-
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.
Sokullu_Mehmet said:
Well, a player will gain a core on Thrace if he conquers it early anyway, which I assume he will, because it's too important a province to leave alone for thirty years. Just the CoT alone is generally enough to have the Ottoman player invading in 1419, after he gets his second diplomat. The purpose behind this, however, is to give a player more of incentive to wait as well as to direct the ai to act more historically.
Sokullu_Mehmet said:
Yes, but neither was finally conquered until the 1460s. When Murad II did seize Bosnia in 1437, he was driven out seven years later. Murad was also not as conquest minded a sultan. When he conquered Konya, seveal times during his rule, he never annexed it. He didn't annex Albania or Bosnia. Finally, Albania strongly resisted Ottoman annexation until the death of Skanderbeg, so I think that the nationalism revolts one gets with an early annexation are definately warrented.
Sokullu_Mehmet said:
Agreed.
Kaigon said:
I looked it up online. Fascinating stuff.... darn wahhabis burning it all down.
From what I've read, the Socotrans were decendents of Greek traders and Nestorians. While the Portugese may have claimed they wanted to save the island's Christians from the Molsems, in truth they simply wanted the island as a base to seize the South Arabian ports and shut down Arab trade, much like how they used Hormuz.
"Well, a player will gain a core on Thrace if he conquers it early anyway, which I assume he will, because it's too important a province to leave alone for thirty years. Just the CoT alone is generally enough to have the Ottoman player invading in 1419, after he gets his second diplomat. The purpose behind this, however, is to give a player more of incentive to wait as well as to direct the ai to act more historically."
*Don't forget about the BB problems and also I think that Ottomans would conquer Thrace as early as they could but they were afraid of Balkan and other European forces SO they had claims but they tried to gather power for that. Also like I said before Constantinople was always a target for all Moslems because of a speech of Mohammed Then I think that they should have core on it."
"Yes, but neither was finally conquered until the 1460s. When Murad II did seize Bosnia in 1437, he was driven out seven years later. Murad was also not as conquest minded a sultan. When he conquered Konya, seveal times during his rule, he never annexed it. He didn't annex Albania or Bosnia. Finally, Albania strongly resisted Ottoman annexation until the death of Skanderbeg, so I think that the nationalism revolts one gets with an early annexation are definately warrented."
*You can give revolts with the events either, but big problem is BB again. I think that Ottomans shouldn't get more BB than a core province because they conquered Bosnia and Albania."
*Don't forget about the BB problems and also I think that Ottomans would conquer Thrace as early as they could but they were afraid of Balkan and other European forces SO they had claims but they tried to gather power for that. Also like I said before Constantinople was always a target for all Moslems because of a speech of Mohammed Then I think that they should have core on it."
"Yes, but neither was finally conquered until the 1460s. When Murad II did seize Bosnia in 1437, he was driven out seven years later. Murad was also not as conquest minded a sultan. When he conquered Konya, seveal times during his rule, he never annexed it. He didn't annex Albania or Bosnia. Finally, Albania strongly resisted Ottoman annexation until the death of Skanderbeg, so I think that the nationalism revolts one gets with an early annexation are definately warrented."
*You can give revolts with the events either, but big problem is BB again. I think that Ottomans shouldn't get more BB than a core province because they conquered Bosnia and Albania."
chegitz guevara said:
I found it after some manual search...
This is what i wrote in that thread;
Paradox could really use work of Halil Inalcik when it comes to Ottomans in EU2. I even found a map of Anatolia where it shows what different provinces produced during this era......
