Should Ottoman have a Tributary mechanic?

[Lavilledieu]

For historical accuracy, and also for gameplay to some extent, eu4 needs more types of subjects. Or tributaries need a major overhaul. Currently, there are situations that demand a different system. The Ottomans got mentioned here already. A different situation I really dislike, is Russia: Moscovy starts out much much much stronger than Novgorod thanks to the vassal swarm, which gets integrated very quickly. Especially all the extra manpower and capital forts turn this into a nightmare for Novgorod. Additionally, several of the "vassals" got conquered by Muscovy irl. I’m also not sure why Pskov is a vassal. A different approach to subject relations is really needed here as well.

 

[YellowPress]

For historical accuracy, and also for gameplay to some extent, eu4 needs more types of subjects. Or tributaries need a major overhaul. Currently, there are situations that demand a different system. The Ottomans got mentioned here already. A different situation I really dislike, is Russia: Moscovy starts out much much much stronger than Novgorod thanks to the vassal swarm, which gets integrated very quickly. Especially all the extra manpower and capital forts turn this into a nightmare for Novgorod. Additionally, several of the "vassals" got conquered by Muscovy irl. I’m also not sure why Pskov is a vassal. A different approach to subject relations is really needed here as well.

Because the vassals are tributaries of GH, but Muscovy is tax collector

 

[sjobenrit]

if the full tributary system would be added to the ottomans I think it would need a special version of it because there are two things that could happen:
1) ottomans dont consilidate further then anatolia
2) they add ALL neighbouring nations as tributary, so you have silly things like byzantium minus constantinople as tributary and another pain in the *** for bigger nations in the area (georgia, hungary, venice, mamluks) who have all potential targets under ottoman protection (not all, but you get my idea)

 

[MaXiMuS-54]

Manpower for steppe nomads amd mana for everyone else?

Totally insignificant stats and better off razing the land

 

[YellowPress]

if the full tributary system would be added to the ottomans I think it would need a special version of it because there are two things that could happen:
1) ottomans dont consilidate further then anatolia
2) they add ALL neighbouring nations as tributary, so you have silly things like byzantium minus constantinople as tributary and another pain in the *** for bigger nations in the area (georgia, hungary, venice, mamluks) who have all potential targets under ottoman protection (not all, but you get my idea)

What if all those people were tributaries at one point or another and so minors finding it hard to expand makes the game more historical? Wallachia and ragusa being tributaries rather than just having independence guaranteed works far better for an Ottomans player
We're seeing changes related to if duchy kingdom or empire next patch, so ottos should expand further anyway

 

[DominusNovus]

I think, in general, the game should have far more variety and flexibility with the subject mechanics. Take a page out of Stellaris' book.

 

[durbal]

Tributaries were done all wrong. They were a goofy way to make Ming not just steamroll over everything due to its dev which itself was a patch on some inherently flawed mechanics (like allowing Ming to send 50K troops into Mongolia). Then they got added to other stuff and...the game's not better for it.

 

[sjobenrit]

What if all those people were tributaries at one point or another and so minors finding it hard to expand makes the game more historical? Wallachia and ragusa being tributaries rather than just having independence guaranteed works far better for an Ottomans player
We're seeing changes related to if duchy kingdom or empire next patch, so ottos should expand further anyway

works far better for an ottomans player but not for an austria hungary, venice or poland player, maybe its more historical but seeing as eu4 has become more and more of a sandbox the past years I personally wouldnt like it if I got blocked as bosnia or the like by ottoman tributaries everywhere for the sake of 'historical' gameplay

I have not seen the changes yet but I hope the ottomans will focus more on egypt and the maghreb and then 'stay' there instead of going rampage in the steppes region as they do now

edit: so I propose a more lenient tributary system where the ottomans dont always defend the nation like when the attacker is too small to bother or a modifier similiar but bigger than the 'already in another war' so that you can more easily snatch ragusa when the ottomans are fighting ad quoanalka, I hope you get what I mean

 

[YellowPress]

works far better for an ottomans player but not for an austria hungary, venice or poland player, maybe its more historical but seeing as eu4 has become more and more of a sandbox the past years I personally wouldnt like it if I got blocked as bosnia or the like by ottoman tributaries everywhere for the sake of 'historical' gameplay

The king of Bosnia was so dumb he should've just done x
Becomes moot if the start date is more accurately reflected

I have not seen the changes yet but I hope the ottomans will focus more on egypt and the maghreb and then 'stay' there instead of going rampage in the steppes region as they do now

Maghreb is different culture group so that'll be interesting

edit: so I propose a more lenient tributary system where the ottomans dont always defend the nation like when the attacker is too small to bother or a modifier similiar but bigger than the 'already in another war' so that you can more easily snatch ragusa when the ottomans are fighting ad quoanalka, I hope you get what I mean

Why shouldn't ottos be called to arms? You know how long Ragusa was a tributary for irl, and how all those years of paying tribute mean nothing if venice can just eat you that easily.
If you want oppurtunistic strikes during wars then campaign for length of war modifier to be smaller

 

[BlakFrahust]

ottomans need their own subject tier, ottoman government is already its own government type so you can easily tie it to it.
marches and vassals are too centralized, but tributary definitely isn't what they were. Crimean cavalry played a major role in ottoman wars in eastern and central Europe and crimean revolt was a major factor in second vienna war.
Ottoman vassals should be able to declare their own wars but also should be forced into their overlord's wars.
But tributary system definitely existed for ottomans. For example ottoman rule in inner arabia is rather ambiguous, while ottomans never truly reigned desert tribes there were still recognition of ottoman authority, something best represented by tributary.

