Favorite as in favorite to play or as in you just like those two states the most in general?
Byzantium
- Thread starter Scottx105
- 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.
Favorite as in favorite to play or as in you just like those two states the most in general?
Byzantium already has an entire DLC for it, while China has next to nothing. Just stop already, stop. Byzantium needs no buffs, it's already ahistorically strong.
Obligatory images
and
Obligatory images
and
- 4
- 2
- 1
A mix of liking little underdog states, both of them having some seriously badass rulers (Skanderbeg/Edzard I) and finding them fun to play.
- 2
- 2
I would say I am a Byzantophile, but in all seriousness I would like the changes of Morea Vessel, Lower Devolpment and Supported Independence by Ottomons of Athens.
Only Important Center of Trade should stay (ingame descriptions say, CoT is a natural harbor, which should Constantinopel loose this?).
It would make the game playable only in Multiplayer will help from other players, or some serious cheese. And it would be more historical..
Only Important Center of Trade should stay (ingame descriptions say, CoT is a natural harbor, which should Constantinopel loose this?).
It would make the game playable only in Multiplayer will help from other players, or some serious cheese. And it would be more historical..
- 1
Nah, I've done East Frisia -> Germany though. I think my next game will be East Frisia -> Germany without joining the HRE.
- 1
- 1
Don't let little things like historical facts get in the way of giving huge unnecessary buffs to Byz!
- 1
If you made Byz unplayable in SP I think the forums would crash never to rise again, much like the Roman empire.
- 1
As always in thread about Byzantium everyone forgets about Trebizond. If any Byzantine state should be buffed it's TRE - they could use some unique bonus like option to RM Muslims, which historically was one of the main reasons Trebizond survived that long. That and the fact that Ottomans didn't bother to conquer it.
- 2
to op:
Eu4 begins at Varna which is considered the last chance byzantines had, and they lost it. This is the wrong game to ask such things.
Eu4 begins at Varna which is considered the last chance byzantines had, and they lost it. This is the wrong game to ask such things.
8 more years?
8 more years without Theodesian Walls, help from the West, less prestige and legacy to use as a levarage in diplomacy and hopeless situation. I would say 8 years is pretty good all things considered.
- 2
And why are you not going to do these exactly? So that you can always come in with your trump argument and be the final arbitrator of what Byzantium should or shouldn't be, while the peasants argue among themselves below? As if it's the community's fault that Byzantium outlives Denmark with the present state of balance. Seriously these threads have become really tiring.
Give Morea as vassal with historical friends, make Kirkilisse of Greek culture & owned by Byzantium (all the coastal cities up to and excluding Varna were owned by Byzantium until 1453), transfer TP to Genoa. Just make sure to leave the absolute minimum required for skillful players to be able to survive for the fun of it. Otherwise move the frigging starting date and let's be done with this.
Because Byzantium should be winnable and also this is an empire building game, not 100% Accurate HIstory Simulator 1444
- 14
- 4
- 1
- 3
Aha! But it should be accurate from the 1444 start date to the final start date as you always start from historical points, and then allow players to take their own paths and build their own Empire, if the game does not start historical then this game has no historical base at all, and then we might as well give Byzantium laser weapons and disco balls.
- 8
There are no historically accurate computer games, all are abstracted to some degree or another, and this is exactly how it should be. Even if you somehow have a completely unanimous consensus on what exactly is historically accurate, requiring 100% historical accuracy from a historical strategy game is like expecting every object in a puzzle physics game to have perfectly relative mass down to the atomic level.
- 23
- 2
- 1
One of the worst analogies I have ever seen on the forums.
Who knew that the "historical base" litmus test started with Byzantium.
I don't think its physically possible to roll my eyes any further.
- 7
Any chance Byzantium will be renamed into Basileía Rhōmaíōn or at least there would be a decision or an event (like Establishing the Theme system) for it? It would be a small but very nice addition for Byz players, not buffing Byzantium at all. Because it would be not only historical, not even Western Powers called it Byzantium at that time, but also very satisfying fo the players when you growth large enough to see Basileía Rhōmaíōn as an indication for the revival of the Empire.
- 1
My point is that every start point in EU4 is a historical start point matching the historical map of Europe at that time, it would only make sense to accurately represent the countries historically (especially from the first start point 1444). However this does not detract from allowing the game to become ahistorical after each start date. My point is that you must start from some historical grounding point and apply it universally and then from that point go from historical to ahistorical, any other permutation of that order would not make any sense. And whilst I agree that balance must be maintained to prevent some nations being OP, giving Byzantium the 3 listed items I mentioned at the start of this thread, would not make it OP in terms of conquering other nations, all it will do is make it perhaps slightly easier to play as and would not make any nation that conquered them unfairly OP, and making a nation weaker just because it historically died after the games main start date of 1444 (after which point everything becomes ahistorical) is silly, and sure you can start from 1453 but at that point Byzantium no longer exists, so you can only really count Byzantium from 1444 as its original and only start date.
Each to our own, but it also does as 1444 is the only start date by which Byzantium exists and is the very beginning of the entire game.One of the worst analogies I have ever seen on the forums.
Who knew that the "historical base" litmus test started with Byzantium.
I don't think its physically possible to roll my eyes any further.
Last edited:
- 1