I am still a relatively new player and I currently started a custom dynasty as Polotsk. I have since expanded to become the kingdom of Lithuania. I have more or less ignored the religious aspect of the game outside of trying to get taxes from my bishops and converting pagan counties to my religion, but I'm nervous that I am shorthanded once the pagan nations are gone and the Catholic nations set their gaze on me. Is there anything unique about being Orthodox or is it just Catholicism without the perks? I'm nervous that Hungary, Denmark, or Sweden will use Holy Orders against me and I will be more or less powerless to stop it. I have the Legacy of Rome DLC (got the steam bundle) but I do not have any retinues.
Is there any benefit to being Orthodox?
- Thread starter unmerged(618336)
- 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.
IIRC, Holy Orders will only fight against heathens and heretics, and since the Orthodox church is not considered a heresy in other aspects of the game, I doubt they will be able to fight you. Also, Catholic nations will not get the Holy War CB against you, so you should be safe if they dont have claims on you already.
On to the first part of your question, while playing as a Orthodox kingdom, it may seem like you are losing a lot of the Catholic "perks" such as Crusades and Holy Orders, but it does come with some less apparent benefits. First of all, there is no pesky Pope to worry about, and I believe since you are a kingdom, the Ecumenical Patriarch does not have the ability to excommunicate you since you have your own Patriarch. I may be wrong though. Secondly, and I believe most importantly, all your "bishops" will automatically pay taxes to you, rather than the pope, regardless of opinion.
On to the first part of your question, while playing as a Orthodox kingdom, it may seem like you are losing a lot of the Catholic "perks" such as Crusades and Holy Orders, but it does come with some less apparent benefits. First of all, there is no pesky Pope to worry about, and I believe since you are a kingdom, the Ecumenical Patriarch does not have the ability to excommunicate you since you have your own Patriarch. I may be wrong though. Secondly, and I believe most importantly, all your "bishops" will automatically pay taxes to you, rather than the pope, regardless of opinion.
No pope to annoy you and steal your bishops tax money. Catholics can't holy war on you so you don't have to worry about that. Orthodox autocephaly means that your court chaplain is also your personal patriarch if you're a kingdom, so as long as you appoint someone you like you usually don't have any hassles.
There's really nothing NOT to like actually.
There's really nothing NOT to like actually.
Orthodoxy is pretty relatively flavourless when compared to religions like Roman Catholicism or even Sunni/Shiite Islam. I'm pretty sure I've only ever seen one unique Orthodox event, and that's the "sponsor-an-icon" one. The main advantage to being Orthodox, is that if you're a king, you should be able to appoint your own patriarch (religion head) and you control the excommunications within your realm.
From a gameplay stand point, Catholicism is certainly the superior religion because if you're strong you can really use Crusades to dominate the game.
From a gameplay stand point, Catholicism is certainly the superior religion because if you're strong you can really use Crusades to dominate the game.
They can't use the holy orders for free in wars against you, Orthodox are not considered infidels or heretics (if you look out for your relation to other persons, you will see a modifier of "-8: Religious differences" between Orthodox and Catholic people, while for example Muslims and Christians, Orthodox and Catholic alike, take a -35 hit on their relation to each other due to considering each other as infidels.).
Unless you decide to eat some out of the HRE's de jure lands you can just live in peace, there is no crusades against orthodox people in the game mechanic, claimants and de jure wars will be what you have to be aware of.
Unless you decide to eat some out of the HRE's de jure lands you can just live in peace, there is no crusades against orthodox people in the game mechanic, claimants and de jure wars will be what you have to be aware of.
I think Catholic and Orthodox are well balanced. I might even prefer Orthodox.
The reason to be Catholic are:
1. Invasions. The most powerful CB in the game. If used right, invasions can really allow you to dominate half of Europe in the first 100 years.
2. Crusades. Getting the crusader trait is great. And help to secure new kingdoms are always nice.
3. Free Investiture. If you can handle the papal penalty, this has some nice bonuses.
But those are balanced by these very big downsides.
1. Excommunications. If you're Catholic, especially if you use Free investiture, you're going to get excommunicated at some point. So you end up constantly bribing popes and wasting the use of your court chaplain to avoid it. Worst thing is you can't really break truces often because of the opinion penalty with the pope.
2. Lost Taxes and Troops. If your bishops like the pope more than you, they supply ZERO troops or gold. If you have a P-AB, that's the troops and gold of an entire duchy lost. If you have a lot of them, that's very painful. And if the pope is a crusader and popular, this happens a lot. Ties go to the pope.