 

[sjobenrit]

The king of Bosnia was so dumb he should've just done x
Becomes moot if the start date is more accurately reflected

Maghreb is different culture group so that'll be interesting

Why shouldn't ottos be called to arms? You know how long Ragusa was a tributary for irl, and how all those years of paying tribute mean nothing if venice can just eat you that easily.
If you want oppurtunistic strikes during wars then campaign for length of war modifier to be smaller

I dont get your point. Obviously I am talking about a player/maybe ai here who wants to expand, which is like, the point of the game? Bosnia did nothing the entire games timespan in our timeline, I am sure you understand that I took an example and I am not some armchair military historian or maybe we dont understand eachother

Ottomans historically hold a large part the maghreb and they seem to have no problem expanding into not-levant culture land this patch, just not in the Maghreb

> and how all those years of paying tribute mean nothing
holy shit its just 'historical'!
I am not advocating for a tributary version only in name, I am advocating for an ottoman tributary version that makes it more likely for the tributary version in question to get attacked compared to a normal tributary, like a -40 'in another war' modifier instead of a -30 modifier.

 

[YellowPress]

I dont get your point. Obviously I am talking about a player/maybe ai here who wants to expand, which is like, the point of the game? Bosnia did nothing the entire games timespan in our timeline, I am sure you understand that I took an example and I am not some armchair military historian or maybe we dont understand eachother

If we have a more historical set up we have a more historical progress

Ottomans historically hold a large part the maghreb and they seem to have no problem expanding into not-levant culture land this patch, just not in the Maghreb

Yes because its normally held by rivals or gets claims to it, the next patch means itll have interest in Egyptian clay due to being a levantine empire so gains of low dev maghreb land may be slower

> and how all those years of paying tribute mean nothing
holy shit its just 'historical'!
I am not advocating for a tributary version only in name, I am advocating for an ottoman tributary version that makes it more likely for the tributary version in question to get attacked compared to a normal tributary, like a -40 'in another war' modifier instead of a -30 modifier.

Your "ottomans dont always defend the nation like when the attacker is too small to bother" comment which I was quoting begs to disagree

 

[BoomKidneyShot]

ottomans need their own subject tier, ottoman government is already its own government type so you can easily tie it to it.
marches and vassals are too centralized, but tributary definitely isn't what they were. Crimean cavalry played a major role in ottoman wars in eastern and central Europe and crimean revolt was a major factor in second vienna war.
Ottoman vassals should be able to declare their own wars but also should be forced into their overlord's wars.
But tributary system definitely existed for ottomans. For example ottoman rule in inner arabia is rather ambiguous, while ottomans never truly reigned desert tribes there were still recognition of ottoman authority, something best represented by tributary.

Couldn't this be seen as the tributary supplying manpower?

 

[Jiben]

Generally speaking, A LOT of diplomatic arrangements of the era could be represented as tributaries, Ottoman subjects being among them.

But right now the biggest problem to use the mechanic more is how unreasonably eager the AI is to make tributaries. This screws up places like Japan and China, where stronger party will turn it's weaker neighbours into tributaries... or at least it used to before Paradox made a quick fix by scripting a specific rule to restrict AI from making tributaries with capitals in same superregions.

A way to turn tributaries into vassals may be needed in that case? Have vassal relations "progress" from loosely connected tributaries into "regular vassals" into becoming a integral part of the nation.

Would require quite a big rebalancing about the entire mechanic otherwise it would be op as hell but having a more dynamic subject system could be an idea for eu5?

 

[YellowPress]

A way to turn tributaries into vassals may be needed in that case? Have vassal relations "progress" from loosely connected tributaries into "regular vassals" into becoming a integral part of the nation.

Would require quite a big rebalancing about the entire mechanic otherwise it would be op as hell but having a more dynamic subject system could be an idea for eu5?

State to territory at high autonomy to vassal to tributary to independent would be a nice change at showing breakdown of empire in rotw

 

[themrspartan]

Yes. They should also have an disaster that causes them to decline midgame, the janissary coup is far too weak. It should be avoidable with missions but happen for the AI pretty much every game. During this disaster it becomes more likely their tributaries break away as happened in real life.

 

[BlakFrahust]

Couldn't this be seen as the tributary supplying manpower?

I don't think so. Although I am not sure about Wallachia and Moldovia(though there is no reason for them to be different) Crimeans and Serbians while they were still a vassal had their own generals. Game, for balance reasons, doesn't let you control your vassal armies which are semi-accurate most of the time.