Youve never seen AI ottoman Vienna? I normally intervene for moral reasons, but if you play as timurids, or an England that ignores the continent you should see it semi often if Hapsburg don't get Hungary
- 1
Game ruined - again- by the Ottomans
- Thread starter Oxenstierna13
- 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.
Fact is, as i explained it to you before ( maybe wasnt to you); you never quote a war in which the Ottoman beat single handedly a major power. Funny to struggle against a point made, without answering to the point. Either its just a battle (great accomplishment), or it is just not against major power (ie, depending on time, Spain, France, united HRE, UK, Prussia/Russia by the end of the scope).
And sometimes, its Ottoman attacking, and beating Spain (winning a war! against a major ! single…. -While France is at war with Spain- ho shit)
During the same timeline, all those major power did beat some sort of other great power coalition. Ottoman did beat Mazovia and Albania. Congrats.
However, and that is a simple question, your alternate Ottoman Empire, that beat, in 17 wars, major nations of Europe, single handedly, in the spawn of two centuries, which is the straight "facts" that your post translate: how is it possible for him to need help from France and UK to keep some coherence? How is it possible for it to be bullied by Greece, Bulgaria, Romania and Serbia during the next century?
No country in Europe can brag about winning that much wars against its rival in only two centuries, and despite that, several strong independant nation were born or developped during this scope (especially UK, France, Prussia, Russia). What is amazing is that those less Glorious Nation, were never as low as Ottoman were after 1750. While, they were on a 17 win streak. Maybe they werent.
Maybe the truth is that Ottoman Sultanate was never able to rival any of those country, except, indeed, in some battles, or with the help of some major allies. Similar things could be said about Poland, Austria, Portugal, Netherland. Ive indeed said that for the last past 5 years (or so). And i'll keep saying it. But maybe you should stop saying the opposite, or try to demonstrate it, at least in our TimeLine. I dont know about your last EUIV run.
Because im some kind of productive; id propose to Paradox team (once more), to greatly nerf the Ottoman* and to pick one nation, or two, providing them with huge buff in each different games. The player would have a end game boss, but the game would all be different. As you dont treat Scandinavia, as Ottoman, or as rampaging Poland or wide UK. Now, its just without interest. Either you snipe Constantinople and keep Ottos in Check early game; either you have them eating half of Europe, 80% of the time.
*Id rather see them greatly increase the difficulties of ruling such a wide empire
Another possibility would be to block countries from sending more than Xthousand soldiers, Xkm away, except if they have some technologies or ideas etc.
Because multiple 30k European stacks in New World by 1600 is as ridiculous as Ottoman crushing major european nations.
- 9
- 3
HRE, Austria, Poland, Russia, Spain (at multiple points and as pointed out without help from France in the one war where they were allied) and Venice at it's zenith (when they could beat France and HRE at the same time) don't count.
Ok.
- 4
- 2
The historical debate aside, who actually has problems with the Ottomans in this current patch? You can neuter them at the start by taking Constantinople. Or you can just do your own thing and overpower them later when their pips aren't godlike anymore. The later route also makes them accumulate a lot of debt in the current patch. They never felt so weak.
- 3
- 2
How sad is it that Mam are now a bigger threat than the Ottos? No one talks about how the Mamlucks are a powerhouse without even having a true mission tree (their half a dozen missions that can be completed before 1500 not withstanding).
- 3
- 1
I don’t know about bigger threat... I guess some players take an interest in that area, but usually even a blobby mamluks is pretty chill. Not like ravenous Otto.
- 2
My only Problen with the ottomans right now is that they seem to favor expanding into the steppes instead of the middleast which makes my eyes bleed from border gore
- 4
- 3
- 1
At least in my experience they constantly field bigger armies than the Ottomans. However, they are very chill, yes. Probably because they don't tend to border any rival (with the exception of the Ottomans), most provinces that they border are pretty bad, they make vassals and allies of pretty much every nation that they border, they are not strong enough (emphasis on enough) to DoW the Ottomans and they get only a few claims. Sad how they have nothing to do except wait to get gobbled up by the Ottomans and yet that rarely happens nowadays.
