Ottomania

[AvengedK1ng]

People say the AI doesn't use them so the point is moot, but janissaries seem kind of good to me? -35% dmg recieved when drilled, rapidly drilled, etc. The real toothless part is the janissary coup has too high of standards to start (need stability <0 and your ruler has to have at least one ability below 5... very unlikely for the ottomans!)


Also, are we sure the AI doesn't use them? After I massacre their first troops in the island forts, the second batch always seem way softer. Removing the pre-requiste the sultan has all abilities below 5 for it fire might make ottomans more likely to implode in the midgame.

They cost mil to raise which has an extant extensive list of priorities, so finding where janissaries fit in that list is hard

 

[Blackmoore]

I'm pretty much talked out on this topic, so I'll boil down my views and then depart the thread:

(1) AI in 1.33 is a bit too aggressive, this aggression seems to be across the board, but most visible with respect to the Ottomans.
(2) AI aggression needs to turned from 11 to 10 OR the Ottomans' early game situation needs to be reexamined in view of the new AI.
(3) Ottoman power is not centered in its ideas so much, (but it has some strong ideas) but also due to the surrounding weak neighbors, excellent starting location, and superior early game units as well as other mechanics like the Jannisaries and the chose-your-own heir mechanics.
(4) It is uninteresting to focus your strategy in every game on what to do about Ottomans.

 

[MatthewP]

I'm pretty much talked out on this topic, so I'll boil down my views and then depart the thread:

(1) AI in 1.33 is a bit too aggressive, this aggression seems to be across the board, but most visible with respect to the Ottomans.
(2) AI aggression needs to turned from 11 to 10 OR the Ottomans' early game situation needs to be reexamined in view of the new AI.
(3) Ottoman power is not centered in its ideas so much, (but it has some strong ideas) but also due to the surrounding weak neighbors, excellent starting location, and superior early game units as well as other mechanics like the Jannisaries and the chose-your-own heir mechanics.
(4) It is uninteresting to focus your strategy in every game on what to do about Ottomans.

I haven't played the new patch yet, but this makes sense. As the AI improves (or gets more aggressive when powerful, which I think is a version of improving) strong positions become stronger.

As far as 4, to a point. The tension in EU4 between historical outcomes (Ottomans became a super-duper power), historically plausible outcomes (Ottomans were in a great position in 1444 to become a super-duper power), and gameplay (it would be nice to see varied outcomes sometimes) is tricky and very subjective.

 

[we need a jagellion]

They still get the benefit of being a lucky nation surrounded by tiny nations they get free claims on, and this game's ai proves time and time again that it is much more capable in that scenario than it is of taking advantage of a set of national ideas.

If Austria, France, or Poland started in the Ottoman position, they would snowball much harder, though.

 

[Ferdinand_Bardamu]

I just had a game as Holland in which, by 1468, the Ottomans had beaten Poland for Moldavia, completely wrecked Hungary, got a Crimea for free that had expanded into the Golden Horde and Circassia, then declared on the Mamluks.

Don't want to play the campaign anymore because I know that in due time the Ottomans will have a border with Sweden and if I complain about it, people will just post the Ottomans 17th century borders 'Well they were powerful in real life'.

It's disgusting.

 

[Pablo_Warhammer]

I just had a game as Holland in which, by 1468, the Ottomans had beaten Poland for Moldavia, completely wrecked Hungary, got a Crimea for free that had expanded into the Golden Horde and Circassia, then declared on the Mamluks.

Don't want to play the campaign anymore because I know that in due time the Ottomans will have a border with Sweden and if I complain about it, people will just post the Ottomans 17th century borders 'Well they were powerful in real life'.

It's disgusting.

Add to this that in 1500 they have more soldiers deployed than almost the five next countries TOGETHER. Nice

 

[Ferdinand_Bardamu]

Add to this that in 1500 they have more soldiers deployed than almost the five next countries TOGETHER. Nice

Once they take Quantity it's over.

For some reason, AE isn't a thing for them (lucky nations I guess) and they always get militarist leaders meaning they'll just attack, attack and attack until they own Moscow, Stockholm and Berlin. Probably will end up in Siberia too since they got such a large Crimea for free.

