1.8 Byzantium

[Athan.]

All of this makes me wonder why they ever bothered with the Purple Phoenix DLC. Granted, it was a pre-order bonus, and much has changed since then. But why design events and units at all for a nation you are determined to have get crushed every time without gamey tactics?

http://www.eu4wiki.com/Purple_Phoenix

 

[Stategem161803]

Queue the "Byzantium is impossible now" threads followed by the inevitable BYZ empires in the empire thread.

 

[Roelath]

With revolt risk that way it is... and how rebellions operate it may be an advantage to the Byzantines.

 

[Viperswhip]

With revolt risk that way it is... and how rebellions operate it may be an advantage to the Byzantines.

Why? We have very few cores now, not claims, can a nation form from a historical core? Does Byz show up in the history tab of those provinces?

 

[net.split]

There have been some changes to warscores, diplomacy, and rivals. Perhaps you can ally a strong Ottoman rival now and rely on their strength to hold off the Ottomans while you build strength in other places?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Queue the "Byzantium is impossible now" threads followed by the inevitable BYZ empires in the empire thread.

Indeed, but this is the kind of pointless BS stealth change that most frequently pisses people off. Obviously it's not going to be impossible; anybody who's won with far more challenging starts knows that.

But someone took the time to go and remove those cores, and I will gladly throw down the gauntlet and say that PI will never effectively defend this choice on a historical or gameplay basis that is consistent with their implementations elsewhere, such as Castile having cores on Granada. Of course, this is knowing that they won't try too ^_^.

 

[Panzerschiffe]

Next patch, Byzantines will become a horde.

Those poor byz always get a bat to the head each patch.

 

[Ranjid]

Indeed, but this is the kind of pointless BS stealth change that most frequently pisses people off. Obviously it's not going to be impossible; anybody who's won with far more challenging starts knows that.

But someone took the time to go and remove those cores, and I will gladly throw down the gauntlet and say that PI will never effectively defend this choice on a historical or gameplay basis that is consistent with their implementations elsewhere, such as Castile having cores on Granada. Of course, this is knowing that they won't try too ^_^.

The only start which was kinda impossible prior to 1.8 was Chimu. Everything else was doable by gamey tactics and clever playstyle. But that's not the problem. This nerf was uncalled for. AI Byzantium doesn't even have a chance of gaining back Rhodos, Crete or Cyprus, if rebels don't swap them. This nerf is clearly directed at Byz players. I don't understand that. Sure, I'll rebuild the empire like I did in every other patch as well. But it still pisses me off.

I would really LOVE to see the justification for this move.

 

[net.split]

Indeed, but this is the kind of pointless BS stealth change that most frequently pisses people off. Obviously it's not going to be impossible; anybody who's won with far more challenging starts knows that.

But someone took the time to go and remove those cores, and I will gladly throw down the gauntlet and say that PI will never effectively defend this choice on a historical or gameplay basis that is consistent with their implementations elsewhere, such as Castile having cores on Granada. Of course, this is knowing that they won't try too ^_^.

I think someone's answer before was correct - it's a gameplay change to reduce Byz vassal-feeding.

Another possibility is to make it so that Byz doesn't get release-revived from a lost war into those islands as a OPM. That's a pretty weird scenario (it's weird when it happens in Corfu too; there's little need for a Byz core there either, since they can't reasonably beat the Venetians early on, and later they can just forge it or holy war or whatever). Better to have those release as Knights or Cyprus instead.

 

[Viperswhip]

I think someone's answer before was correct - it's a gameplay change to reduce Byz vassal-feeding.

Another possibility is to make it so that Byz doesn't get release-revived from a lost war into those islands as a OPM. That's a pretty weird scenario (it's weird when it happens in Corfu too; there's little need for a Byz core there either, since they can't reasonably beat the Venetians early on, and later they can just forge it or holy war or whatever). Better to have those release as Knights or Cyprus instead.

