1.23 Player Ottoman Nerf

[erneiz_hyde]

Hm, didn't quite manage 1600, I only get a little over 1000 dev by 1500. But honestly if I can get to 1000 dev by this point I don't think I have the gall to still whine "expansion has been killed hurr durr". edit: I checked again and I'm currently at 1750 by year 1539, didn't remember exactly what dev I sit on by 1500.

 

[bly08]

Are you no-CBing Tyrone? That's a bit risky with Orthodox spillover.

What other Christian land did you take besides full annex Byz?

I think I would consider going way over alliance limit - allying QQ, some of the larger Persian guys, Hormoz, some of the hordes, maybe even AQ is big enough to merit an alliance. Then minors as necessary. Not like you need the dip that early..

Think we can adjust by targeting "terminals" of Sunni land e.g. zanzibar harder since the spillover from annexing those guys is less obnoxious.

Byzantium/white peace Serbia -> Candar + CoB Dulkadir + white peace Non-CoB Ramazan -> AQ + Karaman. No Christian land besides Byzantium.

Polish alliance (required restarts). Mamluks at positive opinion but will rival me soon with >60 AE. Hungary/Venice/QQ rivals.

Better diplomat micro wouldn't matter too much. In 5 years or so blobbing won't be possible for a while. No Hanbali school yet.

I can try going way over alliance limit with Ajam, GH + minors. Though QQ needs to chewed through or else it would take too long to go through Levant. I can also try converting to Christian and going through Orthodox to Musocvy. Neither are attractive options though.

Tyrone is for an HRE strat. NoCB gave something like -8 to Venice who are already rivals and beyond hope, no effect otherwise. AE without:

 

[bly08]

Hm, didn't quite manage 1600, I only get a little over 1000 dev by 1500. But honestly if I can get to 1000 dev by this point I don't think I have the gall to still whine "expansion has been killed hurr durr". edit: I checked again and I'm currently at 1750 by year 1539, didn't remember exactly what dev I sit on by 1500.

Coalition situation?

1550 map on 1.22, around 3600 dev in 1540. Give or take 500 that's still >1k more. "Killed" is hyperbole but >1k dev hardcapped by AE is a big nerf since the AI hasn't gotten that much weaker in comparison. There's no reason for player Ottoman to have less development than a horde in 1500.

 

[ywxiao]

I understand what you are coming from, but you are not putting forth any suggestions on how this can be made differently. Besides, achievements are what you can do within a certain set of limitations. If you don't like the limitations then just use console to get what you want.

You are probably trying to see if you can achieve more in absolute terms, like you want to get 5000 dev by 1540 in 1.23, and now you can't. It's frustrating when that happens, but that's just part of the new game. Personally I don't want to see a game where every patch makes it so I can conquer faster, or get more money, because the game balance will be broken very soon.

If all we want is a nation that can conquer the world by 1500, then I pick Ulm. Give it double the bonus bears get.

 

[bly08]

As written in the OP, buffing neighbor army sizes for example is a disadvantage that can be overcome with skill, as opposed to a hard cap like AE which affects all players equally. Another suggestion is to give the Ottomans an extra diplomat, even if temporarily, which would solve most of the problems without affecting AI strength.

I see no reason for the Ottoman start itself to be nerfed along with the AI. On the other hand I don't care if the AI is nerfed to satisfy the player base though I'd prefer to keep the non-Ottoman WCs challenging. There are history purists with good intentions and there are others who simply want an easier game.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I don't see why Ottomans need super special treatment to allow a pre-set expansion rate. They were nerfed, obviously. They're still a top 5 non-horde WC nation and can still snag crushing dev in short order.

Ming --> Yuan is probably your best bet for unfettered/uncontested expansion.

 

[Incompetent]

OP: I'm not seeing how it's a bad thing for the game that you can't blob quite as fast as you used to as Ottomans.

I don't see why Ottomans need super special treatment to allow a pre-set expansion rate. They were nerfed, obviously. They're still a top 5 non-horde WC nation and can still snag crushing dev in short order.

Ming --> Yuan is probably your best bet for unfettered/uncontested expansion.

I see Yuan can form Mughals as well. If it's game balance we're worried about, the devs should really take a look at how easy it is to get permanent claims all over India and China (on top of receiving strong blobbing ideas).

 

[ywxiao]

As written in the OP, buffing neighbor army sizes for example is a disadvantage that can be overcome with skill, as opposed to a hard cap like AE which affects all players equally. Another suggestion is to give the Ottomans an extra diplomat, even if temporarily, which would solve most of the problems without affecting AI strength.

