Turko-Semitic or Anatolian Debate

[metallicania]

In Todays (28th January) development diary we saw that Turko-Semitic culture group has made a comeback. I'll be arguing against this change and why Turkish, Pontic and Greek cultures should form an "Anatolian" culture group in following statements:
1) Turkish culture doesn't share anything with Arabs other than language and religion: Ottomans and other Turkish states are already sunni and that already states that Turks and Arabs share religious culture, a common culture group isn't needed.

Yes, Ottoman alphabet is written with Arabic letters and there were a lot of Arabic (on par with Persian and French) words in Ottoman Turkish. But I want to quote Johan here:

We also made a complete overhaul of how cultures work to remove the ties to language, and tie them more together to similar cultures, to create more historically plausible countries and relations.

2)Turkish culture and Greek culture shares a lot (even if neither sides accept it): Since everyone knows how much these two share in cuisine (gyro,yoghurt,baklava,coffee,sarma,dolma, etc.) I won't talk about it. But these two cultures also share alcoholic drinks (raki, ouzo, Aegean wines) which Arabs don't have and even forbidden. Besides that music, customs and genetics are very similiar. Ottoman rulers has more Greek origin than any others including Turkish (sorry for citing Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mothers_of_the_Ottoman_sultans )

3)Greek culture group is too lonely: Right now, Greek and Pontic form a culture group which is very tiny, considering even Hungarians will get a considerably wide culture group in 1.16.

4)Andalusians are in Iberian culture group: Despite not originally being Iberian and being sunni, Andalusians are in Iberian culture group which shows that Turkish culture can be in a possible Anatolian(or an another name) culture group.

Thats my thoughts on this change which will come in 1.16.

 

[DanubianCossak]

I can tell you one thing though, Turks in Arab group will be a great source of inspiration for teasing my Turkish friends.

Yes, i can already see that

"Piri, kanki, weve known each other for how many years now? You never told me you were Arab..."

 

[Sabotage13]

Reason seems mostly to be related to Byzantine fanboyism.

 

[zamieo]

4)Andalusians are in Iberian culture group: Despite not originally being Iberian and being sunni, Andalusians are in Iberian culture group which shows that Turkish culture can be in a possible Anatolian(or an another name) culture group.

Eh, weren't most Andalusians Iberians that had been living in Spain for centuries before the Umayyad invasion? Many of them probably spoke Spanish and far from everyone was Muslim. That might not be the case for the Moorish elite and the people in power, but the commoners were probably fairly close to other people living in the Spanish peninsula, especially after the Alhambra Decree.

 

[Tufto]

It should not be with either the Arabs or the Byzantines. Turkish should be in the Iranian group. This was the golden age of Persianate culture, with the cultural circles of the Ottomans, Safavids, Mughals and Uzbeks all endorsing and embracing Persian styles of literature, painting, architecture &c of the time. It makes the most sense by far.

 

[metallicania]

Eh, weren't most Andalusians Iberians that had been living in Spain for centuries before the Umayyad invasion? Many of them probably spoke Spanish and far from everyone was Muslim. That might not be the case for the Moorish elite and the people in power, but the commoners were probably fairly close to other people living in the Spanish peninsula, especially after the Alhambra Decree.

Most of the Turkey is Anatolians who speak Turkish. They lived centuries before Turks in Cental Asia arrived. Otherwise Turks now would have slant eyes.
Besides that, before Ottomans Turks found Sultanate of Rum. Rum means Roman (Or Greek after Ottomans) in Turkish.

 

[Ternega]

I would like to note that as stated in DD cultural changes are for gameplay not historicity alone. However, I think having greek+turkish union makes a lot of sense from both standpoints, Representing importance of greeks to ottoman state and avoiding a situation where we have ottos overbuffed to all hell for no reason that I can fathom. Do remember that greece revolted in 1820 not 1500 so anyone arguing for that to be important doesn't have a point. This would also allow paradox to put more greek muslim provinces in anatolia w/o any harm to Ottomans, just for the sake of historical accuracy.

P.S. Should I start with the jokes about this never happening on the grounds of this would buff byz, or can we skip this step .

 

[Kiyant]

There are 3 solutions which are much better then the Turko-Semitic abomination.
1. Like you said a Anatolian culture group together with Greek and Pontic.
2. Like Tufto said a Turko-Persian culture group since the Turks,Azeris and Türkmen had a big Persian impact.
3. Just let it stay Oghuz together with Azeri and Türkmen.
All these three are much more historically accurate then Turko-Semitic.

 

[Fallofthepurple]

I've mentioned in the initial thread that while keeping Oghuz is probably the best choice it doesnt add much to the gameplay most of the time so I suppose this was the reason to bring the abomination that is Turko-Semitic back.

Now one could ask: "Do the Ottomans need this buff?"
If your answer is no, congratulations keeping Oghuz is probably the best decision to you.

"But I really, really want this buff!"
You could very well just put Turkish in a group with Persian which would make a lot more sense than Turko-Semitic in this case though some people seem to be concerned that AI Kebab might push torwards east too much.
Well then I'd suggest to move Turkish and Greek into a group, this would also help out the current Greek culture group as it is quite empty and hold them more in the historic area.

 

[Sabotage13]

I would like to note that as stated in DD cultural changes are for gameplay not historicity alone.

