Ottomans in the protestant league

[unmerged(17577)]

I was playing Prussia as a protestant, preparing to wage war against Austria and the catholic league.

When I was ready, on opened the diplo screen to declare war on Austria and surprised to see that their ally, France, would join the Catholic side.

So I waited a little for France to join another war or for their alliance to end, but I was devastated when in the HRE screen, France had joined the catholic league.

Looking at the protestant league, I remarked that the Ottoman Empire had joined us.

Then, later, Orthodox Russia joined catholics and Catholic Spain joined the protestants.

I DOWed Austria, but, with France support of the Catholics, we were outnumbered.

The Holy Roman Empire now have a mechanics for internal religious wars, including leagues for Catholics and Protestants that fight over the faith of the Empire

- patch notes.

PI, please repair that, so people in the HRE can do war between themselves in peace.

 

[DukeWilleo1630]

ottomans joined the catholic league in my game. Though probably because PLC joined the protestant league.

 

[dirtInfestor2]

IRL the Ottomans and France both fought on the protestant side, so i dont see a reason for changing that.

 

[Dr.Livingstone]

Please don't change this. Seeing colonial powers like Spain and Portugal along with eastern powers like Muscovy and the Ottomans fight on the protestant side in internal HRE wars is a sight I hold in reverence and awe.

 

[WeissRaben]

...you do know that the Ottomans, IRL, did fight in the Thirty Years War on the Protestant side, right?

 

[kal56]

In latest game the whole thing snowballed and ended with Netherlands (me), England, Portugal and Brandenburg vs. most of the Catholic countries and oddly enough the Russian nations and the Golden Horde. But what surprised me the most that pretty much all the German minors sided with Austria despite being Protestant or Reformed.

 

[Chamboozer]

The Ottomans, indirectly through the Protestant ruler of Transylvania, intervened in the Thirty Years War after it had already begun. They didn't sign treaties of alliance beforehand giving themselves obligations to fight alongside Protestant powers in the event of religious war.

 

[AurochsAway]

The Ottomans, indirectly through the Protestant ruler of Transylvania, intervened in the Thirty Years War after it had already begun. They didn't sign treaties of alliance beforehand giving themselves obligations to fight alongside Protestant powers in the event of religious war.

The game mechanics can't simulate that though, so this seems a reasonable abstraction.

 

[Chamboozer]

Not the vassal having independent action part of it, but there's nothing stopping countries from declaring war on someone who is already fighting in the 30 Years' War, is there? There's no need for it all to be part of one in-game war, the 30 Years' War was after all a series of wars in reality.

Besides, if the game mechanics can't simulate the gradual expansion of the 30 Years' War, that means that the mechanics aren't implemented as well as they should be. I don't think the 30 Years' War being represented as a Pan-European conflict reaching from Russia to Spain and even beyond Christendom from day 1 of the war is a particularly "reasonable abstraction".

 

[Karabas1543]

It's roughly historical and this is like the 5th complaint about it

 

[D-A-C]

As has been said, Ottomans were involved:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish–Ottoman_War_(1620–21)

 

[ahyangyi]

The Ottomans, indirectly through the Protestant ruler of Transylvania, intervened in the Thirty Years War after it had already begun. They didn't sign treaties of alliance beforehand giving themselves obligations to fight alongside Protestant powers in the event of religious war.

But... the game is about alternative history.
If Ottomans IRL indirectly aided the protestants after the war had begun, while France, a catholic country, IRL allied with the protestants, Ottoman outright joining the protestant league shouldn't be impossible in alternative history.

 

[Chamboozer]

As has been said, Ottomans were involved:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish–Ottoman_War_(1620–21)

The Khotin Campaign of 1621 had absolutely nothing to do with the Thirty Years' War, it was very much tangential. I see tons of people on the forums claiming that the Ottomans were involved in the Thirty Years' War, they really were not. They were deeply preoccupied by eastern affairs during those years, with internal instability (murder of Osman II in 1622), rebellion in Anatolia (1623-8), war with Iran (1624-39), and war with Venice (after 1645).

But... the game is about alternative history.
If Ottomans IRL indirectly aided the protestants after the war had begun, while France, a catholic country, IRL allied with the protestants, Ottoman outright joining the protestant league shouldn't be impossible in alternative history.

Like so many people have said, it doesn't make any sense. Protestant countries in the lead-up to the Thirty Years' War signed explicitly religious defensive alliances, and established leagues to aid in military cooperation. Catholic states did the same. These leagues were built around upon shared religious feelings. They may have negotiated with outside powers, but they never drew any state of an explicitly incorrect religion into either league. It was only after the war began, when the Habsburgs defeated the Protestants at the Battle of the White Mountain, overran Bohemia, and began to revoke Protestant privileges in an effort to undo the Reformation, that significant powers outside the HRE began to take notice and consider intervening, and only much later in the war that significant non-Protestant powers, mainly just France, intervened on what had by then become simply the "Anti-Habsburg" side. They feared the rise of Habsburg power, they weren't fighting for a "Protestant Cause", they were fighting for an "Anti-Habsburg" cause. But they weren't doing this before the war even began, because they couldn't see the future to know it was going to turn out that way.

However, in EUIV, the "Protestant" and "Catholic" coalitions start forming with only limited allegiance to their supposed religion, based mostly on geopolitics and spreading far beyond Central Europe, decades before the war ever breaks out. It's like they can see the future and know that this religious struggle inside the HRE is supposed to be more than just that.

 

[vonHassenstein]

@OP: There's no need to fix anything, imho.

 

[DrLulz]

PI, please repair that, so people in the HRE can do war between themselves in peace.