But again, this is 'normal'.

 

[grommile]

For some reason, AE isn't a thing for them (lucky nations I guess)

Lucky nation status combined with religiously diverse, geographically separated enemies (and many of their early targets being small enough to swallow in one gulp).

 

[Pablo_Warhammer]

I always said that Ottos need an exhaustive disaster (like Ming, Majapahit, Poland or Mali) AND/or a govern system like the mandate of heaven representing the odds of the harem. The odds are now only representde by some random little pretenders, but it should be more dangeroues, as it was in real life, I mean...

 

[Nostalgium]

Lucky nation status combined with religiously diverse, geographically separated enemies (and many of their early targets being small enough to swallow in one gulp).

Don't forget culture. Poland is only going to care a little bit about them eating Hungarian land, and not at all about them eating Mamluk land. They will only care in a big way when they start taking West Slavic land - i.e. theirs - and then, Hungary will only care a little bit, and so on.

 

[AvengedK1ng]

I just had a game as Holland in which, by 1468, the Ottomans had beaten Poland for Moldavia, completely wrecked Hungary, got a Crimea for free that had expanded into the Golden Horde and Circassia, then declared on the Mamluks.

Don't want to play the campaign anymore because I know that in due time the Ottomans will have a border with Sweden and if I complain about it, people will just post the Ottomans 17th century borders 'Well they were powerful in real life'.

It's disgusting.

They won't get that far due to gov capacity and you're holland that gives you a strong ally vs Catholic

 

[grommile]

The odds are now only representde by some random little pretenders, but it should be more dangeroues, as it was in real life, I mean...

The fundamental challenge here is that we're playing the state, and so the only reason to put up meaningful resistance to a pretender is if he's a drooling moron with good publicity.

 

[jamal bakr]

Ferdinand_Bardamu said:
I just had a game as Holland in which, by 1468, the Ottomans had beaten Poland for Moldavia, completely wrecked Hungary, got a Crimea for free that had expanded into the Golden Horde and Circassia, then declared on the Mamluks.

Don't want to play the campaign anymore because I know that in due time the Ottomans will have a border with Sweden and if I complain about it, people will just post the Ottomans 17th century borders 'Well they were powerful in real life'.

It's disgusting.

I feel bad for countries like Poland, Hungary or Russia that have to grind out land victories against ottomans, but if you are a naval nation (france/england/spain/netherlands etc) you can really style on him regardless of how big he gets, just because he doesn't fort biga or koceli, and his navy always sucks, his naval tradition always sucks, etc. I honestly prefer fighting Otto to anything in Iran (mountains, terrible supply) or Asia steppes (huge, low supply will take a year just to get your dudes back after winning 50 total dev of quasi wasteland)

They won't get that far due to gov capacity and you're holland that gives you a strong ally vs Catholic

i'd stay catholic as Holland... if you split the current Catholic bonuses in half, it would be the first- and second-best religion right now.

 

[Ferdinand_Bardamu]

They won't get that far due to gov capacity and you're holland that gives you a strong ally vs Catholic

It's not the point.

The point is that in every single game the Ottomans are the end game boss. It's the same slog of 7 wars just to get them down to a size that they don't immediately expand after I beat them.

I can do it, it's not a difficulty issue, but it's an extreme boredom issue.

I'd kill to have a huge Russia, colonial Britain or even say unified India to fight as an end-game boss. It never is though, it's always a huge Ottomans.

I always said that Ottos need an exhaustive disaster (like Ming, Majapahit, Poland or Mali) AND/or a govern system like the mandate of heaven representing the odds of the harem. The odds are now only representde by some random little pretenders, but it should be more dangeroues, as it was in real life, I mean...

The game is crying for the Ottomans to have an exhaustive disaster. I'd accept something that makes it harder for them to get Printing Press and Manufactories, I'd accept an actual, proper Janissary coup that's hard to get out of i, I'd accept even just them getting -2 Stab on Sultan death reflecting how brutal and bloody succession often was. Just one of these things would be fair enough.