I see no reason for the Ottoman start itself to be nerfed along with the AI. On the other hand I don't care if the AI is nerfed to satisfy the player base though I'd prefer to keep the non-Ottoman WCs challenging. There are history purists with good intentions and there are others who simply want an easier game.

So give them the modifier, "Scourge of Christendom" once they take Constantinople. +1 diplomat, -10% AE with Muslim, -10% core cost. Last until age of reformation?

Also make it that any Christian nation allied with "Scourge of Christendom" they will get -2 dip rep and -2 yearly legitimacy.

 

[bly08]

OP: I'm not seeing how it's a bad thing for the game that you can't blob quite as fast as you used to as Ottomans.



I see Yuan can form Mughals as well. If it's game balance we're worried about, the devs should really take a look at how easy it is to get permanent claims all over India and China (on top of receiving strong blobbing ideas).

I don't see why they deserve to be nerfed again since the 33 CCR to 20 change was recent. Part of their appeal was that the start allowed for blobbing with no convoluted tag switches. Ming - Shan - Yuan - Mughals costs thousands of mana for perm claims over India and Oirat which is probably a net loss until much later.

 

[Maldazar]

Except the Mameluke annexation in 1520+, you can pretty much expand historically as of now.

Here is a simplified timeline of Ottomans conquests post 1444:
- 1448: Kosovo
- 1453: Constantinople
- 1458: Athens
- 1459: Serbia
- 1460: Morea
- 1461: Candar
- 1461: Trebizond
- 1463: Bosnia
- 1475: Caffa & Genoese colonies
- 1482: Wallachia definitively made a vassal of the ottomans.
- 1487: Karaman
- 1498: Montenegro
- 1514: East Anatolia (most of Aq starting territory)
- 1516: Ramazan

Even if you pace yourself, you can certainly expand faster than historically. Then of course, the Ottomans conquest of the Mamelukes is impossible to achieve in game in the same time-period. This was a one time extraordinary event however, thus very difficult to replicate under standard game mechanics.

There was a DHE in early versions that allowed to take all the Mamelukes in one go, but unfortunately it's not active anymore at this point. I had hoped that CoC would have tackled this issue as the DLC deal with exactly this region.

I also think they should have added some event chain/missions/decissions or something to replicate that conquest, because it was historicaly important for the definitive dominance of the Ottomans in the region, and should be in the game, the same as there are stuff like:
- Burgundian Inheritance
- Iberian wedding
- Austria-Hungary PU
- Austria-Bohemia PU
- Poland-Lithuania PU

I mean, NOT adding anything for the conquest of the Mameluks is the same as removing those events, basicly making the nations that depend on those events to never hitting their historical importance/dominance. Right now I have seen Ottomans dying way too often or at least not being the menance they were for europe in any game. (I never see them actualy taking stuff like Hungary, sieging Vienna, etc..), heck, they even have a hard time taking the balkans now.

And sure, there are games where they still do well, but even then by 1520 (reign of Suleiman) they will most likely be FAR behind historical power, at this time they had an army of somewhere between 150.000 - 300.000 (depending on sources).

I do understand that the big issue here is that a snowballing Ottomans until around 1620 would be hard to decline afterwards in EU4 because of game mechanics, so I get why they might have wanted to slow them down a bit, but has someone who loves history it hurts to see Ottomans around 1520 still not even with east anatolia conquered..

 

[makaramus]

I don't see why they deserve to be nerfed again since the 33 CCR to 20 change was recent. Part of their appeal was that the start allowed for blobbing with no convoluted tag switches. Ming - Shan - Yuan - Mughals costs thousands of mana for perm claims over India and Oirat which is probably a net loss until much later.

problem wasnt coring cost... problem was their expansion WAS WAY TOO GUARANTEED!
they allways eat mamluks allways conquer hungary allways conquer qara qoyunlu allways conquer russia etc...

it was too much happaning it became so much boring! that region was ALLWAYS NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO is same!(unless you are byzantium or mamluks)
same thing happening to china too and devolpers nerfed ming because of that too!

also as I know ottomans did fight aganist coalitions in their massive expansion dont dare to bring that ottoman map and rage for aggresive expansion at the same time

rembember: historical outcomes are desired to exist in game but FIRST THING aimed is gameplay... if gameplay is allways being same then hurt historical outcomes for some

HELL RELIGIUS PEACE ALMOST NEVER HAPPENING IN HRE BUT YOU ARE NOT EVEN RAGING FOR THAT O_O

short version: its not they deserved a nerf... they are nerfed for shake of gameplay because it was boring region .