Seriously? The thirty years war had probably been over in less than ten years, if no outside powers had intervened.
I guess, there is some semblance of logic in requesting that Muslims should not join, because afterall the extent of Ottoman intervention was fairly minor, and to have any other muslim power, like the Timurids or the Mameluks, join would be wierd... but your request is far more radical than that, namely, that only princes of the empire should be allowed in the leagues, and, honestly, that proposal is beyond terrible. The main protagonists on the protestant side were Denmark (though, Denmark's performance was rather pitiful), Sweden, and France. All princes outside of the empire.

 

[DrLulz]

Like so many people have said, it doesn't make any sense. Protestant countries in the lead-up to the Thirty Years' War signed explicitly religious defensive alliances, and established leagues to aid in military cooperation. Catholic states did the same. These leagues were built around upon shared religious feelings. They may have negotiated with outside powers, but they never drew any state of an explicitly incorrect religion into either league. It was only after the war began, when the Habsburgs defeated the Protestants at the Battle of the White Mountain, overran Bohemia, and began to revoke Protestant privileges in an effort to undo the Reformation, that significant powers outside the HRE began to take notice and consider intervening, and only much later in the war that significant non-Protestant powers, mainly just France, intervened on what had by then become simply the "Anti-Habsburg" side. They feared the rise of Habsburg power, they weren't fighting for a "Protestant Cause", they were fighting for an "Anti-Habsburg" cause. But they weren't doing this before the war even began, because they couldn't see the future to know it was going to turn out that way.

However, in EUIV, the "Protestant" and "Catholic" coalitions start forming with only limited allegiance to their supposed religion, based mostly on geopolitics and spreading far beyond Central Europe, decades before the war ever breaks out. It's like they can see the future and know that this religious struggle inside the HRE is supposed to be more than just that.

Even if you are right, and you probably are - at least to the extent that "EUIV is about alternative history", though inexplicably common, is a horrible argument - having a slightly ahistorical (or even slightly non-sensical) religious league mechanic, where outside forces join before the war breaks out, is a small price to pay, in order to actually have the game consistently simulate the 30 years war. Much of this game is balanced between verisimilitude-of-outcome and verisimilitude-of-mechanic. To my - admittedly non-expert, though also non-ignorant - eye, the league mechanic sacrifices a fairly small amount of verisimilitude-in-mechanic (outside forces join the league beforehand) for a huge gain in verisimilitude-in-outcome (the 30 years war actually happen). I think this is a large step forward.

 

[DukeWilleo1630]

It makes more sense for the Ottoman(or any non catholic/protestant) ai to declare separate wars to take advantage of 30 years war. Gameplay wise, it makes sense for the ottomans to join the protestant league usually. Gives Protestants a bit more of a chance.

 

[ahyangyi]

Like so many people have said, it doesn't make any sense. Protestant countries in the lead-up to the Thirty Years' War signed explicitly religious defensive alliances, and established leagues to aid in military cooperation. Catholic states did the same. These leagues were built around upon shared religious feelings. They may have negotiated with outside powers, but they never drew any state of an explicitly incorrect religion into either league. It was only after the war began, when the Habsburgs defeated the Protestants at the Battle of the White Mountain, overran Bohemia, and began to revoke Protestant privileges in an effort to undo the Reformation, that significant powers outside the HRE began to take notice and consider intervening, and only much later in the war that significant non-Protestant powers, mainly just France, intervened on what had by then become simply the "Anti-Habsburg" side. They feared the rise of Habsburg power, they weren't fighting for a "Protestant Cause", they were fighting for an "Anti-Habsburg" cause. But they weren't doing this before the war even began, because they couldn't see the future to know it was going to turn out that way.

However, in EUIV, the "Protestant" and "Catholic" coalitions start forming with only limited allegiance to their supposed religion, based mostly on geopolitics and spreading far beyond Central Europe, decades before the war ever breaks out. It's like they can see the future and know that this religious struggle inside the HRE is supposed to be more than just that.

It depends on what you compare with. If you compare with real life, EU4 mechanism will always look wrong. But if you look at the possible alternative implementations, the current implementation is actually pretty good.

 

[Järnblomma]

The Thirty Years War was a pan-european conflict, that involved action from Lisbon to Moscow. The problem is that firstly there was in actuality several wars that after a while muddled together to the grand mess we call the Thirty Years War and secondly, nations tended to change sides all the time. The big players remained the same, Austria, Sweden, France, Spain, but almost all of the others changed sides, often and sometimes swiftly. This is impossible to model correctly, I would say, and in some ways the Thirty Years War mechanic has more to do with the Schmalkaldic League and other religious organisations in the Empire. I think it is a very reasonable approximation of what happened.

There are areas of possible improvement, sure, but most things are logical and works, and works not unlike how it did historically. I would like more events, both to start the war when nations perhaps weren't ready and to make it more interesting as it happens, and perhaps large nations outside of the HRE should join the war AFTER it has begun. That could be dangerous though, as it would be difficult to know which side they would take, which could make the war rather short and boring if everyone supports one side or the other.

 

[ahyangyi]

There are areas of possible improvement, sure, but most things are logical and works, and works not unlike how it did historically. I would like more events, both to start the war when nations perhaps weren't ready and to make it more interesting as it happens, and perhaps large nations outside of the HRE should join the war AFTER it has begun. That could be dangerous though, as it would be difficult to know which side they would take, which could make the war rather short and boring if everyone supports one side or the other.

Which is also why I think the current implement is fine. Even if the countries didn't join the war in the beginning they certainly had tendencies towards the two leagues.

And guess what's a good mechanism to model that tendency? Just let them join the war in the very beginning.

A better alternative would require quite some additional UI work to make everyone clear about these subtle tendencies. If that won't get done, the current system is already the best we can have.