerhouse that half the world had to unite against is simply WRONG. There are hardly any notable battles where the Ottoman armies significantly outnumbered their opponents, and there are tons of Ottoman wars that ended badly for them, often against 1 or 3 province countries.

Here:

List of wars involving the Ottoman Empire - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Where? Where are these mythical EU 4 "300 k in a 70k army world" battles?

This EU 4 Ottomans strength is historical fiction.

 

[st360]

There may or may not be a case against current Ottoman strength vs what it "should" be, but I do not respect accusations of cheating when players do things that are plainly within a game's mechanics.

Aside from that, I am sympathetic to the idea that nations should be strong or weak due to factors on the board, not historical factors which do not exist in that game.

At some point, yes, its just cheating.

Imagine that if every single time you wanted to play as any colonizer in the game you first had to no CB Scotland in 1444, do heavy AI manipulation to trap English armies in Ireland and needed to hyper expand in Europe to keep up with England.

All so that once you ally the top 3 other greatest powers in the world you just barely get to 80% of England's strength and can *maybe* beat them in a war, if you're really, really, really careful.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Imagine that if every single time you wanted to play as any colonizer in the game you first had to no CB Scotland in 1444, do heavy AI manipulation to trap English armies in Ireland and needed to hyper expand in Europe to keep up with England.

What you describe could reasonably be called poor balance and/or bad design. The word "cheating" does not imply actions like this. No CB is a by-design option. Trapping armies across straits/on islands is as well. They are directly implied logical conclusions of rules as the game defines them. That is *by definition* not cheating.

To cheat, one must violate the rules in some fashion. Examples would be using 3rd party software or arguably using a bug to make the game do something its UI/rules contradict. Nothing you discuss implies actions like those.

 

[Dunner]

Where? Where are these mythical EU 4 "300 k in a 70k army world" battles?

This EU 4 Ottomans strength is historical fiction.

I feel like you're missing the point here... the ENTIRE GAME is historical fiction.

Yes, the Ottoman armies are stupidly large, but so are everyone else's. Tell me the army sizes in the following screenshot are the least bit historical (oh, and historically speaking, where was the ERE in 1635? Surely that's historical, right?). Based on my manpower and ducat reserves I could call up an army of almost half a million men in three months, not to mention poof about a bajillion artillery pieces out of thin air that historically all needed to be cast by hand. Then there's the British and their 108k cavalry, I highly doubt there were even half that many warhorses in the British Isles. My point is EU4 is like Star Wars, you can engage your ability to suspend disbelief and enjoy yourself, or, you can nit-pick at the impossibilities until the whole thing just seems stupid; I choose the former.

Oh, and nerfing the Ottomans is a dumb idea.

 

[Gawron96]

From the start, if you don't start next to them, you have nothing to worry about, because by 1550 you're already No. 1 GB even if you start as OPM.
However, if you start next to the Ottomans, you have to make sure they don't grow too much. In most cases, you can do this without exploits (such as island trapping, which I've never used because it's actually broken) or ‘cheating’, as you prefer to call it. Just use other game mechanics, such as better tech or ideas. Letting them grow and complaining that they are too strong is like letting Prussia form and then complaining that their army is too strong in terms of quality xd

The rest of the complaints are pointless, because the same case applies to the UK, France, Spain and Russia, as they also have lots of perm claims, gold from missions and strong ideas through ‘historical’.
And complaining that you always have to do certain things as a given country to be the best? Note that this is called strat. Just like when you play in Europe and always aim for BI. If you don't want to do it, don't, but don't complain that other methods are ineffective. You can drink water through your nose, but it's more comfortable through your mouth.

 

[klingonadmiral]

To cheat, one must violate the rules in some fashion.

I refuse to see subjects that have the combined upside of vassals and marches, reduced liberty desire, don't cost a relation slots AND are cheaper to integrate as anything other than a cheat.

However it is not the players I blame for (ab)using them. I blame the dev team for adding them.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I refuse to see subjects that have the combined upside of vassals and marches, reduced liberty desire, don't cost a relation slots AND are cheaper to integrate as anything other than a cheat.

However it is not the players I blame for (ab)using them. I blame the dev team for adding them.

What you are describing is (flagrant/deliberate) imbalance, not cheating.

Imbalance can be so large that it confers more benefits than some cheats. It is nevertheless a distinct category for a reason. The current Ottoman strength is not from some hacker inserting his fanfic into the game, nor is it the result of something like a 3rd party save editor. It did not find its way into the game by accident. The devs made them this way on purpose.

Ottoman strength relative to other nations has varied across patches, but the nation has pretty much always been given wildly unrealistic advantages relative to most other nations in the game. Remember that when EU 4 was released, the Ottomans were part of the "Turko-Semetic" culture group that reached all the way from Balkans to Morocco (lol) and "Ghazi" gave you TRIPLE manpower recovery speed any time the nation fought against at least one opponent with a different religion. That was in the earliest patches, when there were still two nations total in South America, ZoC didn't exist, and "Swahili" was a playable tag. They ALREADY had stuff like that, which only a few nations could compete against.

I've never agreed with it, but it's not a cheat because that's not what the word cheat means. Even if we agree it's not a great implementation, it's still not correct to call it one.

 

[klingonadmiral]

The current Ottoman strength is not from some hacker inserting his fanfic into the game

I'm like 95% sure that significant parts of the Eu4 dev team since Tinto took over came from the modding community.

 

[Cavalry]

Fighting the Turk is a fun game setting. Now we know what factors, idea group is the best. It is quantity of manpower and quantity of gold. Try recruiting all your manpower, not just force limit but all manpower! A lot of cavalry too.

 

[wthree]

You are complaining about a situation which I think you exaggerate. What is the solution then?

I genuinely believe the Ottomans should just be removed from the game entirely, as the developers let their Ottoman fetishism and their fan fic get in the way of the game.