" Ottoman surveys show that this Turcoman mass migration settlement had a revulutionary effect on the demography of the eastern Balkans and Thrace. Along with the Ottoman policy of transferring disorderly nomadic groups into the Balkans in order to turkify and secure new conquests, a large-scale valuntary immigration took place during the fourteenth century in same regions. A detalied map based on Ottoman surveys by Barkan demonstrates this dramatic change in the ethnic compositon of the population. As occured earlier in western Anatolia that was not, to use Speros Vryonis Jr.´s words "a typical military conquest...but an ethnic migration of nomadic peoples of substantial numerical proportions." In the eastern Balkans between the Black sea and a line of the Mesta and Yantra rivers, Turkish settlements formed the majority of the population both nomadic and sedentery at the begining of the sixteenth century" (Page 35)
Source: Inalcik H.,1994, An Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire(Volume One 1300-1600), Cambridge University Press
"In other words, by the end of the fiftheenth century Anatolia to the west of the Euphrates was predominantly a Muslim country settled by immigrant Muslim Turks, or converted native populations. There was no question that widespread islamization had occured. This was mostly a result of a socio-cultural process during the three centuries of Turkish Seljukid rule. Judging from the Ottoman population and tax registers of the second half of the fiftheenth century, western Anatolia had by then mostly settled by Turcomans."(Page 27)
Source: Inalcik H.,1994, An Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire(Volume One 1300-1600), Cambridge University Press
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12770&page=10&pp=25
Last edited:
I'm with chegitz guevara on the cores of Bosnia, Albania and Thrace. I think the system we have with cores for each Sultan should be kept and cores do work for keeping the AI perform historically. Giving them early claims will lead to early conquests.
Norrefeldt said:
Well, if its for the AI, you could make some "trigger" system for the cores like i described earlier, its both more historical and will make the AI act like you said.
I think it would be very likely that the AI didn't get all it's cores and get stuck somewhere. Also, if one knows of the system it would be possible to block the AI, or a player if it's used for players as well, from advancing to their next core set by knowing the triggers for it.Yasko said:
Norrefeldt said:
Depends if AI manages to get its core in time. With the current system, regarless if AI has succeded or not by let say 1500s, it still get cores on Egypt. With the trigger system, even if it failes during the 1400s AI, it dont have to "get stuck somewhere" by getting Egypt, and if the human player succedes before the time line he or she could get the next couple cores earlier. After all, Mehmed II did not conquer those places he did just becouse he had some divine claim/right to take those lands. His predecessor was so successfull that it made the conquests of Mehmed II possible.
I can understand your view that the player wants to speed things up. The problem is the AI, it might get stuck somewhere, then go where it would normally have cores but now don't. By that it would rack up a lot of BB. The current system both guides the AI and is pretty forgiving for it.
To accomodate the players wish for a speedier conquest, we could have the current events but have as trigger either the correct monarch OR some selection of conquered provinces. It would then make it possible for both the AI and the player to get before schedule. I do understand that the current system might feel constraining for the player.
To accomodate the players wish for a speedier conquest, we could have the current events but have as trigger either the correct monarch OR some selection of conquered provinces. It would then make it possible for both the AI and the player to get before schedule. I do understand that the current system might feel constraining for the player.
Doing what? Not a very clear statement.Yasko said:
I do like to have the cores coming step by step and it makes OE less a special case, since Russia have it too. It guides the AI as well, very much needed. You don't seem to be against it as long as you could 'go ahead'. Then the suggestion above should be OK, while still guiding the AI and treating the AI in the same way as players. Many people want's the same rules for both. It also has the advantage that you cannot break the AI by holding on to one key core province, only stop it from 'going ahead'.
EDIT: I have been reading some old EEP threads on this before and it seems you have been fighting for the same ideas before chegitz! http://www.europa-universalis.com/forum/showthread.php?t=37177&page=1&pp=25
I was looking for some old events for Crimea, but I haven't found anything so far.
Last edited:
Norrefeldt said:Doing what? Not a very clear statement.
I do like to have the cores coming step by step and it makes OE less a special case, since Russia have it too. It guides the AI as well, very much needed. You don't seem to be against it as long as you could 'go ahead'. Then the suggestion above should be OK, while still guiding the AI and treating the AI in the same way as players. Many people want's the same rules for both. It also has the advantage that you cannot break the AI by holding on to one key core province, only stop it from 'going ahead'.
Like i said before step by step is acceptable as long as you dont get it linked to a certain sultan, thats unhistorical IMO, i doubt that Mehmed II would just sit on his ass just becouse his father(Murad II) was so successfull that he took, lets say Istanbul and all the areas Mehmed got. But if you MUST have this system becouse the reasons you described earlier( i dont agree with them, but..), then maybe just linking that to AI is a good solution after all.
