1.23 Player Ottoman Nerf
- Thread starter bly08
- Start date
-
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.
I think for 'casual' players indeed Ottomans have not changed that much, but your printscreen there is probably a little less then what i would have has Ottomans after 10 years in last patchwithout 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)
(counting my vassals of course, Syria/Iraq/Persia). Basicly until that point being normaly in 2-3 wars at all times and taking close to 100% warscore every time. And that is just not possible anymore, not saying that this is good or bad, just saying that they certainly got nerfed (if that was needed or not is up to everyone to decide)
At the risk of sounding like a broken record: I think there is a disagreement on what Bibor and you consider a "successful" game.
Bibor described what he thought of as an Ottoman playthrough where he accomplished anything he wanted to accomplish, and found doing that no less possible than in 1.22. "Everything" being (roughly) all territories that he thought it made sense for the Ottomans to conquer. He obviously (sorry for any misrepresentation) has no interest in world conquest or in doing stuff like Coptomans or revoking the privilegia as Ottomans.
The problems/changes from 1.22 that your thread describes are (almost) only relevant for an entirely different playstyle, based on WC or on trying to get as much development as possible as quickly as possible as a personal challenge (and there are some people, including me who actually consider it a good thing or don't care if such a playstyle is not catered to).
It is a good job this guy wasn't around earlier just after release for patches 1.2 & 1.3, as he would probably had a breakdown coping with not getting his WC.
The playstyle you describe just means making use of all the mechanics the game has to offer. I don't see it as a playstyle but more so as getting better at the game. Even if people don't care for it, why should those who do get punished? I used the example of Coptoman to show that the start offers a lot of variety in gameplay. I can frame the problem more simply in that the start used to be the best tutorial in the game, and was also the recommended choice for first time WCs. I don't think either is the case anymore as there are too many disadvantages that need to be overcome with new mechanics.
I also don't agree that conquest outside of historical borders should be restricted. EU4 is a sandbox game, and after 1k hours it turns into a spreadsheet simulator. I don't mind historical parameters, but difficult strategies that require planning should not be punished without good reason. The argument is that game design should reward skill. Your argument against comes from historical counterfactuals which get very messy after a certain point if you insist that a certain country could not have done x by year y.
Oh, I don't think that there should be "punishment", which is an absurd idea. I think that it simply shouldn't matter how a given change affects world conquest.
To use an only remotely accurate analogy: think of playing EU4 as of driving a car. I like to drive around safely in that car at moderate speed and take in the landscape. You take it for races. Since I do not consider it a racing car, but a car for pleasant trips around the countryside, I do not care how any change to the car affects its properties as a racing vehicle, and I do not think that any development time and ressources should be spent on worrying how the car can go more quickly or slowly in races.
It's not only about WC but maintaining a well-designed start that serves as a tutorial for blobbing, which itself involves understanding economy/trade/warfare, which in turn helps with every possible objective that can be accomplished including WC. There is merit to preserving the start for those reasons, especially since, using your analogy, nearly every new feature in every patch already impacts how fast cars go. I won't guess why there was so much backlash against AI Ottomans, but not understanding game mechanics such as how guaranteeing Byzantium makes a significant impact on their blobbing probably has something to do with it.
Thank you for the effort, but you're only half right. My old/new strategy for the Ottomans is identical to a WC opener, with the exception of not going immediately after Portugal or some such move.
There are four points I want to make that also benefit a new player learning how to blob properly.
1. Going Christian: If you want to min-max and go coptic, you still can. Nothing is preventing you from going ham on Armenian (QQ etc) religion territories. However, you lose the Ottoman government system which might or might not be more mana efficient that Personal Union fishing. Most of the nations you want a PU over will be on your kill list anyway (with the possible exception of France). It also requires you to go full Religious early to make full use of Deus Vult.
2. Loss of territorial cores on Anatolia is actually a good thing. It teaches you that not all land is good, especially in the early game. Free cores on Anatolia negated the need to expand your economic base and instead enabled you to rampage all over Levant. Most of the blobbing in a WC will be past 1600s, so before that you want to prioritize lands that provide you with a strong economic base. If you look at your starting position, in the 10-province radius, the only lands that are really worth conquering are Constantinople (not even Morea), Kosovo, coastal and middle Syria, Lower Egypt (that's Nile Delta), a few Greek islands, central Mesopotamia and the southern coast of the Caspian Sea. Even with the Ottoman government and empire rank, you can't possible stateify all of Levantine and Greek culture. And you shouldn't, because most of it is not worth the AE or the admin points.
3. A Strong economic base and staging grounds for future conquests are more important than conquering all of Anatolia in the first 10 years.