You can crush the Venetian navy within 5 years of game start. Thanks for stopping by a Byz thread.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

The only start which was kinda impossible prior to 1.8 was Chimu

This is what I mean. Chimu wasn't even a top 10 country in difficulty after 1.4 altered the upstream trade propagation rules (it allowed them to afford double as much military w/o loans as it could previously and gave full sight of Inca). Winning was a matter of same or better shock than Inca had. Compared to starts like Ashanti (had to wade through natives to hit Oyo), Jangladesh (awful ruler + vassal of Delhi), Mongolia (vassal of a nation with a shock 5 general to start), crap like Moldavia, Khmer, sukhotai, Chimu was actually easier.

Byzantium will still be doable on similar grounds...but considering how recently they had land there, and that nations that didn't even exist yet like Syria and Transylvania have cores...this move is preposterous and it's maddening that someone spent time making it .

They won't justify this move. They might not even try to do so, or they do like the horde thread and argue from a broken initial premise as if it's obvious, then when called out for it disappear, but they won't actually justify this move.

Of course, I'd love to be given a reason to change my mind, but experience suggests otherwise unfortunately .

I think someone's answer before was correct - it's a gameplay change to reduce Byz vassal-feeding.

I was careful to mention "that's consistent with implementations elsewhere".

Examples of how this line of thinking doesn't make sense when compared against implementations elsewhere:

1. Guyenne
2. Syria
3. Persia
4. Iraq
5. Finland
6. Granada with Castile cores (Granada had this much longer than Ottomans/Venice/Cyprus had BYZ cores)

And that's the problem. Why is feeding BYZ bad...but it's okay to feed Guyenne or Persia? Why is one more problematic to "balance" (as if this game has a passing semblance of balance anyway) than another?

That is why that answer is not and can not possibly be the correct one, unless it's actually applied consistently, and not just "when it's convenient to say it".

 

[Ranjid]

This is what I mean. Chimu wasn't even a top 10 country in difficulty after 1.4 altered the upstream trade propagation rules (it allowed them to afford double as much military w/o loans as it could previously and gave full sight of Inca). Winning was a matter of same or better shock than Inca had. Compared to starts like Ashanti (had to wade through natives to hit Oyo), Jangladesh (awful ruler + vassal of Delhi), Mongolia (vassal of a nation with a shock 5 general to start), crap like Moldavia, Khmer, sukhotai, Chimu was actually easier.

Byzantium will still be doable on similar grounds...but considering how recently they had land there, and that nations that didn't even exist yet like Syria and Transylvania have cores...this move is preposterous and it's maddening that someone spent time making it .

They won't justify this move. They might not even try to do so, or they do like the horde thread and argue from a broken initial premise as if it's obvious, then when called out for it disappear, but they won't actually justify this move.

Of course, I'd love to be given a reason to change my mind, but experience suggests otherwise unfortunately .

Oh well, I haven't played Chimu in ages. I didn't even know they were passively buffed. Of course I didn't count in all the vassals, although Moldavia could work with some luck. But I get your point. It's sad how it turned out, however. Well, no need for me to play Ironman with Byz anyway. I'll just add the cores back in a minimod.

 

[net.split]

You can crush the Venetian navy within 5 years of game start. Thanks for stopping by a Byz thread.

I'd expect the Venetians to build more military ships in 1.8 (just like the Ottomans). For a sufficiently masterful start where that still doesn't pose a problem within 5 years, the changes to BYZ cores are basically irrelevant. Thanks for unnecessary snark?

I was careful to mention "that's consistent with implementations elsewhere".

Examples of how this line of thinking doesn't make sense when compared against implementations elsewhere:

1. Guyenne
2. Syria
3. Persia
4. Iraq
5. Finland
6. Granada with Castile cores (Granada had this much longer than Ottomans/Venice/Cyprus had BYZ cores)

And that's the problem. Why is feeding BYZ bad...but it's okay to feed Guyenne or Persia? Why is one more problematic to "balance" (as if this game has a passing semblance of balance anyway) than another?

