Byzantium has gone too far

[unmerged(5161)]

I dont understand what the deal is with all these people trying to make Byzantine events. Byzantium should be going the way of the dinosaur, but it seems like most the Byzantine event scripters want to give the empire rebirth. The Byzantine Empire should be heading for the dust bin of history, not becoming a resurgent Rome.

And why is Byzantium a default nation for the Grand Campaign? What genius decided on that? They start the game with 2 provinces for Christs Sake! They are on the Ottoman chopping block. I have to change that damn shield every time I start a new game and it is starting to piss me off.

Events are supposed to guide the nation on its historical path with some player choices that reflect paths not taken. Byzantine events past a certain point become ridiculous. I could easily give France an event to take on the Mantle of the Holy Avenger and give them CB shields on every province. But I wont do that because it would be "ridiculously unhistorical!"

Does anyone else feel my pain?

 

[unmerged(4444)]

Originally posted by ryoken69
I dont understand what the deal is with all these people trying to make Byzantine events. Byzantium should be going the way of the dinosaur, but it seems like most the Byzantine event scripters want to give the empire rebirth. The Byzantine Empire should be heading for the dust bin of history, not becoming a resurgent Rome.

And why is Byzantium a default nation for the Grand Campaign? What genius decided on that? They start the game with 2 provinces for Christs Sake! They are on the Ottoman chopping block. I have to change that damn shield every time I start a new game and it is starting to piss me off.

Events are supposed to guide the nation on its historical path with some player choices that reflect paths not taken. Byzantine events past a certain point become ridiculous. I could easily give France an event to take on the Mantle of the Holy Avenger and give them CB shields on every province. But I wont do that because it would be "ridiculously unhistorical!"

Does anyone else feel my pain?

Yes, I agree that the Byzantium events are pure fantasy. But, the Byzantium events are also optional. You don't have to install them. (I didn't.) As for the default shields, they can be changed by editing the scenario .inc files (see Harvard's editing site for info on how). So chill.

Phil

 

[unmerged(5630)]

1) Isn't this game about, at least to a degree, changing history? Historically Poland-Lithuania went the way of the dodo bird due to the Partition, but do you think players would enjoy that? The whole point is trying to do better than history.

2) Most of the player-crafted events I have seen actually make it HARDER to keep Byzantium alive. They push you into wars with Turkey that you cannot win, give you rather inept monarchs, and few leaders. All the pre-1453 events are historical to my knowledge. IF you survive them (no easy task, I might add) of course you should get more events and obviously they can't be drawn from history.

I could easily give France an event to take on the Mantle of the Holy Avenger and give them CB shields on every province. But I wont do that because it would be "ridiculously unhistorical!"

There is only 1 EEP Byzantine event ("Byzantine Rennaisance") that gives CB shields. Indeed, it gives LESS than Paradox assigned by simply dumping the Ottoman Empire CBs on them. None of the events are unbalancing, and most of them relate to internal strife as opposed to gain. The Zoe events helped crush a lot of empires due to all the revolts.

 

[unmerged(7837)]

Yeah, man, chill out. Ooh, so Byzantium has a few events and some people like building a huge empire. So what? Are you pissed that people aren't creating events for YOUR personal favorite?

I haven't seen any real trolls since I started posting on this board, but this guy comes awful close to being the first one...

 

[Idiotboy]

Simple solution for avoiding those events. Don´t install them. And they aren´t made to artificially prolong Byzantium but to make them a playable nation past 1450.

 

[unmerged(5161)]

Idiotboy,

Did you read your last sentence? They arent meant to prolong Byzantium, but to make them playable past 1450? Not A, but A?

Dunkel,

Troll? That is so harsh. I said nothing "offensive".

Priam,

This game is about representing historical possibilities. Choices you have are supposed to represent real choices that faced those nations. Byzantium went into the trash for a reason. They made bad choices and faced harsh realities. The game is not about changing history. It is about changing choices made in history. Giving Byzantium choices they didnt have is against the essence of the game.

