Should Byzantium and the Roman Empire be buffed, with new mechanics, buffs and reverting old nerfs? They are the most interesting countries due to history, but they aren't unique. Is possible to form the Roman Empire, but they aren't interesting. They have any unique mechanic, no great ideas and reforming the roman culture is bad because how culture groups works. Formed them once only for the achievement in a WC and never bothered with them again. Byzantium is just a eastern feudal 3PM, that was overly nerfed since release. I know that these countries were dead or dying in 1444 and people would say that I play Imperator instead, but they are in the game, but are underwhelming.
Starting by Byzantium:
I played as Byzantium in EU3 and was very interesting and was unique. In EU4 they aren't that unique, they are more to play to get the achievement (Basileus) and forget. Their gameplay is more of a Ottoman usurper than a Roman revival. And they were heavily nerfed since EU3:
- In EU3 and early EU4 they had an unique government, called Empire, this unique government was removed in patch 1.12 and empires are a country level since then. Even with Byzantium being an empire from start, they lost the morale of armies bonus (+25% in EU3, and 5-10% in EU4), vassal income and free holy wars versus heathens (in EU3) from government. Even if you release Byzantium they lose their empire status, even 1444 Byzantium originated from a small state that retook Constantinople from latins. They are now a feudal monarchy. So, give Byzantium a unique government, with empire rank fixed but with things that make them unique.
- In EU3, Anatolia was easier to culture convert from Turkish to Greek, the same applied to prussian-saxon, russian-tartar. This isn't present in EU4, the best is accept the Turks than assimilate them, even with a still considerable Greek and Orthodox presence in Anatolia. In EU3 this was better represented, in EU4 no. A mission reward, giving a provincial modifier that decreases culture convertion costs in a byzantine anatolia would be great.
And there are other issues with Byzantium:
- Romanian and Albanian cultures not in a byzantine culture group, but in slavic or magyar groups. For a returning Byzantium this isn't good, because while romanians are worth to accept, the albanians are not, because of low development. These cultures weren't slavic or magyar, they were a romance and/or illyrian culture, with more roots with the roman empire and common history with Byzantium.
EDIT: There is Armenian too, that is in caucasian group, even not being a caucasian culture. And in CK2 caucasian was byzantine too.
- While having a mission tree, they have nothing unique. Their missions are generic ones with a few religious buffs, Orthodox is unique because of Third Rome DLC, but nothing about Byzantium, no unique mechanics, nothing interesting, you don't feel reving a dead empire, you feel like playing another feudal country.
- Their ideas are generic ones with a few religious buffs.
- They are an Eastern country, with cossacks, bardiche infantry, winged hussars, no vision of India and China. They would be better on Western or Anatolian groups.
And reviving the Roman Empire isn't a great experience. You just blob into the older territories of Rome and then you have a decision to change tag, get new ideas and lose your culture group, just it. Even as Byzantium.
- There is no unique roman government, neither monarchy or republic. Would be interesting a revival of republic from a monarchy. Even CK2 added a roman government to Byzantium. This government should start with Byzantium, or even reformed as byzantines (to show a revival) and any country reforming Rome should get it. There should be a revival of senate too, like a better parliament with unique mechanics.
- A roman "diwan", that accepts the romance or derived from (like British) culture groups as primary ones. Because Roman is a lost culture and you lose your cultural union. Latin isn't a dead or lost language, is still alive in these many culture groups as derived ones.
- Gradual formation of Rome. You start as a christian or pagan country, blob into Mediterranean, click a button, now you are Rome. Should be better a gradual one, reforming the WRE (as latin countries) and ERE (as Byzantium, to show more legitimacy) after conquering each part of the empire. After that is possible to reform Rome.
- Rivalries with the modern romes. After forming the WRE or ERE, Russia, Ottomans, Italy and the HRE emperor should deslike you. They are envious.
Even having both achievements for both nations I don't feel that these countries are good to play. Mare nostrum was just to grind another achievement after a WC and when playing Basileus, I was feeling like playing a padishah usurper.