If you're Orthodox:
1. You control your own "pope" so you won't ever be excommunicated, and you can freely excommunicate anyone in your realm for any reason. Very nice. This means you can freely break truces with other Christians without worry about excommunications.
2. You can spam P-ABs without worrying about losing taxes or troops. If you like the stability of bishop vassals, this is a very big deal.
Bottom line, if you don't use a lot of invasions Orthodox is clearly better than Catholic. Controlling your own pope really frees you to do a lot of things a Catholic ruler can't do. The ability to use a lot of bishop vassals can also make for a very stable realm, something I would never do as a Catholic at risk of losing half my realm levies and income for years just because I did something unpopular or the new pope is a saint.
But if you play aggressively and take advantage of invasions, Catholic has the bigger upside. The choice is really whether you want to aggressively expand in a less stable realm or have a nice stable realm with few revolts.
The reason to be Catholic are:
1. Invasions. The most powerful CB in the game. If used right, invasions can really allow you to dominate half of Europe in the first 100 years.
2. Crusades. Getting the crusader trait is great. And help to secure new kingdoms are always nice.
3. Free Investiture. If you can handle the papal penalty, this has some nice bonuses.
But those are balanced by these very big downsides.
1. Excommunications. If you're Catholic, especially if you use Free investiture, you're going to get excommunicated at some point. So you end up constantly bribing popes and wasting the use of your court chaplain to avoid it. Worst thing is you can't really break truces often because of the opinion penalty with the pope.
2. Lost Taxes and Troops. If your bishops like the pope more than you, they supply ZERO troops or gold. If you have a P-AB, that's the troops and gold of an entire duchy lost. If you have a lot of them, that's very painful. And if the pope is a crusader and popular, this happens a lot. Ties go to the pope.
If you're Orthodox:
1. You control your own "pope" so you won't ever be excommunicated, and you can freely excommunicate anyone in your realm for any reason. Very nice. This means you can freely break truces with other Christians without worry about excommunications.
2. You can spam P-ABs without worrying about losing taxes or troops. If you like the stability of bishop vassals, this is a very big deal.
Bottom line, if you don't use a lot of invasions Orthodox is clearly better than Catholic. Controlling your own pope really frees you to do a lot of things a Catholic ruler can't do. The ability to use a lot of bishop vassals can also make for a very stable realm, something I would never do as a Catholic at risk of losing half my realm levies and income for years just because I did something unpopular or the new pope is a saint.
But if you play aggressively and take advantage of invasions, Catholic has the bigger upside. The choice is really whether you want to aggressively expand in a less stable realm or have a nice stable realm with few revolts.
Orthodox: Less risk vs Reward. That said, I chose it for my very first game because I wouldn't have to worry about losing bishop taxes or being excomunnicated. I was still a newbie at that point so making total use of crusades and invasions were still a bit beyond my grasp.
To an extent, the real benefit of playing as an orthodox christian as opposed to a catholic ruler is not having the absurd advantages of catholics. You get a lot better at this game when you can't call in an extra 14K troops for winning a holy war and not having the absurdly powerful invasion CB at your disposal. My last run as the Duke of Moray saw me conquer all of Brittania, France, and the HRE in the first generation (that Mael lived a long time, but still). I can't take games playing as a catholic seriously any more.
edit: The invasion cb is so much more powerful than some might even know: every county level keep successfully captured when the war ends wipes out the entire ruling structure of that county when the agreement is signed. In the game I mentioned, I captured the first castle of every county of France, forever wiping out Occitan and Frankish power in the span of a ten year war (and having absolutely no rebellions for the next four centuries in those territories).
edit: The invasion cb is so much more powerful than some might even know: every county level keep successfully captured when the war ends wipes out the entire ruling structure of that county when the agreement is signed. In the game I mentioned, I captured the first castle of every county of France, forever wiping out Occitan and Frankish power in the span of a ten year war (and having absolutely no rebellions for the next four centuries in those territories).
Last edited:
Looks like there should be some changes for Invasion CB. It seems to me that Invasion CB was created to accommodate William's invasion of England alone. No other instance in history was something like that repeated. Even the way the 1066 invasion is modelled right now is massively ahistorical and making the post-invasion rule so much easier than it actually was for old William the Bastard.
CK2+ had an interesting take on the Invasion CB. You only get the ruler's holdings (the king's demense if you invaded a king etc). You get claims on every holding you occupy. You can revoke titles but there still is the chance of a revolt.
I would also like to point out that you can assign your chaplain to Rome in order to get the Pope to like you more. This is important with Free Investiture. If you have Free Investiture and the pope has 100 relations with you, your not going to be excommunicated.
