Developer Diary - 8th of August 2017

[Steel_atlas]

The biggest issue is that Otto grows and grows, but because of the way his AE burns off near automagically I have ever yet in recent expansions seen a coalition form against him.

If nothing changes for Otto to be seen as a threat, and if France his is ally a good percentage of the time, you'll keep seeing the "Gates of Vienna" some time c. 1550 rather than 1693.

To play devils advocate, maybe the changes to anatolia and the caucuses will add more variance to the Ottomans.

France does fail from time to time, maybe we will see the ottos not always be so powerful and actually get eaten by Persia from time to time.

I doubt it, because how many times have you seen Muscovy or Ming fail post their respective patches, but it could happen.

But yeah the whole variance thing doesnt make any sense, if its okay for PLC, Spain or Austria to never go anywhere some if not a lot of times, why is okay for the Ottomans, Muscovy, and to a lesser extent France never fail.

 

[Dominion]

The biggest issue is that Otto grows and grows, but because of the way his AE burns off near automagically I have ever yet in recent expansions seen a coalition form against him.

It doesn't burn off magically. He's retaking his cores which gives reduced AE. That's why his early expansion can be so massive.

Afterwards he just expands in all directions. And I have seen a coalition form against him, it's just that the AI rarely does it.

With the new system it might be possible that there are fewer cores for them so we could see a slowed down expansion. That's just guessing though.

 

[Warial]

Oh please. This is a game where the Portuguese explore past the Sahara to find fleets of galleons from Mali and Wolof patrolling the south Atlantic, because playability. A game where not only do the plagues that historically struck the natives of the Americas never happen, but instead those countries deploy regiments of cavalry and artillery circa 1480. Etc. etc. etc.

In short, this is a game where playability trumps history almost every time. I'm not sure why BYZ should be the lone exception.

Then you guys should be perfectly happy with the currently relatively overpowered Byzantines, who have more flavour than 90% of nations although their only achievment in history was getting themselves conquered. Byzantines absolutely don't deserve any buff.

 

[creativitypersonified]

Oh please. This is a game where the Portuguese explore past the Sahara to find fleets of galleons from Mali and Wolof patrolling the south Atlantic, because playability. A game where not only do the plagues that historically struck the natives of the Americas never happen, but instead those countries deploy regiments of cavalry and artillery circa 1480. Etc. etc. etc.

In short, this is a game where playability trumps history almost every time. I'm not sure why BYZ should be the lone exception.

So you are saying that the ottomans Prussia and France are weak, the portuguese don't colonize everything and the natives don't get destroyed by 20 stacks, England doesn't eat the rest of the British isles and hide behind the best navy Poland doesn't get a PU over Lithuania and the hordes are stable? Why should Byzantium be the lone exception.

 

[Dominion]

Then you guys should be perfectly happy with the currently relatively overpowered Byzantines, who have more flavour than 90% of nations although their only achievment in history was getting themselves conquered. Byzantines absolutely don't deserve any buff.

Need to visit Reddit to understand the sentiment.

Most people playing this game are casual players - as it is with every game - and Byz has always been their go-to nation right after Prussia and France.
It's extremely difficult for a player with 0 hours clocked in to pull it off, but once you manage to win the first war they are at least amongst the five easiest nations available.
I'd even say top3.
Challenge mixed with huge rewards for initial success lead to a lot of people continuously demanding buffs for it.

No derogatory intentions, I'm rather happy Byz exists and provides so much entertainment to a huge part of EU4's playerbase.
The buffs were definitely necessary, not for gameplay purposes but for the playerbase's health.

In a normal game they die instantly, so I don't mind. And in the hands of a player they can only get used in SP. Any real MP will take them out early, just like the AI does.

Doesn't hurt anyone, helps the game, provides something for newer players. Overall a very good deal. I don't think we should complain about its strength.
Just like we shouldn't complain about Ottos, but at this point it has become a dead horse that will get beaten until eternity *shrugs*

 

[CorpusIurisCivilis]

I wonder if there could be an achievment for migrating Avaria back into the Carpathian region???

 

[Ostovar Hossein]

Was about time Persia get some buffs, Persia needs to be able to be a pain on the Ottomans right flank as it was historically.

 

[Ostovar Hossein]

To play devils advocate, maybe the changes to anatolia and the caucuses will add more variance to the Ottomans.

France does fail from time to time, maybe we will see the ottos not always be so powerful and actually get eaten by Persia from time to time.

I doubt it, because how many times have you seen Muscovy or Ming fail post their respective patches, but it could happen.

But yeah the whole variance thing doesnt make any sense, if its okay for PLC, Spain or Austria to never go anywhere some if not a lot of times, why is okay for the Ottomans, Muscovy, and to a lesser extent France never fail.

I think if they made Persia historical and gave it the cb on provinces that it originally got when safavids were formed it can easily delay or potentially be a good Western Allie as it was historically.