So, give these interesting countries, more love, better ideas, mechanics and other things. They are a bit off their historical scope, but they exist in the game. Even CK2 in the end, buffed the romans, why not EU4?
Starting by Byzantium:
I played as Byzantium in EU3 and was very interesting and was unique. In EU4 they aren't that unique, they are more to play to get the achievement (Basileus) and forget. Their gameplay is more of a Ottoman usurper than a Roman revival. And they were heavily nerfed since EU3:
- In EU3 and early EU4 they had an unique government, called Empire, this unique government was removed in patch 1.12 and empires are a country level since then. Even with Byzantium being an empire from start, they lost the morale of armies bonus (+25% in EU3, and 5-10% in EU4), vassal income and free holy wars versus heathens (in EU3) from government. Even if you release Byzantium they lose their empire status, even 1444 Byzantium originated from a small state that retook Constantinople from latins. They are now a feudal monarchy. So, give Byzantium a unique government, with empire rank fixed but with things that make them unique.
- In EU3, Anatolia was easier to culture convert from Turkish to Greek, the same applied to prussian-saxon, russian-tartar. This isn't present in EU4, the best is accept the Turks than assimilate them, even with a still considerable Greek and Orthodox presence in Anatolia. In EU3 this was better represented, in EU4 no. A mission reward, giving a provincial modifier that decreases culture convertion costs in a byzantine anatolia would be great.
And there are other issues with Byzantium:
- Romanian and Albanian cultures not in a byzantine culture group, but in slavic or magyar groups. For a returning Byzantium this isn't good, because while romanians are worth to accept, the albanians are not, because of low development. These cultures weren't slavic or magyar, they were a romance and/or illyrian culture, with more roots with the roman empire and common history with Byzantium.
EDIT: There is Armenian too, that is in caucasian group, even not being a caucasian culture. And in CK2 caucasian was byzantine too.
- While having a mission tree, they have nothing unique. Their missions are generic ones with a few religious buffs, Orthodox is unique because of Third Rome DLC, but nothing about Byzantium, no unique mechanics, nothing interesting, you don't feel reving a dead empire, you feel like playing another feudal country.
- Their ideas are generic ones with a few religious buffs.
- They are an Eastern country, with cossacks, bardiche infantry, winged hussars, no vision of India and China. They would be better on Western or Anatolian groups.
And reviving the Roman Empire isn't a great experience. You just blob into the older territories of Rome and then you have a decision to change tag, get new ideas and lose your culture group, just it. Even as Byzantium.
- There is no unique roman government, neither monarchy or republic. Would be interesting a revival of republic from a monarchy. Even CK2 added a roman government to Byzantium. This government should start with Byzantium, or even reformed as byzantines (to show a revival) and any country reforming Rome should get it. There should be a revival of senate too, like a better parliament with unique mechanics.
- A roman "diwan", that accepts the romance or derived from (like British) culture groups as primary ones. Because Roman is a lost culture and you lose your cultural union. Latin isn't a dead or lost language, is still alive in these many culture groups as derived ones.
- Gradual formation of Rome. You start as a christian or pagan country, blob into Mediterranean, click a button, now you are Rome. Should be better a gradual one, reforming the WRE (as latin countries) and ERE (as Byzantium, to show more legitimacy) after conquering each part of the empire. After that is possible to reform Rome.
- Rivalries with the modern romes. After forming the WRE or ERE, Russia, Ottomans, Italy and the HRE emperor should deslike you. They are envious.
Even having both achievements for both nations I don't feel that these countries are good to play. Mare nostrum was just to grind another achievement after a WC and when playing Basileus, I was feeling like playing a padishah usurper.
So, give these interesting countries, more love, better ideas, mechanics and other things. They are a bit off their historical scope, but they exist in the game. Even CK2 in the end, buffed the romans, why not EU4?
Last edited:
- 2
