Why not have give cores through events for a Byzantium that is doing well.
Shouldn't Byzantium have more cores?
- Thread starter tkorsvold
- Start date
-
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.
Brilliant! But which one of them is you?
More practically, I detect the serious suggestion in the video. Byzantine buff: Early militarization of scooters. +50% flanking range.
If Byzantium is doing well, why does it need any extra stuff? Can't it just conquer and core those places the normal way?
Last edited:
- 2
- 1
Sure, once you won the first war with the Ottomans the rest is easy and you can easely conquer everything back... The point is not (at least not for me) about buffing/nerfing Byzantium, it's about historical innacuracy. For me at least it just makes no sense that they would NOT have cores on a lot of stuff.... Specialy given that the reason for removing them is based on an old rebel system, that has been fixed a couple of patches ago already now and should not lead to the same results (byzantium popping up everytime again with any kind of rebels from the Ottomans)
- 1
But again, why specifically Byzantium? What sets them apart from other nations that have lost land?
Nothing, really. I was just more interested in Byzantium since I like to play as them.
I'm sure there are others that could have more cores. Granada, maybe?
They should make it so that when Byzantium no longer exists, her cores should be removed and replaced with greek cores by event instead.
- 1
Would make far more sense for crusader state cores to exist than none at all.
Granada could probably have some on Al-Andalus, but if I was to pick one example, it would be Mali. Over the 50 or so years prior to the game start (thus within even the most conservative core duration time), The Mali Empire lost a lot of territory, both to the invading Songhai, and to internal rebellions breaking off parts of their empire. How many cores outside their starting realm does Mali get? None. Not a single one. Byzantium, for all that its fans complain, has some cores, yet Mali, who lost most of the land they did more recently than Byzantium did, get none.
Or how about the Golden Horde? Again using the conservative time of 50 years, we're in 1394, before Timur's campaigns, meaning the GH should have cores on Tokhtamysh's empire - which spread from Crimea to Lake Balkhash [so: Crimea, the current GH, Nogai, Kazan, Circassia, Gazimukh and parts of the Timurids, Uzbeks and Muscovy] (and if instead you're presenting the in-game GH as one of the successor states of the actual thing, then all of said successor states should have missions/CBs and a decision to reuinte the GH with said cores).
Hell, speaking of Timur, his empire spread from Turkey to Dehli, as well as further north than the Timmys control at the game start. Maybe you could argue that he didn't have to time to core it all before he popped his clogs and his descendants started fighting, but come on, at the least there should be some claims resulting from his conquests, and parts of the area lost (particularly that held by QQ) were done so well after his death....
That's why the "buff Byzantium" threads annoy me and I can be rather critical of them. It's nothing personal towards the people making them, it's just that while the Byzantine Empire might not be in a perfectly historical situation, they're way better off, both in terms of things like cores, and in unique content, than the vast vast majority of the nations in the game, (many of which had a far greater impact on the world during EUIV's timespan), yet people still keep calling for more.
Last edited:
- 9
Sadly by this point Greek Fire was lost in the Fourth Crusade if I remember right
As much as I like Byzantium I think it shouldn't be something that stands any real chance of surviving without the incredible luck that players going for byzantium seriously tend to get
It should be a significant achievement to restore it to being a serious power, which is hard to get impressed by when you start with cores on huge amounts of land that could then be inherited without any input from the player through rebellions
- 1
Honestly, I think they should get back all of the cores they lost + cores on Anatolia. However, once they have been annexed, BYZ cores disappear via event, replaced by Greece and whatever other appropriate cores.
Outside of the player immediately intervening against Ottos, Byz will disappear like it should, but should the pheonix does rise in the hands of the player, it actually feels like you are retaking your homeland.
Outside of the player immediately intervening against Ottos, Byz will disappear like it should, but should the pheonix does rise in the hands of the player, it actually feels like you are retaking your homeland.
- 3
Exactly, Byzantium has already been given a unique DLC, and received far more attention than other declining states with justifiable cores. I don't want to be that guy, but if you want to play a game roleplaying the 'rise of the phoenix' and feel unhappy with the current state of Byzantium, could you not find a mod which restores Byzantium's cores? Is that not what mods are for?
No doubt I will get endlessly downvoted by the Byzantophiles for this post.
- 2
- 1
Okay that DLC was a pre-order bonus. It's basically like Stars and Crescent, some events that's it.
- 1
Which is still more unique content than the vast majority of nations in the world get.
- 1
Yes. It was used to get people to pre-order the game and participate in the pre-order campaign, where you had to invite friends and stuff, because turns out a lot of people like BYZ and it was one of the first tags many people played.
I haven't played BYZ myself in ages, but I don't see why it continuously needs to be bashed or gutted.
- 3
This is a thread about buffing Byzantium. I don't think people are actively asking for BYZ to be gutted in this thread. This is just a guess, but maybe because people are tired of these frequent threads on buffing Byzantium when the developers have consistently responded to them with the same answer everytime. People seem to forget that it is a liberty that the developers actually read the forums and take people's opinion into account as a part of their vision for the game.
- 1
Johan has also adamantly refused to remove Swedish cores on Skane by "divine" decree. Now they changed their minds. Pdox often changes their mind on things all the time, and the fact that nothing is set in stone is one of the reasons so many people love to argue on these forums because often enough it does affect the game and makes it worth it to sink another 100 hours into the game.
- 2
Byzantium needs a buff, its been nerfed to the point of unplayability in recent patches, the one strategy that worked reliably was alliance with PLU, but now that does not work on Iron-man as even if you get rivalry bonus to Ottomans, and dip adviser +1 AND give gifts and get marriage, its usually not enough to get Poland to ally you.