 

[Wagonlitz]

Byzantines in 1444 were a decomposing corpse waiting to be eaten by wolves. Short of divine intervention there was no possibilty of survival.

Completely true. Doesn't make the Theodosian Walls less imposing though (albeit afaik they were not fully maintained by then).

although their only achievment in history was getting themselves conquered

That's not true. In the last few centuries of it's existence sure, but not in it's entire history.

 

[grand_Turk]

Is there a release date for this expansion yet?

 

[RHKINC]

Is there a release date for this expansion yet?

No release date yet.

 

[abedfo]

And all of the following new tags will be part of the Ottomans circa ~1450

 

[Dominion]

And all of the following new tags will be part of the Ottomans circa ~1450

Only if all these tags are Ottoman cores.

Reason why they can expand like mad is because taking back cores creates barely any AE. You can watch a potential development by going through every single "Ottomans are OP!" screenshot. Watch where they tentacled into.

They barely expand into Europe at all, it's always Africa (south) and Horde land (north through Crimea).

If they'd remove the Khanate event they'd lose _everything_ north of Caucasia, which they can't get through due to ICC.

A rather fun thought experiment. Really, take any screenshot you can find and cross out all provinces north of the black sea. Suddenly they don't look as menacing anymore.

I am merely speculating, but if any of these new nations have either ICC or own provinces that aren't Ottoman cores it will completely block their eastern expansion, thereby enabling Persia to rise and other nations to expand like they normally would without a big bad wolf patrolling their borders.

Which is why most "OPtoman Empire" discussion go into the wrong direction imo. There is absolutely no need to nerf Ottos or buff their neighbours.
A simple modifier added to a nation or a few cores removed from provinces makes a whole area unreachable for them.

To put it differently: If the Khanate got removed and Mamluks got ICC we would get an Ottoman Empire that's about as strong as current Bohemia.

I'd love to see how many of the new provinces are Ottoman cores before I dare to call it a buff. It could very well be a brutal nerf to them.

Never underestimate what a modifier can do to the AI.

 

[abedfo]

Only if all these tags are Ottoman cores.

Reason why they can expand like mad is because taking back cores creates barely any AE. You can watch a potential development by going through every single "Ottomans are OP!" screenshot. Watch where they tentacled into.

They barely expand into Europe at all, it's always Africa (south) and Horde land (north through Crimea).

If they'd remove the Khanate event they'd lose _everything_ north of Caucasia, which they can't pass due to ICC.

I am merely speculating, but if any of these nations have either ICC or own provinces that aren't Ottoman cores it will completely block their eastern expansion, thereby enabling Persia to rise and be an actual enemy for them.
Which is why most "OPtoman Empire" discussion go into the wrong direction imo. There is absolutely no need to nerf Ottos or buff their neighbours. A simple modifier added to a nation or a few cores removed from provinces makes a whole area unreachable for them.

To put it differently: If the Khanate got removed and Mamluks got ICC we would get an Ottoman Empire that's about as strong as current Bohemia.

I'd love to see how many of the new provinces are Ottoman cores before I dare to make these assumptions. It could very well be a brutal nerf to them.

Never underestimate what a modifier can do to the AI.

Agree, I was being quite facetious with my comment. In my most recent games Ottoman expansion has been through annexation of Crimea and moving into Lithuania and that region, and North Africa courtesy of Mamluks. I think an ICC or something similar in regards to the Mamluks would be a great addition and maybe provide a nicer counterweight to Ottomans.

Tangent. It has always annoyed me that its so hard to get a coalition against them, for instance as Naples seeing them eat half of Hungary in one war is cause for concern and should be too for Bohemia, Austria and Pol Lith but they never seem to garner enough AE, whats up with that.

 

[Mister X]

@Nirnsnibbedy snab

Ain't there this river that cuts through the range somewhere in the middle? It could be passable from there connecting the coast with that dry highland

 

[Koskenbleu]

I couldn't be more excited, I've waited for a ME/Central Asia "refresh" for a while now! Especially hyped for the Iran/Anatolia revamp, since Safavid/Timurid (greater Iran in general) history has been one of my recent favorite subjects to study/read on.

 

[Dominion]

Tangent. It has always annoyed me that its so hard to get a coalition against them, for instance as Naples seeing them eat half of Hungary in one war is cause for concern and should be too for Bohemia, Austria and Pol Lith but they never seem to garner enough AE, whats up with that.

Before I go there, let's get one thing out of the way: The AI hates AE like the pest on our current patch.
There were some where it thought AE is just a number if a certain trait applied, on older patches it did care less, but overall we know from experience that AI nations do not risk even the tiniest of coalitions.

Ottomans are special. They do create the possibility of coalitions more than once per game, but the problem is - again - something very minor that can nerf them massively or even render them useless when removed.

Quantity.

Just like they evaluate standing forces before sending a DoW, AI nations also evaluate standing forces before forming a coalition.
Ottos with Quantity simply have too many forces.