In general,

The point I made, but was ignored, was that making Byzantine events unrelated to history is against the purpose of the game. Yes they are optional, DUH. But I want to have some events for Byzantium; to push them into the gutter at the right time; in the same way that I want events for Brabant, Gelre, and Friesland. Writing events for Byzantium seems like a waste of time to me. Just like writing events for Granada, Navarre, or Auvergne would be.

Playing Byzantium and surviving is unhistorical. So the game should nudge Byzantium towards the brink. If you can survive, fine. But speculation about what would have happened had Byzantium survived is unhistorical and should NOT be in the game. Or the EEP.

Just because I disagree with all you Byzantine lovers, doesnt mean I am a troll or FREAKING OUT.

 

[unmerged(5664)]

Originally posted by ryoken69
The point I made, but was ignored, was that making Byzantine events unrelated to history is against the purpose of the game. Yes they are optional, DUH. But I want to have some events for Byzantium; to push them into the gutter at the right time; in the same way that I want events for Brabant, Gelre, and Friesland. Writing events for Byzantium seems like a waste of time to me. Just like writing events for Granada, Navarre, or Auvergne would be.

But I or one would love to see some events for Granada or Navarre (not so much for Auvergne). I've even thought of a few for Navarre...

Not every event in EU2 from Paradox is historical. There are already alternate history events included. What the EEP group is doing is making more.

Now you can argue that the events make it too easy. As for Byzantium, although I know the EEP group disagrees, it does seem that way to me somewhat (although there are some tough events). But I'm not entirely convinced that it's enough to just say "they're ahistorical".

BarristerBoy

 

[unmerged(2833)]

Note to myself: Never trust a Byzantine

Seriously, as long as AI Byzantium doesn't start conquering, i'm ok with those events. And from i saw (reading only, i didn't play with them), they wont.

 

[unmerged(5664)]

Originally posted by Maur13
Seriously, as long as AI Byzantium doesn't start conquering, i'm ok with those events. And from i saw (reading only, i didn't play with them), they wont.

The most I've ever seen is AI Byzantium linger on for a little bit past 1453, but never conquer additional territory. My understanding from the EEP events is the same - they'll only ever come into play when a human player is involved.

BarristerBoy

 

[Johnny Canuck]

I don't mind having post-1453 Byzantine events in the EEP, as long as they are part of the optional alternate installation. My view on ahistorical events are that they should be reasonable & balanced. For example, Lambert Simnel's set of events for an England that has won the Hundred Years' War, based around the Salic Law & the succession of Mary & Elizabeth, are a reasonable extrapolation of what might have been a key issue in occupied France in the late 1500s. Of course, people's perception of what constitutes reasonable & balanced ahistorical events vary from person to person.

Ryoken69 is not a troll, though. He has created 100+ excellent events for France in about a week of work, that greatly add to the realism & difficulty of playing a GC as France. I may not agree with all of ryoken69's opinions, but he certainly has the right to make them known.

 

[unmerged(1302)]

The events are optional (except one, which I thought would've been allowed what if option), if you don't want them don't install, I didn't

 

[Idiotboy]

Originally posted by ryoken69
Idiotboy,

Did you read your last sentence? They arent meant to prolong Byzantium, but to make them playable past 1450? Not A, but A?

Yes I did read it, DID YOU??

Perhaps I was unclears so I will take this once more. They aren´t meant to make it easier for the Human or the AI to survive, but they insure that if you do play them and manages to survive things actually do happen during the last 350 years of gameplay. I have had many comments over time how supremely dull a nation can be if nothing happens to them like having no events or leaders or whatever. From my viewpoint you sound very much like the whiners that breaks down and cry every time the ottomans didn´t grow as big as they did historically. Well these events won´t make impact on that anyway as any lack of performance from their part is because of other factors.

