Shouldn't Byzantium have more cores?

[tkorsvold]

Hello,

I've recently taken up EU4 again, lots of New patches plus the Common Sense and Art of War DLC.
Exciting, as always I fire up a New game With Byzantium, my favorite.

So far so good, managed to ally Poland-Lithuania, Wallachia and Aragon.
Ottomans declared war on me around 1450, the war is going well for now, Ottomans are winning Battles but slowly losing Manpower and get whittled Down by the sheer number of forces opposing them.
Hoping the Beyliks and Mamluks will decalre on them soon, too.

But here's my question: I see the Byzantines now have a reduced number of cores.

But shouldn't at least some of the Anatolian west coast (Smyrna, Nicaea, Nicomedia) and maybe Trebizond have Byzantine cores on them? Some of these areas were owned by Byzantium as late as the 1330s, and still had large greek populations. Trebizond also was one of the byzantine successor states after 1204.

Maybe this has been discussed to Death before, but given the very concept of what a core is - there should be more Byzantine cores IMO.

Or maybe People disagree?

 

[Fiend13]

Oh no

 

[skillor7]

Hopefully Wiz won't recognize this thread....

Well.....

Basically you're historically right..... but well Byzantium is op compared to rl in 1444....

Wiz would say: "okay I'll add the cores.... but Constantinople will get 75% autonomy, Morea and Achea will be independent and Constantinople will lose its trade boost"

But I can understand you..... Byzantium for ever <3

 

[LoriKe]

From what i know cores exire after 150 years, so theoretically Byzantium should have cores on hudavendigar and the other 2 procinces near it and also on the province near chios.

While that is somewhat true, because Byzantium did own those provinces until around 1300 it didn't have western greece on which has cores so it's kind of balanced.

 

[Necurok]

Well actually he woulg be right

CORE_LOSE = 50 and CORE_LOSE_CULTURE_GROUP = 150

so greek culture group cores won't be lost for 150 years...

 

[Starki113r]

Please don't start. Every time someone mentions the Byzantines losing cores Paradox removes more.

They already lost their cores on the Aegean, parts of Greece, and Trebizond. Just let it go.

 

[IIWW]

Wiz should just pin the answer to this and other such thread...
Basically "Byzantium is already much more powerful than it historically was in 1444, so we can add them cores, but they are now OPM and Constantinople has total development of about 10".

Ahhh, here it is:

OK, I'll give Byzantium Theodosian Walls and Greek Fire since it's more historical. Just as long as you don't mind the following historical changes as well:
- Reduce Constantinople to <10 development
- Remove important center of trade and black sea toll from Constantinople
- Morea should be a vassal or independent
- Athens should start with their independence supported by the Ottomans

Sound good?

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/byzantium.880783/#post-19915764

 

[Shaaaq]

Wiz should just pin the answer to this and other such thread...
Basically "Byzantium is already much more powerful than it historically was in 1444, so we can add them cores, but they are now OPM and Constantinople has total development of about 10".

Ahhh, here it is:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/byzantium.880783/#post-19915764

Wiz was talking about modifiers that actually gave Byzantium strength (for realism purposes) in that thread though.

 

[hwoosh]

The challenge with Byzantium is winning the first war with the Ottomans. Unlike Wiz's half-serious proposed nerfs like crippling the Constantinople province and making Morea start as a vassal, giving Byzantium cores that obey the game's own rules wouldn't change the difficulty of that first war; and the rest of the game is smooth sailing for a reasonably competent player even if Byz were to have zero cores.

 

[MrParadux]

As far as I know, the main reason more and more cores got removed from byzantium was that it was just incredibly easy to vassalize them and feed them all their cores back. I do think this is a solid reason gamplay wise

 

[Necurok]

that's true if you win the first war you own the whole cost and the mameluks normally take the anatolian region of the crippeled mameluks

 

[Wizzington]

no

 

[Necurok]

no

senpai has spoken the word that each player suggesting something fears

 

[ShoGuL]

no

How dare you, sir.

You should introduce a new 'thing' where Byzantium is buffed every patch. But make it a tiny, pointless and irrelevant buff -- just enough to have "Buffed Byzantium by..." listed near the top of the change notes.

 

[ace1234567890]

no

I would have thought that answer would be best left dead and buried in the past.

 

[yerm]

I support Byzantine starting with cores on the entirety of the Eastern Roman Empire, plus Justinian's holdings from Italy. I also want this to be realistically implemented only AFTER you give Mongolia cores on all of Genghis Khan's empire, and Granada cores on the entirety of the Umayyad Caliphate.

 

[zenisar]

no

Since Wiz found this thread, we can expect more cores removed from Byz. In next patch, Byz will start as OPM with Constantinopole only.

 

[IIWW]

How dare you, sir.

You should introduce a new 'thing' where Byzantium is buffed every patch. But make it a tiny, pointless and irrelevant buff -- just enough to have "Buffed Byzantium by..." listed near the top of the change notes.

Buffed Byzantium: They now have one more, unique option for "the comet sighted" event (which still works the same ofc).

 

[AurochsAway]

Buffed Byzantium: They now have one more, unique option for "the comet sighted" event (which still works the same ofc).

Buffed Byzantium. Historical rulers pre-1444 with increased monarch point stats.

 

[MCBC6]

Or

Buffed Byzantium: name changed to Roman Empire, tag name doesn't change