Example from a game: Got bored and saw that Ottos had a huge amount of AE accumulated.
Immediately declared on them because I can. 1 month later a 6 nation coalition formed (a nation's enemy gets calculated as an ally if the AI opposes someone).
I also got a 7 nation coalition in my last game.

In both cases they never attacked. They barely had enough power to form, but not enough to DoW.

If Ottos would take Quantity later it could tamper with their expansion to a massive extent, but that's theorycrafting. I can't sandbox the game so it'll stay a guess.

But we know why coalitions currently don't ever form.

Ottos simply have too many troops.

 

[holyvigil]

Only if all these tags are Ottoman cores.

Reason why they can expand like mad is because taking back cores creates barely any AE. You can watch a potential development by going through every single "Ottomans are OP!" screenshot. Watch where they tentacled into.

They barely expand into Europe at all, it's always Africa (south) and Horde land (north through Crimea).

If they'd remove the Khanate event they'd lose _everything_ north of Caucasia, which they can't get through due to ICC.

A rather fun thought experiment. Really, take any screenshot you can find and cross out all provinces north of the black sea. Suddenly they don't look as menacing anymore.

I am merely speculating, but if any of these new nations have either ICC or own provinces that aren't Ottoman cores it will completely block their eastern expansion, thereby enabling Persia to rise and other nations to expand like they normally would without a big bad wolf patrolling their borders.

Which is why most "OPtoman Empire" discussion go into the wrong direction imo. There is absolutely no need to nerf Ottos or buff their neighbours.
A simple modifier added to a nation or a few cores removed from provinces makes a whole area unreachable for them.

To put it differently: If the Khanate got removed and Mamluks got ICC we would get an Ottoman Empire that's about as strong as current Bohemia.

I'd love to see how many of the new provinces are Ottoman cores before I dare to call it a buff. It could very well be a brutal nerf to them.

Never underestimate what a modifier can do to the AI.

I don't think the Ottos not having cores would make much of a difference. It's only 11 provinces at 75% reduced AE. To me the problem is the 5% discipline mixed in with better units/pips than the rest of the world, and 5% more discipline 10% manpower recovery speed 10% infantry combat ability almost immediately at game start. I've tried attacking the Ottos with Timurids, Austria, Poland, and Mamluks as soon as I can declare war but even with favorable terrain and superior numbers I still get stack wiped or lose most of the time. This supreme military is what lets the Ottos declare on whoever they want early game. The rest of the nations can't keep up with the Ottos growth and then the Ottos superior tech, ideas, and development are able to bully the rest of the world into not forming coalitions or never declaring war later in the game.

 

[Kaizer Prussian]

Looks nice ,but maybe you rename province "Circassia" to they capital city name? And other nations which still have name of capital like name of country. I see this from EU3 , in EU4 too but with DLC and patches(i remember Brandenburg ,with capital Brandenburg, now Berlin. Аnd Bohemia with capital Bohemia, now Prague )
Example it is (not only Circassia) :
Lorraine with capital Lothringen (just german name) and capital city Nancy, so ptovince may call Nancy
and Burgundy with capital Bourgogne (french name of Burgundy) but capital city is Dijon, so province may call Dijon
and etc (or its all ,i dont see at another capital)
I know exist more country which have similar name of capital and country (Venice, HRE members) but example Aachen - country, province and province capital call similar ,they can set another name for country but they dont do this.
It will be good if example province Burgundy was all Burgundy ,but no it is grand country and area
Or it is example :
Country: England
Capital: England (but capital of province it is London)
It is not much work, i know i can rename province, but it is part of game i can do more! But it is mistake in game and i want "kill" mistake for all players

 

[Dominion]

I don't think the Ottos not having cores would make much of a difference. It's only 11 provinces at 75% reduced AE. To me the problem is the 5% discipline mixed in with better units/pips than the rest of the world, and 5% more discipline 10% manpower recovery speed 10% infantry combat ability almost immediately at game start.

Fire up a quick France round and annex those 3 Provence provinces without them being excommunicated and tell me how it went.
"Only 75% AE reduction", is a hefty understatement.

It's the AI, not a human player in control. Additional AE means they hold back when it comes to waging war.
And we all know the best windows to take out Ottos: Right at the start or towards the end of the game.
If these provinces give full AE it will prolong their start, not only slowing down expansion in general, but also giving more nations an opportunity to intervene. Human controlled nations of course.

I've tried attacking the Ottos with Timurids, Austria, Poland, and Mamluks as soon as I can declare war but even with favorable terrain and superior numbers I still get stack wiped or lose most of the time. This supreme military is what lets the Ottos declare on whoever they want early game. The rest of the nations can't keep up with the Ottos growth and then the Ottos superior tech, ideas, and development are able to bully the rest of the world into not forming coalitions or never declaring war later in the game.

I never know what to say about this.
I don't lose to them. Their tech is not superior. I have more morale than them most of the time.
Attrition in Russia is probably a bigger problem than fighting the Ottoman Empire, at least for me.

What am I supposed to tell you? You lose to them, okay. Cool.