 

[Dracleath]

ryoken69, have you ever actually played with the Byzantine events? What the pack does is limit the Byzantines to 100g loans, greatly reduce their core provinces, force them to confront the turks early on and get vassalized if they lose, and allow the turks to take constantinople freely in the 1450's if the byzantines have managed to hold on to too much territory to allow them to be annexed it one war. The renaissance events aren't just given away, in order to get them the byzantines need to not only survive the initial onslaught, but take about 5 provinces from the turks. So the events do usher the byzantines to destruction, and only through the divine intervention of a human player will any of these events ever take place.

Furthermore, these events are completely optional. When you install the pack, there's an option not to put them in. So why post a thread about how much you don't like them? I don't like to eat squash. I think tommorow I'll go to the grocery store and yell at the manager for having squash availible, because obviously because I don't like squash anyone involved in producing squash must be wrong, and furthermore the grocery store is wasting shelf space on squash which could be used on better food products that I actually do like.

 

[unmerged(1302)]

I don't like to eat squash. I think tommorow I'll go to the
grocery store and yell at the manager for having squash availible, because obviously because I don't like squash
anyone involved in producing squash must be wrong, and furthermore the grocery store is wasting shelf space on
squash which could be used on better food products that I actually do like.

Boy, I LOVE squash, how dare you question my LOVE for squash!

 

[unmerged(4990)]

Three Words.

Burn the heretic.

 

[unmerged(7398)]

Re: Three Words.

Originally posted by Constantine XI
Burn the heretic.

I concur. Squash lovin' needs to be stamped out wheresoever it's found.

 

[unmerged(7837)]

Maybe you're not a troll...but why even waste the bandwidth to complain about this? Is it seriously affecting your enjoyment of the game? If so, the extremely simple fix has been suggested...just don't install them.

Geez, seriously, why are we wasting energy on this?

 

[unmerged(5161)]

What is this "love it or leave it" mentality. DAMN. People did that on the original EU board so much I stopped using it. The beauty that is EU2 got me back on this board. Why do people have to try to crush any criticism or comment that runs counter to their beliefs? Here is a thought to everyone who told me how the events were optional so I should shut up.

My comments are optional. If you dont want to read them, dont. You shut up.


BTW: A final solution is in the works for those evil squash fiends. The Squash Annihilation Zenophobic Instigators party (SAZI) is being formed. We will be meeting in the Reichstag next november. Join us, or die.

 

[unmerged(2810)]

Originally posted by ryoken69
Events are supposed to guide the nation on its historical path with some player choices that reflect paths not taken. Byzantine events past a certain point become ridiculous. I could easily give France an event to take on the Mantle of the Holy Avenger and give them CB shields on every province. But I wont do that because it would be "ridiculously unhistorical!"

Does anyone else feel my pain?

Nobody feels your non-pain. I've played a few EEP games, and "Byzantium" gets swallowed by the Ottomans every time unless I'm playing "Byantium".

Do you swear, for the REST OF YOUR LIFE to ONLY play the countries you play according to history? Do you swear to ONLY do things EXACTLY as they were done in history? The "Byzantium" events are there for people who might play "Byzantium" and want more than a smattering of random events.

 

[unmerged(4990)]

Originally posted by ryoken69
What is this "love it or leave it" mentality. DAMN. People did that on the original EU board so much I stopped using it. The beauty that is EU2 got me back on this board. Why do people have to try to crush any criticism or comment that runs counter to their beliefs? Here is a thought to everyone who told me how the events were optional so I should shut up.

My comments are optional. If you dont want to read them, dont. You shut up.


BTW: A final solution is in the works for those evil squash fiends. The Squash Annihilation Zenophobic Instigators party (SAZI) is being formed. We will be meeting in the Reichstag next november. Join us, or die.

What is this "love it or tell people not to make it" mentality? DAMN. The beauty that is EU2 is that events can be made for anyone at anytime, and for any purpose. Why do people have to crush peoples' fun that runs counter to their beliefs? Here is a thought to everyone who thinks that events should be totally historic, with no chance for a "game" environment in the game.

My comments are not optional, you read them and then you shut up.

BTW: Thanks for telling me where the meeting is at.

*Goes for goodie bag*