It's not whether or not Mehmet would have sat on his ass or not. BB reflects how the rest of the world feels about you. If the Ottomans expanded faster and farther than they did, it's highly likely Europe would have put aside their differences and allied to stop the Turk. As long as the Turkish progression was slow, European powers not on the frontline could afford to ignore the Turks, thinking, well, that's Hungary's problem, etc.
As well, cores also represent the people of the area looking upon the ruler as legitimate. While Anatolia welcomed Turkish rule, the Balkans were not as accepting of it, at first. Over time the peasants came to realize thety were better off with the Turks than with Christian lords (despite modern propaganda about the cruel Turk). As well, when the Ottomans took control of all of Anatolia in the early 15th Century, the Timurids invaded and the minor Turkish states revolted. The Ottomans weren't seen as legitimate (though that could all have been avoided if Beyezid hadn't been so insulting to Timur).
As well, cores also represent the people of the area looking upon the ruler as legitimate. While Anatolia welcomed Turkish rule, the Balkans were not as accepting of it, at first. Over time the peasants came to realize thety were better off with the Turks than with Christian lords (despite modern propaganda about the cruel Turk). As well, when the Ottomans took control of all of Anatolia in the early 15th Century, the Timurids invaded and the minor Turkish states revolted. The Ottomans weren't seen as legitimate (though that could all have been avoided if Beyezid hadn't been so insulting to Timur).
Last edited:
yasko said:
I don't have a problem with this, but consider that Adana, Anatolia, Angora, Antalya, Kasamonu, Konya, Sivas, and Taurus are all Turkish. Even if Smyrna is Greek, Anatolia west of the Euphrates is predominately Turkish. I think Greek deserves some representation in Western Anatolia, and Smyrna was the place with the most unassimilated Greeks.
As for Turks forming the majority of the population of Eastern Bulgaria, if this was the case, how did the Turks get thrown out of Bulgaria? I know they formed a substantial part of the population, and I know large numbers of Bulgarians converted, but I'm a little skepitcal.
I can be convinced, however. I have no emotional ties to this mess of conflicting nationalisms, and only want to see historical accuracy done.
I think Ottoman fantasy options should get a thread all their own, after we finish modeling what actually happened. That way we'll have a better idea of what we'll be changing.
I don't think linking the cores to AI is a good idea. Why not simply have ownership conditions that ensure that the Ottomans are in fact on track, and add BB into the trigger. This allows faster expansion by either AI or human, but prevents the AI from getting cores while BB is high. A date trigger would override the other conditions when the historical time comes around.
As to the other events I don't think it is at all helpful to give the Ottomans cores on the steppes, even in ahistoric choices. I'm also a little uncertain about ceding all the Steppe provinces to Crimea, particularly as only a couple of countries are affected. Events more like the Kaffa one (that I do like) might make more sense in terms of getting Crimea to grow better.
As to the other events I don't think it is at all helpful to give the Ottomans cores on the steppes, even in ahistoric choices. I'm also a little uncertain about ceding all the Steppe provinces to Crimea, particularly as only a couple of countries are affected. Events more like the Kaffa one (that I do like) might make more sense in terms of getting Crimea to grow better.
"To accomodate the players wish for a speedier conquest, we could have the current events but have as trigger either the correct monarch OR some selection of conquered provinces. It would then make it possible for both the AI and the player to get before schedule. I do understand that the current system might feel constraining for the player."
*I think that this is the best solution to solve core problem of both for AI that is needed to guide and impatient players, which wanted to expand earlier.
*For Thrace I still think it should be a core province. I think that other ones are discussable, but Thrace was different and very important for the Ottomans strategically, religiously, as an enemy and etc. I think no one can claim that Istanbul was conquered by Ottomans, only because of it is in 1453 or Mehmed II was Sultan.
"I don't have a problem with this, but consider that Adana, Anatolia, Angora, Antalya, Kasamonu, Konya, Sivas, and Taurus are all Turkish. Even if Smyrna is Greek, Anatolia west of the Euphrates is predominately Turkish. I think Greek deserves some representation in Western Anatolia, and Smyrna was the place with the most unassimilated Greeks."
