It does (the vital interesting).
They vital Southern Italy and take it if Naples allies Epirus or Albania.
It's just you don't notice it because Aragon often enforces the Union on Naples immediately after releasing them.
- 2
- 1
Is it just me or are the Ottomans completely insane in 1.33?
- Thread starter durbal
- 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.
They vital Southern Italy and take it if Naples allies Epirus or Albania.
It's just you don't notice it because Aragon often enforces the Union on Naples immediately after releasing them.
Well, it's pretty much anecdotally but in my last Florence-Italy game, the Commonwealth actualy formed, and went on to taking Crimea before the Ottos had a chance, wich in turn lead to the Ottos expanding into Iran/Hormuz/Toward India. It didnt make it easier fighting them, but it sure feelt more logical and sane.
By reading this thred, I still agree that the Ottos needs something keeping them in check, be it a disaster oe anything else.
But the fundamental problem (wich EU4 cant fix) is how war is portrayed in the game. The possibility to send massive armies after another, completly leaving parts of a huge empire undefended, not having to care about logistics, seasons, weather.. Well, it will make blobs blob.
By reading this thred, I still agree that the Ottos needs something keeping them in check, be it a disaster oe anything else.
But the fundamental problem (wich EU4 cant fix) is how war is portrayed in the game. The possibility to send massive armies after another, completly leaving parts of a huge empire undefended, not having to care about logistics, seasons, weather.. Well, it will make blobs blob.
- 3
Both said it pretty much never happens. You sharing one screenshot is no proof. Just that is happens at least occasionally.
- 4
Just ignore downvotes. Everywhere there are few "flat earthers". I've seen people like lambda x.x being downvoted for no good reason
- 3
- 1
- 1
- 1
And no wonder, EU4 literally purports that the Earth is flat.
- 1
- 1
Don't be ridiculous - EU4's worldview is clearly cylindrical.
- 2
- 1
- 1
It happened my burgundy game too. If ottomans go to war with naples they will get northern italy allways. Its just the fact that they usually have better targets so they dont do it allways
- 1
I haven't seen them ever go for southern Italy.
I am just saying sharing a screenshot and then using that as proof someone else is wrong despite them never stating it can't happen is wrong.
- 1
One person says, and I quote: "Yeah because it pretty much never happens." in reference to the Ottomans taking southern Italy.
Two posters (myself and @Kerham) provide screenshots showing the Ottomans in southern Italy. @makaramus confirms he's seen it in his Burgundy game.
If 3 posters are saying that they've seen it happen, then the idea "It pretty much never happens" is completely dismantled unless we're all having extremely coincidental games.
I'm not saying the Ottomans take southern Italy in 10/10 or even 5/10 games, but it does happen with some frequency.
- 3
- 1
Out of how many games you played?
Completely dismantling something like based on three examples is not possible. Again no one said it can't happen and three examples neither proves nor disproves anything here. In fact this should mean that they are taking southern Italy in more than 50 giving your reasoning (3 people agreed, two disagreed).
If you want to prove it disprove let the game run a couple of times from observer mode and then share the results.
I can only repeat I haven't seen them go for southern Italy ever. In fact I hate how Spain and Southern Italy plays out because it's always Naples under a PU of Spain.
EDIT: If I remember I will do it today and share the results in here. Not to prove it disprove just to provide some data about it.
- 3
- 1
You are not saying the same thing as the poster I originally responded to.
He said, and I repeat: "Yeah because it pretty much never happens"
You're saying that it doesn't happen often, which is different.
Something you guys have to answer me is, why don't you get so defensive about other major powers in the game? I never see France reach their historical borders, I never see Great Britain in India, there's almost never a united Persia, sometimes Muscovy gimps themselves by allying Ryazan and then they can't form Russia without attacking the PLC....
I've never heard people complain about any of these things.
Meanwhile if you even dare suggest the Ottomans shouldn't be able to stomp over every nation in their sights people get super defensive.
I don't buy this "we need an end-game boss". Why can't the end-game boss sometimes be France, Russia or anyone else?
Why do the Ottomans always have to be the supreme power in the game? I deeply suspect the poster who said it's just about creating a meme tier Ottomans is correct.
You're complaining about Spain in Southern Italy which is their only reliable, consistent route of European expansion. Meanwhile the Ottomans expand North, South, East and West and no one complains.
- 3
- 1
I don't remember when was the last time I saw Naples as a junior partner of Spain. In my games Naples is usually allied to France and if Spain controls Naples it's by conquest and not by the PU
One person has small sample size, you say that something happens always and in my games the same situation happen very rarely.
- 1
Out of 50 games that ottoman is not wrecked it happened once. No one here said its common but it can happen.
As you said they got more priotized paths before that so for that to happen they need someting to happen.
It is rare and exception but not "never" or "1 time thing engineered by player"
- 1
I suppose it does happen quite often that Aragon enforces the union on Naples, but the catch is this...
Naples gets that Republican event giving two stacks of large Pretender Rebels that instantly siege their capital. You know what Spain is like, their entire army is on some island in the Pacific. Especially if they're int he middle of a war they don't deal with that, so they lose Naples who usually picks up a decent alliance pretty quickly.
My point is, Spain gets Naples with a catch.
The Ottomans get zero downsides. They don't even have a proper disaster (Unlike France, England, Castile) because the Janissaries disaster never fires.
- 2
In my personal experience the chances are a bit higher, 1/15 chance or so. I'll provide screenshots if I ever get to have another campaign (1.33 keeps crashing for me).
The point is, relevant to the original post, Paradox making the AI more aggressive has made the Ottomans too powerful. They just see land and take it now. They used to vital southern Italy in 1.30 but because they weren't as aggressive if they attacked Epirus or Albania allied to Naples, they'd just peace Naples for cash. Now they take land. Which btw further proves how broken military access is. The Ottomans should not be able to walk around the Balkans into southern Italy.
- 1
- 1
I have neither defended nor attacked Ottoman expansion. I have remarked that one screenshot is not enough to disprove or prove an argument and given my own experience in the subject of southern Italian expansion of the Ottomans.
But how they should get Naples out of the war without access? AI shouldn't wait 5 years to get 100% warscore on Epirus just because it has strange ally. And how they can conquer anything from Genoa without access? This mechanic unfortunately is necessary especially early game because with few transports all naval landings will end in stackwipe just after landing
I agree. That would be another fix. Maybe the AI needs to look at collective army strength more.
If they're just taking the Aegean islands, occupying them + their land in Crimea + a blockade is enough warscore.