Attacking Aragon early (with probable help from France), vassalizing Crimea, Conquering Syria, Egypt and Mesopotamia should be your priorities #1. You still get claims for most of this. This grants you not only a foothold in Western and Eastern Europe, Africa, and Asia (on the way to India), but also provides you with a strong internal trade network that doesn't suffer from overextension penalties. Acquiring dominance in Alexandria and Aleppo trade nodes is the income you need to proceed to trade company land, while simultaneously working on the colonizers.
Also, the anatolian lands you don't own - aren't so hot anymore. Anatolia has more states and provinces now. Most of these unowned Anatolian (or Greek) states don't go over 25 dev.
4. There are new mechanics and know-hows people should learn how to utilize.
- There are muslim events now ("new madrassas") that lower development costs in provinces or whole states which make it even easier to develop for institutions.
- There's now a semi-permanent muslim 10% AE reduction if you befriend/ally/vassalize a country like Najd. If I'm not mistaken it's 50 admin for a 20 year duration.
- Trading in gems now reduces inflation by 0.05 which is so huge you should prioritize stateifying and developing Mutapa and turning Kilwa into a trade company.
- Ottomans now get missions to get a foothold in East Africa and Oman that not only provide you with a claim, but also with a territorial core.
- Thanks to Florryworry's video we finally know exactly how to deal with coalitions. Mastering that alone should triple the land you can take without repercussions.
Last edited:
1. Coptic is fine but not before taking most of Persia or else you get boxed in even faster.
2. Losing cores doesn't teach anything except that cores are good. You're not considering the fact that leaving Candar/Karaman who both will get to -100 opinion quickly from AE which just means a faster coalition. In general it's better to take only valuable land early but not in this case.
3. Doing stuff like taking land from Aragon is just spreading AE around for no gain. It's the opposite of coalition management. You're asking players to ignore potential coalition members that are next door to attack Christian nations across Europe that don't get AE from Sunni conquests.
2. Losing cores doesn't teach anything except that cores are good. You're not considering the fact that leaving Candar/Karaman who both will get to -100 opinion quickly from AE which just means a faster coalition. In general it's better to take only valuable land early but not in this case.
3. Doing stuff like taking land from Aragon is just spreading AE around for no gain. It's the opposite of coalition management. You're asking players to ignore potential coalition members that are next door to attack Christian nations across Europe that don't get AE from Sunni conquests.
Last edited:
Not quite on 1500, but I had to wait for Ethiopia to peace Mameluke's out. currently sitting at 1400 ish dev. if i where to annex my vassals i'd be at 1478. Even though persia dosnt have any cores anymore I dont think its an issue., in fact i'd probably jut take the mission to claim muscat and hop into india that way.
I have no coalitions, yes it was a little tricker to micro the outraged opinions out, but perfectly doable. I even enjoyed this blob spree somwhat, I found myself using features I'd never used before.
Plenty of direction too go in here, spain italy hungary, poland, india.
I don't think 1.23 changed how quick you can blob, just increased the micro a bit.
I have no coalitions, yes it was a little tricker to micro the outraged opinions out, but perfectly doable. I even enjoyed this blob spree somwhat, I found myself using features I'd never used before.
Plenty of direction too go in here, spain italy hungary, poland, india.
I don't think 1.23 changed how quick you can blob, just increased the micro a bit.
I think I get where your frustration is coming from since I have pretty much the same feeling every time a nerf hits the deck. You'd think there's absolutely no good reason to nerf or even buff a country when they are parameters you get used too while playing the game, especially if, like me, you are exclusively playing single player. Things that used to work don't anymore, which is a big deal in a game where the longetivity relies on providing a variety of experiences instead of a balanced one (the downfall of the likes of Stelaris imo). I'm still on 1.19.2 because I have a few campaigns to complete before introducing the ages mechanic.
A lot of it comes from the fact that whatever was very familiar before the changes, just isn't anymore. However, if the game came out with the current Ottoman, would we still suggest to improve their core cost reduction? Would we ask Paradox to give them cores all over Anatolia? Would we ask them to border Armenia to make it easier to convert to coptic? Probably not. Would the Ottoman experience still be different from the France experience or the Muscovy experience? Probably, yes. But I do agree with you that they are much more similar to them now than they were before the patch (just like France when they removed her vassals).
A lot of it comes from the fact that whatever was very familiar before the changes, just isn't anymore. However, if the game came out with the current Ottoman, would we still suggest to improve their core cost reduction? Would we ask Paradox to give them cores all over Anatolia? Would we ask them to border Armenia to make it easier to convert to coptic? Probably not. Would the Ottoman experience still be different from the France experience or the Muscovy experience? Probably, yes. But I do agree with you that they are much more similar to them now than they were before the patch (just like France when they removed her vassals).