That is very understandable. They tend to ally Ajam/Black/White sheep, the MAM are usually as strong as them and have higher manpower (they don't fight so never lose manpower), Hungary now is more likely to fall into a PU with Hungary and they start out guaranteeing some of the Balkan nations.
Where can they expansion? Well, the Caucasus is the easiest place but they don't really get claims there. Sometimes they go after the PLC steeps if Poland/Lithuania fails. Getting Crimea and eating the steeps is, therefore, their easiest expansion option, or at least one of the easiest. And it doesn't help them that Russia got buffed -- they now build arty!
I've seen Ottomans make a marche out of Hysn Kaifa, give them all of mesopotamia and then form this funky ass circular blob around the Black Sea. The latter happens more often than not. Kievottomans.
In my experience as well. They seem to take quantity ideas as first or second idea group in most cases now. Since they are also super rich in 1.30, they can afford to build up to their quantity-enhanced force limit. That seems to usually deter the Ottomans, so that they expand into other directions.
In my games, however, the Mamluks weren't that passive. They often jumped on the Ottomans, when the Ottomans got into trouble somewhere else. And once they have provinces in south-eastern Anatolia, they sometimes start to snowball into Anatolia and Mesopotamia. If that happens, they can become a very nasty enemy even for strong European powers.
Last edited:
- 1
Well, that may be ahistorical, but I’m thinking its kind of a nice change.
Do we have any %’s for forming egypt?
My last game, as Inca had some particular oddities, including Syria ruling Mecca and Medina area with Syria owned by Ottomans while Egypt was split between Tunis, Ottomans, and Beja. I assume Tunis kicked the Mameluke which allowed Syria to get free, who then conquered into Arabia before the Ottomans moved South taking Syria and Eastern Egypt while Beja ate up the southern Mameluke when crippled by the others.
Anyone know how I can make the save non-Ironman so I can check it out?
I think if you try to load it without all the DLCs that you had when created it, or activate new DLCs, it will revert to a non-ironman game.
Oh wow, what a weird Middle East. In my experience it is quite rare to see a strange Middle East like that one.
Ok, I had tried that with a mod but it didn’t work it just wouldn’t load. Never thought about DLC. The suggestion google gave me was unzipping the save and editing it but I could never load the re-zipped save.
I was definitely shocked when I saw a blue coast in Arabia. And again when I saw that the Ottomans owned Syria. Also never seen Yemen colonizing Indonesia before. Maybe they took them from the Mamelukes?
That's a possibility. I've never seen any Arabic country, aside from Mamlucks and Ottomans, colonize. But then again, usually in my experience the only other country on that region to own loads of coastal provinces is Homuz and I've never seen them pick either of the Colonization ideas.
If the mamlucks take colonisation, they get overrun by the ottomans, because they are way too weak then. If the ottomans take colonisation, they are not able to reach colonisable provinces, because they fight their neighbours forever, missing the strength to beat them. In an very old game of me they did some colonisation, but it was rather late-game. most of the provinces were already gone at that point.
And regarding "game ruined by ottomans": i never had problems with the ottomans. In most of my games the ottomans are not able to gain much on the balkan. The moment they do anything there, austria (with hungery and other allies) is killing them off. I had one game, where i played spain and had some war with them in northern africa. They came with an army of 300, while i had maybe 60 troops? But lost their fleet against mine. and while they had their massive army in northern africa, i invaded their mainland. The ottomans seems to be strong. But they have terrible distances to manage and are open for attacks on all sides. Plus, as it is mostly desert there, a lot of this area cannot harbour a lot of troops, killing big stacks of armies just like that. They are never a real threat for some serious player, who understands the basics in this game.
- 1
Is anyone keeping count with respect to threads of over/underpowered ottomans? I'm curious as to what the tally must be by now!
I did see them colonize. Usually ones that connected to indian sea colonizes sometimes but only if they conquered some land
In my current game, the first nation to start colonising in the Indian ocean then pacific ocean was Hadramut. In fact the Ottomans conquered all their land except for Andamans so Hadramut had its capital in Andamans for a while.
It does get a colonist in its national ideas, and you get passive colonial range from dip tech