Ming have the Mandate.
Russia have bad development and far from institutions.
France have the French Wars of Religion and HRE right on their doorstep with a Burgundian Inheritance that almost never goes their way.
England have two major disasters and start with Scotland guaranteed by France.
Castile have a major disaster and awful starting heir.
Austria can lose the Emperorship at any given moment.
Poland may not take the Union and have a bunch of negative events.

Meanwhile the Ottomans can have an Empire from Persia to the Baltic Seas with zero unrest.

And people think this isn't an issue...

 

[Pablo_Warhammer]

if you are a naval nation (france/england/spain/netherlands etc) you can really style on him regardless of how big he gets, just because he doesn't fort biga or koceli, and his navy always sucks, his naval tradition always sucks, etc.

?????

Ottos always have INSANE navy numbers, more than enough to beat any navy you could send to them. Maybe some people here defending Ottos dont have all dlcs or whatever because I cant understand some arguments...

 

[jamal bakr]

?????

Ottos always have INSANE navy numbers, more than enough to beat any navy you could send to them. Maybe some people here defending Ottos dont have all dlcs or whatever because I cant understand some arguments...

I'm playing right now with all dlc except origins as portugal, looks like I first beat them in 1573 with my portuguese navy, took back southern italy from them, as well as picked up a byz and hungarian vassal

Don't stress out about the numbers; they have crappy naval tradition, crappy admirals, and crappy engagement width. Its annoying because they don't run out of sailors, so you will kill a LOT of galleys by the time the war is over, but htey can't conslidate them well and go limp pretty quick. When I came back in 1583 for World War Ottoman 2 with a byz vassal and a hungarian vassal, it was gg for them, I was more worried about their corpse getting scavenged by the Commonwealth than them ever being a threat again.

I think some people wait too long to kneecap ottos.... you really want to get them before absolutism, when they still have a lot of foreign cores hiding underneath their provinces. By 1623 ottos aren't the "endgame boss".... they're the 7th ranked power.

 

[Ferdinand_Bardamu]

The Ottomans outnumbered my British navy in the 1500s on one campaign...

They're just too much in every single department and it really seems that the last patch made this issue even worse.

I mean if Naples allies Epirus or Albania you're basically guaranteed an Ottoman Italy too since they'll take the land no-cobelligerent (they never did this on 1.30). Again the only nation that seems to be able to take no-cobelligerent land in Italy with no coalition problems even after they've just killed Hungary.

 

[jamal bakr]

The Ottomans outnumbered my British navy in the 1500s on one campaign...

They're just too much in every single department and it really seems that the last patch made this issue even worse.

I mean if Naples allies Epirus or Albania you're basically guaranteed an Ottoman Italy too since they'll take the land no-cobelligerent (they never did this on 1.30). Again the only nation that seems to be able to take no-cobelligerent land in Italy with no coalition problems even after they've just killed Hungary.

Well you should have used "call to arms" on mighty portugal to save you

The whole point of the british missions in the mediterrian is to nab med islands so naval battles in the mediterrian trigger "wooden wall". the whole "galleys have more cannons per engagement slot in inland seas!" thing is a red herring; at the end of the day the battle ends when morale breaks, and more bodies means more causalities. Don't get stressed about sailing into 70+ galley swarms with your heavies, you'll chew them up no problem if you have a decent admiral.

 

[CthulhuTactical]

I think the only thing that needs to be redone is ottomans literally expanding into russia and urals. This is so stupid and annoying and ruin playthroughs.

 

[AvengedK1ng]

The Ottomans outnumbered my British navy in the 1500s on one campaign...

They're just too much in every single department and it really seems that the last patch made this issue even worse.

I mean if Naples allies Epirus or Albania you're basically guaranteed an Ottoman Italy too since they'll take the land no-cobelligerent (they never did this on 1.30). Again the only nation that seems to be able to take no-cobelligerent land in Italy with no coalition problems even after they've just killed Hungary.

How much was your Britain packing? Was Scotland vassalised and you lost france? You can beat them on heavies and they'll always build over fl for gallies anyway