 

[Maldazar]

HELL RELIGIUS PEACE ALMOST NEVER HAPPENING IN HRE BUT YOU ARE NOT EVEN RAGING FOR THAT O_O

Wut? I think that in EVERY SINGLE ONE of my games, where I was not personaly the leader of one of the sides of the league it ended in religious peace. Always goes the same way, heavy fighting, at some point one side finaly starts taking a real edge, can go for the win, and then white peace (or at least, not enough warscore to secure the religous victory, so they peace out because of war exaustion/duration of war and it ends in religous peace...).

 

[makaramus]

Wut? I think that in EVERY SINGLE ONE of my games, where I was not personaly the leader of one of the sides of the league it ended in religious peace. Always goes the same way, heavy fighting, at some point one side finaly starts taking a real edge, can go for the win, and then white peace (or at least, not enough warscore to secure the religous victory, so they peace out because of war exaustion/duration of war and it ends in religous peace...).

I saw it happening twice ... %65 catholic wins %35 catholic wins

 

[bly08]

In what possible way does it hurt gameplay to have a powerful Ottoman start?

 

[makaramus]

In what possible way does it hurt gameplay to have a powerful Ottoman start?

here what happens
ALLWAYS no matter what you seeing half of the map green
is it too much to see conquest reversed and mamluks instead conquered anatolia + greece?

"diffrent experinces" are aimed in this game... history is in second place after that. ottomans are still winning that region %70 of time MINIMUM but now you can see region yellow instead of green too

 

[bly08]

This thread is talking about the player Ottoman start, not AI Ottoman, read the OP.

 

[makaramus]

This thread is talking about the player Ottoman start, not AI Ottoman, read the OP.

without making ottoman ai more stupid they cant actually nerf ai only :/ So it makes sense that now they are not strong as before for player too
also I still feel strong as before when play ottoma (pic year 1490)

Just fought with venice + rhodos + lucca to conquer "ottoman sea"P) austria gave 23k soldier to assist venice (wich was actually almost turning tide of battle drained my manpower quickly) but result was 100 warscore victory forced them to give me entire region but land genoa holding (wich is next)

update: year 1495 conquered half of ragusa . 1 year later formed coalition aganist me and I allied france together we pushed them back and forced to white peace. soon as peace is over I conquered halof egypt from mamluks now I got most of coastline of egypt wich are richest part of region year is 1502 almost historical and if I directly focused on mamluks only it was even more. only reason is I am not forcing myself on it fully I never fought with qara qoyunlu ever and not because my fear of coalitions but because I wanted to finish admin idea group

 

[Bibor]

Okay, so I did an Ottoman start in Persia patch.
By 1560, casual blobbing, I had nothing I wanted to conquer, except a few provinces in Arabia and Persia.
By 1600, out of pure boredom, I conquered half of Russia, all of Balkans, East Africa and united Islam.
By around 1620 I ran out of possible rivals.
Now it's 1693, I spent the last 100 years developing states and making the borders pretty.

During all this time, half of my army was drilling in Thrace and Constantinople because I like pretty blue army borders.

I guess my point is, the new "ottoman nerf" did nothing to hamper the player. On the contrary. It has solid expansion options, along with a few (finally) strong opponents that don't implode by 1500. And by strong, I mean, for a skilled player, it takes around 40.000 manpower to permanently cripple either Poland or the Mameluks. If you don't want to merc up, that's around 20 years worth of manpower total. So it's easily doable by 1500.

 

[bly08]

I'm not sure how you're able to conclude the nerf "did nothing to hamper the player" from your anecdote. Have you done a similar run on 1.22 and compared the development numbers? No one in this thread was arguing that Mamluks could not be defeated before 1500.

 

[Bibor]

I'm not sure how you're able to conclude the nerf "did nothing to hamper the player" from your anecdote. Have you done a similar run on 1.22 and compared the development numbers? No one in this thread was arguing that Mamluks could not be defeated before 1500.

It did nothing to hamper the player. QQ is Shia and not Levantine. The only nations that care about you conquering the Anatolian beyliks are the same guys who would've cared in the previous patch, except they now care more. The only real difference is that you now focus admin instead of mil. That's a hard choice, considering the sultan is a 15-year old 6/4/6.