I would also like to point out that you can assign your chaplain to Rome in order to get the Pope to like you more. This is important with Free Investiture. If you have Free Investiture and the pope has 100 relations with you, your not going to be excommunicated.
Obviously the advantage of being Orthodox is you are part of the One True Faith, and not the heretics! 
Interesting input from everybody until now.
I play as orthodox because I really don't like the Pope and all the game mechanics related to it - but other than this, the realm management is pretty much similar and people already explained above what you have to lose in terms of external politics. So for me the religious aspect is a bit of a plus, however, in catalan, occitan & italian regions you find interesting characters and scenarios worth playing - especially republics now, as soon as the DLC is released. Until this point, most people playing orthodox that I read about in the forum were either trying to keep the BE alive, actually restore its glory, or make a Russian empire much sooner in history. There are also some tough challenges as orthodox (ie. playing Georgia - surrounded by BE, muslims and the hordes.... ouch).
* What I didn't read above is the ability to reunite the churches and restore the Roman Empire, but I guess that is too localised on the BE, not orthodoxy itself.
* You can also pluck the eyes of your prisoners to teach them lessons.
* The orthodox have their own religious specifics, like the pentharchy; but they don't give the game too much authenticity, religion gets out of the way mostly - which I like.
* As the BE, you won't need the holy orders IMO, since the empire, if well managed, can produce enough troops and is easier to keep together in comparison to the HRE - IMO.
* If you lead many wars against anybody of any religion and brake your truce too often it will indeed NOT affect your game - which makes the game a bit more focused on staying alive against the hordes and muslims, historically a bigger problem than christians.
* One big advantage in 1066 start in the BE is that you are technologically more advanced than the catholics and you have some holdings which are already developed.
Playing a catholic or muslim has more flavour in my opinion if you like the events and all the micromanagement of the realm (I play Saladin as the king of Egypt right now), playing orthodox was more interesting to me when playing the warmongerer card. Actually muslim is the best in this regard since they can invade/holy war their way to world domination.
Disadvantages:
* the 1100-1400 period has deprived us, the posteriority, of a lot of information on the orthodox regions; there are many incongruences in the game in these regions (justified, since there's too much useless polemic about it and you can't sort it out objectively), so if you like to read the wikipedia about the surrounding regions and characters actual historical accounts, you might get confused by some mismatches.
I play as orthodox because I really don't like the Pope and all the game mechanics related to it - but other than this, the realm management is pretty much similar and people already explained above what you have to lose in terms of external politics. So for me the religious aspect is a bit of a plus, however, in catalan, occitan & italian regions you find interesting characters and scenarios worth playing - especially republics now, as soon as the DLC is released. Until this point, most people playing orthodox that I read about in the forum were either trying to keep the BE alive, actually restore its glory, or make a Russian empire much sooner in history. There are also some tough challenges as orthodox (ie. playing Georgia - surrounded by BE, muslims and the hordes.... ouch).
* What I didn't read above is the ability to reunite the churches and restore the Roman Empire, but I guess that is too localised on the BE, not orthodoxy itself.
* You can also pluck the eyes of your prisoners to teach them lessons.
* The orthodox have their own religious specifics, like the pentharchy; but they don't give the game too much authenticity, religion gets out of the way mostly - which I like.
* As the BE, you won't need the holy orders IMO, since the empire, if well managed, can produce enough troops and is easier to keep together in comparison to the HRE - IMO.
* If you lead many wars against anybody of any religion and brake your truce too often it will indeed NOT affect your game - which makes the game a bit more focused on staying alive against the hordes and muslims, historically a bigger problem than christians.
* One big advantage in 1066 start in the BE is that you are technologically more advanced than the catholics and you have some holdings which are already developed.
Playing a catholic or muslim has more flavour in my opinion if you like the events and all the micromanagement of the realm (I play Saladin as the king of Egypt right now), playing orthodox was more interesting to me when playing the warmongerer card. Actually muslim is the best in this regard since they can invade/holy war their way to world domination.
Disadvantages:
* the 1100-1400 period has deprived us, the posteriority, of a lot of information on the orthodox regions; there are many incongruences in the game in these regions (justified, since there's too much useless polemic about it and you can't sort it out objectively), so if you like to read the wikipedia about the surrounding regions and characters actual historical accounts, you might get confused by some mismatches.
Don't forget castration, the cries of pain will be heard to your bedchamber...
(I'm a depraved soul, wanting more torture option and always going for 'Impaler' when that event chain fires)