That is why that answer is not and can not possibly be the correct one, unless it's actually applied consistently, and not just "when it's convenient to say it".

Off the top of my head, possibilities could include:

1. They haven't gotten around to the others yet (or even recognized some of them)
2. Relative importance of the provinces isn't the same due to a combination of overall province value and the balance of powers in the region
3. Having the "Byzantine Empire" as a vassal state reads rather oddly and is thus being discouraged as an optimal strategy

I'm starting to think more that it's the state release reason, though. Corfu is still weird.

 

[Derikari]

Can you declare war supporting Greek patriots for a free flip and army, bypassing nationalism? Might not have to even send troops to those islands. On Jake's stream it looks like Byz also lost the cultural union with Georgia.

 

[Viperswhip]

I will say that this is the first nerf directly targeting Byz in a while. The scorched earth change was probably necessary, but I know they were thinking about the 1.51 cheese strategy when they made the choice, it also really helped England in 100 years war.

The dishonoured call casus was also probably necessary but I know they were thinking about Byz when they did it, because those were the only threads commonly discussing using that as a strategy.

Similarly other strategies have been destroyed by indirect fire. Jake also gets directly attacked and some of the changes they make for him do affect Byz.

 

[ctp]

Not tried Byz in 1.8, but I started an Albania run and it's gone just fine. Conquest in the Balkans into beating them with Austria + Pol-Lit alliance should work a treat.

 

[Steelers1990]

Oh well, I haven't played Chimu in ages. I didn't even know they were passively buffed. Of course I didn't count in all the vassals, although Moldavia could work with some luck. But I get your point. It's sad how it turned out, however. Well, no need for me to play Ironman with Byz anyway. I'll just add the cores back in a minimod.

I would love to get a copy of the minmod you make. I have zero skills as a modder but love playing BYZ. Thank you.

 

[Starki113r]

Can you declare war supporting Greek patriots for a free flip and army, bypassing nationalism? Might not have to even send troops to those islands. On Jake's stream it looks like Byz also lost the cultural union with Georgia.

Only 'union' Byzantium has, aside from the Greek states, is with Theodoro. Greek and Gothic.

Gothic.

I mean, f---ing seriously. Gothic is in the Byzantine cultural union but not Armenian or Georgian.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I will say that this is the first nerf directly targeting Byz in a while. The scorched earth change was probably necessary, but I know they were thinking about the 1.51 cheese strategy when they made the choice, it also really helped England in 100 years war.

The dishonoured call casus was also probably necessary but I know they were thinking about Byz when they did it, because those were the only threads commonly discussing using that as a strategy.

Similarly other strategies have been destroyed by indirect fire. Jake also gets directly attacked and some of the changes they make for him do affect Byz.

The scorched earth nerf ironically made it stronger in India than Siberia, which is absurd. What they needed to get rid of was the force field, not the damage.

 

[Ranjid]

Off the top of my head, possibilities could include:

1. They haven't gotten around to the others yet (or even recognized some of them)
2. Relative importance of the provinces isn't the same due to a combination of overall province value and the balance of powers in the region
3. Having the "Byzantine Empire" as a vassal state reads rather oddly and is thus being discouraged as an optimal strategy

I'm starting to think more that it's the state release reason, though. Corfu is still weird.

1. How could you not recognize Guyenne or Persia? I doubt that's the problem.
2. Guyenne is almost half of France. Don't tell me 3 byzantine provinces are more important than almost all of Aquitaine?
3. Well, it changes to a "Client Kingdom" if vassalized. So it actually is not a vassal empire.

I would love to get a copy of the minmod you make. I have zero skills as a modder but love playing BYZ. Thank you.

Won't be before tomorrow at noon. I'm still at work until 6 am. Afterwards I don't think I'll be able to do anything.