This sounds as bad as the trucebreak otto cb suggestion to prevent people using the budget monk strat as byz
- 2
-
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.
It's the little attention to details like this that keep me coming back to this game. Great work
- 1
What's the Byzantine budget monk thingy? Sounds like something from Monty Python's fc.
- 1
Or better yet, program the thing so that AI hordes never attack the Muscovites with crossing river penalty, to simulate the stand off at the Ugra river. The Muscovites had fire guns back then, while the Tatars only bow & arrow style weapons. That helped the Muscovites shoot the Tatars across the river, while the Tatars' weapons didn't have enough range so as to shoot back. That's what I like about history: it's quite historical.
- 2
What are you basing that on? The Kievan Rus is not my area of expertise but I've understood that generally the battle of the Kalka river is considered the end of them. Or at least the beginning of the end. Especially considering the Mongol empire wasn't formed until 1206. And Temujin wasn't even born in 1139...
Battle of the Kalka River - Wikipedia
- 5
You isolate the Ottoman lands in Europe in the first war (by taking the coastline). Then you trigger a Bulgarian revolt, that will move into Ottoman lands. They can't raise enough troops gast enough so Bulgaria will become independent. Then you attack them and take their lands.
So in effect in you get two wars with 100% within the span of one truce.
- 2
- 1
He's sharing the view that Kievan Rus had fallen prior to the Mongols, as when the Mongols rock up Kievan Rus no longer has such authority and centralisation that it previously heldWhat are you basing that on? The Kievan Rus is not my area of expertise but I've understood that generally the battle of the Kalka river is considered the end of them. Or at least the beginning of the end. Especially considering the Mongol empire wasn't formed until 1206. And Temujin wasn't even born in 1139...
Battle of the Kalka River - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
- 1
- 1
What is the point of changing the tech group though? I guess it does make Russia benefit from German minors being ahead of tech, but it's something very much not in line with the current principle of tech groups being primarily about regional proximities and no longer giving direct benefits/penalties.
- 5
- 1
By the time of Battle of Kalka river the Kievan Rus had already de-facto fractured into many principalities, where a word from Kiev meant nothing. For a century before that battle russian principalities were deep into feudal wars and intrigues with each other going so far as to seek help from Poland to install themselves as rulers of Kiev. The only times when princes forgot their bickering (for a time, at least) was during the severe raids from Cumans or Mongols, but the lack of unity and intrigues among the princes were the main reasons for their defeat at Kalka.
Last edited:
- 3
My thesis is based on the council of Liubech that de-jure recognized the rights of Rurikid cadet branches to rule their respective principalities without an approval from Kiev. It also based on Novgorod First Chronicle which was the first written document that stated that in 1139 "the land of Rus has fractured". As you can see, the battle of Kalka river was against Mongol Empire and coalition of independent Russian principalities, not against Mongol Empire and united Rus' state.What are you basing that on? The Kievan Rus is not my area of expertise but I've understood that generally the battle of the Kalka river is considered the end of them. Or at least the beginning of the end. Especially considering the Mongol empire wasn't formed until 1206. And Temujin wasn't even born in 1139...
Battle of the Kalka River - Wikipedia
- 3
- 1
Russia underwent numerous processes of self-westernization throughout its history, the most notable (and likely the reason this is a new feature) being Peter the Great's reforms. He took a tour through Western Europe, and worked for four months in a Dutch shipyard, with the goal of learning about their industries, armies, and navies, in order to bring up Russia's outdated military and navy to the European standard.
Hence, abandoning its Eastern tech for Western tech.
- 1
But, talking gameplay-wise, wouldn't it be beeter to retain eastern-european tech? I mean if you switch to western-european, then you would have western-type units: napoleonic square, austrian grenzers etc. Eastern-european, muslim and anatolian tech-groups already have late westernized-types of units, who retain their local flavour and specialities, thus the difference in pips and tactics. If Russia and Ottomans are to switch to western-european tech group, then all the other countires must be able to do so.
- 1
- 1
I didn't know about Ottomans being able to get Western units, but in Russia's case I think it's more about being a historical reference rather than a gameplay decision. In the OP:
this unit type change is cosmetic, not affecting the quality of the troops, up until a mission is redeemed (https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...nt-diary-7th-of-february-2023-russia.1567595/ , keyword "Westernize the Military").
To answer your last point, there's no real reason to have a mechanic for changing your tech group to Western for the reason you already stated, Eastern is simply better up until mil tech 28 (https://eu4.paradoxwikis.com/Land_units#Best_unit_group_by_tech_level).
Last edited:
- 1
They will be able to do this during the "Jannissary coup" disaster - you'll be able to switch to western-european tech group through "Mansure Army reform" in the next patch:
Europa Universalis IV - Development Diary 24th of January 2023
Merhaba ve hoşgeldin! I am excited to showcase the new content for the Ottomans. But before we get to that, I want to comment on some lessons we have learned from the development process of Lions of the North, even if we are quite happy with the...
See? The change is not entirely cosmetic, the pips for units are different - thus the quality of troops.
Last edited:
- 2
True, technically it would be best to retain Eastern units if possible, but by the point in the game where this would be unlocked it hardly matters. Tech group pips in general are a weird but mostly inconsequential army modifier.
- 1
Actually, so many spears were broken over this, so it's best not to give a full account. Many people have already complained that the upcoming change to the pips will seriously nerf the Ottomans.
- 1
Mr Ogele, I just noticed Sarai has a countermodifier that gave ducats to the Horde owner of Sarai. Was it also changed so that it gives plus 0.5 prestige, instead of money?
No, they still gain the ducats. I figured the extra bit of cash feels a bit nicer to play with as a horde than the extra prestige you would get.
- 2
- 2
Mr Ogele, I have a new question about this same matter, if you have the time to answer.
I watched a video in which someone who had early access to the DLC played as Muscovy, attacked Novgorod and a bunch of other neighbours, and lost the Tatar Yoke modifier without declaring a war against the horde owning Sarai. A message explained that Muscovy grew so much, that the hordes weren't any longer a match for them, so the modifier was revoked. The question is... By how much do you need to grow in order to get this?
And a second bonus question for me! Does Muscovy need to take Sarai in a peace deal out of horde land, or it just needs to occupy the province during a war, no need to definitely take it in a peace deal?
Thank you!