Turkish being part of Arab group doesn't make much sense from a gameplay POV either.

 

[MysticSeawolf]

Well, in my opinion Anatolia needs a new culture group named 'Anatolian', which will include 'Turks, Rums and Pontus'. In Ottoman archives Greeks and Rums actually considered two different groups.

Rums means the Romans who lived in Anatolia before it's fall, while their culture has bonds with Greeks in reality they are hybrid of Romans and Greeks. Many consider Byzantium as a Greek Empire, in reality it is actually a Rum Empire. Greeks are considered as a race, who lived in Morea and it's surroundings. In the last speech of XI. Constantine before the conquest of Constantinople he refers his people as the children of Greeks and Romans.

Pontus have actually very little bonds with the Greeks. First Pontus Kingdom actually build by the Persian colonists, later in history it was conquered by the Romans, then the control of the pontus lands will fall to the Byzantium in later history.

In Old Turkish Anatolia was refered as 'Diyar-ı Rum' which means 'Land of Rums'. Anatolia Seljuks were also refered as 'Rum Seljuks', also the Turks/Seljuks who lived in these lands refered as 'Rumi'.

 

[DanubianCossak]

Turkish being part of Arab group doesn't make much sense from a gameplay POV either.

It does. It has to do with AI and general stability of countries. So if you want AI to expand certain way, making them same culture as expansion target area does in fact statistically help.

Trust me, i would know. Ive spent more hours experimenting with this than it is healthy. Ive had Turks with Arabs before it was cool XD

In fact it was so successful that i had to write some missions and stuff to Persuade Ottomans to expand a little bit in the Balkans too.

Spoiler

Edit: i mean dont get me wrong, im not a fun of gameplay changes that differ to how things are in real life, but the argument that this particular change isnt beneficial for gameplay is just wrong.

 

[petertel123]

It does. It has to do with AI and general stability of countries. So if you want AI to expand certain way, making them same culture as expansion target area does in fact statistically help.

Trust me, i would know. Ive spent more hours experimenting with this than it is healthy. Ive had Turks with Arabs before it was cool XD

In fact it was so successful that i had to write some missions and stuff to Persuade Ottomans to expand a little bit in the Balkans too.

Spoiler

Edit: i mean dont get me wrong, im not a fun of gameplay changes that differ to how things are in real life, but the argument that this particular change isnt beneficial for gameplay is just wrong.

how is it wrong? the ottomans already consistantly conquer egypt, they dont need more help with that, buffing the most powerful country in the game is very bad for gameplay IMO

 

[DanubianCossak]

how is it wrong? the ottomans already consistantly conquer egypt, they dont need more help with that, buffing the most powerful country in the game is very bad for gameplay IMO

Its wrong in sense that putting a culture in same group with cultures you want it to conquer IS good for gameplay, if you understand what i mean (if those who make those decisions want such conquest dynamics in the first place). I dont wanna get into whether thats needed for Ottomans in particular or not, but in general its true.

 

[PiriReis]

I can tell you one thing though, Turks in Arab group will be a great source of inspiration for teasing my Turkish friends.

Yes, i can already see that
"Piri, kanki, weve known each other for how many years now? You never told me you were Arab..."

Are we going play like that? Lets see:

Battle of Kosovo,
Kosovo, Battle of (1389), battle fought at Kosovo Polje between the armies of the Serbian prince Lazar and the Turkish forces of the Ottoman sultan Murad I. The battle ended in a Turkish victory, the collapse of Serbia, and the complete encirclement of the crumbling Byzantine Empire by Turkish armies.

You guys were once such a loyal vassal. Is your inner Serb starting to rage?

@metallicania anything but the current situation is better but I doubt that it will change given that there is no consistency between the groups. At one side you have a Russian culture divided on the basis of (medieval) dialects, then you have a group where Andalusian Arabic (Granada) is in the same group with Castilian (which pretty much destroyed it) and then you have the Persian group where apparently everyone from the Kurds to India are related to each other.

 

[DanubianCossak]

Are we going play like that? Lets see:



You guys were once such a loyal vassal. Is your inner Serb starting to rage?

Anani s-stay calm Danub stay calm

 

[The-Doc]

Ottoman Semitic is an abomination. I much prefer the Anatolian proposal. Please Developers, don't do this!

 

[metallicania]

@metallicania anything but the current situation is better but I doubt that it will change given that there is no consistency between the groups. At one side you have a Russian culture divided on the basis of (medieval) dialects, then you have a group where Andalusian Arabic (Granada) is in the same group with Castilian (which pretty much destroyed it) and then you have the Persian group where apparently everyone from the Kurds to India are related to each other.

I didn't suggest Persian because of that, it is already too messy and big. I agree that there are a lot of inconsistencies around culture groups but if Turkish won't be in Oghuz group, the most logical one remains Anatolian. As others said, I too think that anything is better than Turko-Semitic.

 

[Omegador]

1. Put Greek/Pontic into a "Balkan" group with South Slavs and Albanians
2. Turks with Persians, they were both Empires, unlikely to take over one another easily due to Sunni/Shia split. Common culture.
There.

 

[Kiyant]

An answer would be pretty nice because i hope this abomination doesnt make it into the live version of the game.