*I still think that Smyrna should be Orthodox Turkish. Why? Firstly the Ottoman governors doesn't want to change the people's religion much because they could taxed them more easily. Secondly as far as we know even before the Balkan Wars and the refugees that came to Smyrna region because of Wars, there was a really strong Orthodox minority that spoke Turkish in Smyrna region and this the reason why Ottomans put them in that region. Also When Ottomans took Balkans they took of some Christians from there to Thrace and Smyrna, because they wanted become more permanently in Balkans and wanting Thrace was only big city of the Empire as a need of centralization. Macedonia then should be Slavonic/Greek (For me it is Greek but majority claimed that Slavonic and I can't say that I am sure about it" Moslem. About the Halil Inalcik's documents, probably he is the best Ottoman social history historian, but the other documents that I read claimed that it wasn't like that.
"As to the other events I don't think it is at all helpful to give the Ottomans cores on the steppes, even in ahistoric choices. I'm also a little uncertain about ceding all the Steppe provinces to Crimea, particularly as only a couple of countries are affected. Events more like the Kaffa one (that I do like) might make more sense in terms of getting Crimea to grow better"
*Actually there were many problems about Crimea. Firstly nearly in half of my games, Crimea Khanate couldn't found. About secede the provinces issue, I want to prevent to Ottoman took of Crimean provinces with that way. I don't think that we have much more chance to have Crimea as big as it was big in history without the events like those.
*I think that this is the best solution to solve core problem of both for AI that is needed to guide and impatient players, which wanted to expand earlier.
*For Thrace I still think it should be a core province. I think that other ones are discussable, but Thrace was different and very important for the Ottomans strategically, religiously, as an enemy and etc. I think no one can claim that Istanbul was conquered by Ottomans, only because of it is in 1453 or Mehmed II was Sultan.
"I don't have a problem with this, but consider that Adana, Anatolia, Angora, Antalya, Kasamonu, Konya, Sivas, and Taurus are all Turkish. Even if Smyrna is Greek, Anatolia west of the Euphrates is predominately Turkish. I think Greek deserves some representation in Western Anatolia, and Smyrna was the place with the most unassimilated Greeks."
*I still think that Smyrna should be Orthodox Turkish. Why? Firstly the Ottoman governors doesn't want to change the people's religion much because they could taxed them more easily. Secondly as far as we know even before the Balkan Wars and the refugees that came to Smyrna region because of Wars, there was a really strong Orthodox minority that spoke Turkish in Smyrna region and this the reason why Ottomans put them in that region. Also When Ottomans took Balkans they took of some Christians from there to Thrace and Smyrna, because they wanted become more permanently in Balkans and wanting Thrace was only big city of the Empire as a need of centralization. Macedonia then should be Slavonic/Greek (For me it is Greek but majority claimed that Slavonic and I can't say that I am sure about it" Moslem. About the Halil Inalcik's documents, probably he is the best Ottoman social history historian, but the other documents that I read claimed that it wasn't like that.
"As to the other events I don't think it is at all helpful to give the Ottomans cores on the steppes, even in ahistoric choices. I'm also a little uncertain about ceding all the Steppe provinces to Crimea, particularly as only a couple of countries are affected. Events more like the Kaffa one (that I do like) might make more sense in terms of getting Crimea to grow better"
*Actually there were many problems about Crimea. Firstly nearly in half of my games, Crimea Khanate couldn't found. About secede the provinces issue, I want to prevent to Ottoman took of Crimean provinces with that way. I don't think that we have much more chance to have Crimea as big as it was big in history without the events like those.
Sokullu_Mehmet said:
Still, consider that even the Murad I's troops twice entered Constantinople, he didn't claim it for his own. Beyezid I didn't lay siege until they provoked him (though given his temperment, I suspect he would have had the Timurids not invaded). Mehmet I never tried, despite them aiding a pretender. Murad II only laid siege when they supported a pretender to his throne. Despite the fact that Mehmet II wanted it, he still had to come up with a CB for taking it, the fact that the Byzantines had asked for more money to keep cousin Orkhan out of his hair.
Despite the fact that Constantiople was an obvious and natural choice, despite the religious reasons for taking the city, the Ottomans, up to Mehmed II, respected it. I think if you want it early, fine, take it. You'll get a core on it as soon as you annex it. But you have to take the nine BB that come with it (instead of four BB).
How about this, we have the Pretender event in 1421 give the Ottomans a two year CB, and the Heximilion event will also grant a shorter CB? It will only cost you one more BB this way. I think it's a good compromise.