Shouldn't Byzantium have more cores?

[BrandNewIain]

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.

It's not usually enough to get Poland to ally you, but it is possible
It requires an insane amount of luck/restarts with alliances/rivalries in Western Europe

What I've done that worked against the Ottomans was an alliance with Poland and Hungrary and declaring war against ottomans while they're distracted/not done fighting in Anatolia

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Claiming BYZ is unplayable/hard is not credible. It's like those making such claims haven't tried out some of the more daunting ROTW positions, ever .

 

[BrandNewIain]

Claiming BYZ is unplayable/hard is not credible. It's like those making such claims haven't tried out some of the more daunting ROTW positions, ever .

Is it the hardest country to play as? No, but it's definitely not easy
Guess the player reason is that it's nice to be able to play as the Roman Empire which everybody's heard of compared to some random OPM in South America for example that nobody has

 

[firecage]

Perhaps, but as was said previously, Byzantium already starts of so powerful compared to its real world counterpart. Ridiculously powerful. Heck, they have an ENTIRE TWO PROVINCES under their control, plus a vassal.

And for people saying the Byzantium DLC isn't much. Holy hell dude, it fleshes Byzantium out more than the vast majority of nations in the game, and even without the DLC, Byzantium is already fleshed out a lot. While I would LOVE more content for it, I would much rather see the other nations get fleshed out to the same degree before we give Byzantium more stuff.

 

[Smeeved]

Is it the hardest country to play as? No, but it's definitely not easy
Guess the player reason is that it's nice to be able to play as the Roman Empire which everybody's heard of compared to some random OPM in South America for example that nobody has

But why not play as the Ottomans that everybody's heard of compared to some random '3' province minor in Greece.

 

[firecage]

....Actually the Ottoman Empire wasn't nearly as well known as the Roman Empire was. At least in the western world.

 

[Smeeved]

....Actually the Ottoman Empire wasn't nearly as well known as the Roman Empire was. At least in the western world.

Obviously I was being facetious, because BYZ literally unplayable paradox pls posts are ridiculous.

 

[BrandNewIain]

But why not play as the Ottomans that everybody's heard of compared to some random '3' province minor in Greece.

Because part of the appeal is just in the Alternate History aspect of it, same reason people playing Attila Total War like to play as the Western Empire
Byzantium isn't just any 3 province minor, it's the vestigial form of the original Empire, so there's a lot of appeal to restoring that compared to playing through a powerful empire

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Is it the hardest country to play as? No, but it's definitely not easy
Guess the player reason is that it's nice to be able to play as the Roman Empire which everybody's heard of compared to some random OPM in South America for example that nobody has

They are nevertheless given (extreme) special treatment with way more power potential than the likes of Mongolia. At this point it's debatable whether they're even harder than forming Qing, considering the Ming bug.

 

[Shaaaq]

They are nevertheless given (extreme) special treatment with way more power potential than the likes of Mongolia. At this point it's debatable whether they're even harder than forming Qing, considering the Ming bug.

Ming bug?
I formed Qing today as a Manchurian minor and I didn't see anything unusual (well that's not entirely true as they did randomly rivaled me from 200 relations as soon as they lost the mandate of heaven).

 

[SmokeyTheRobot]

Byzantium lost there last anatolian province in 1320 so no they shouldnt have cores as i think its 50 years to close cores on a province that is not your culture group so byz lost there core koceali in like 1380 anways

 

[SmokeyTheRobot]

Also they should lose achea for historical "Accuracy"

 

[JohnKjeken]

They are nevertheless given (extreme) special treatment with way more power potential than the likes of Mongolia. At this point it's debatable whether they're even harder than forming Qing, considering the Ming bug.

I don't know what might have changed, but back in 1.11 forming Qing was very doable as Haixi.

Byzantium is doable in 1.13 with a lot of restarts. I did it by getting both Poland and Hungary on my side before the first war with the Ottos. That's fine, though. Not having more cores is also fine. What annoyed me was that after having taken back the balkans, asia minor coast and started on Italy, Constantinople was considerably poorer and weaker than Istanbul would have been after annex and decision. It is a very minor change, and I doubt a lot of people would care, but I would love it if the different "Triumph for X" decisions granted development to Constantinople. If it got 1 BT, BP and BM per decision they would more or less match the move capital decision Ottomans get, befitting a resurrected Empire.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I don't know what might have changed, but back in 1.11 forming Qing was very doable as Haixi.

Byzantium is doable in 1.13 with a lot of restarts. I did it by getting both Poland and Hungary on my side before the first war with the Ottos. That's fine, though. Not having more cores is also fine. What annoyed me was that after having taken back the balkans, asia minor coast and started on Italy, Constantinople was considerably poorer and weaker than Istanbul would have been after annex and decision. It is a very minor change, and I doubt a lot of people would care, but I would love it if the different "Triumph for X" decisions granted development to Constantinople. If it got 1 BT, BP and BM per decision they would more or less match the move capital decision Ottomans get, befitting a resurrected Empire.

1.11 is so incomparable it's a joke . Ming doesn't have inward perfection in 1.13 and starts with 3/3/3 tech instead of 2/2/2. They also have a bug whereby their LA isn't always counting against their FL right now.

So picture 80+ regiments at your tech with no discipline penalty.

BYZ isn't "doable with a lot of restarts", it's "doable in 1-3 starts, usually 1". Over-reliance on the Poland alliance aside, the galley strategy is still effective and lets you jump Venice for full control of Greece fast. It's formulaic and the second you get past that, you're a regional power.

 

[JohnKjeken]

1.11 is so incomparable it's a joke . Ming doesn't have inward perfection in 1.13 and starts with 3/3/3 tech instead of 2/2/2. They also have a bug whereby their LA isn't always counting against their FL right now.

So picture 80+ regiments at your tech with no discipline penalty.

Ah. I remember fighting them earlier than planned after they DOW and just absolutely thrashing them with the horde steppe bonus. Presumably thats harder to do now. I did notice they managed to stay up to date in tech in a Poland game (Going for the to space achievement, lost ironman without notice in 1741 GRR!), but chalked it up to high level advisors and luck of the draw.

 

[zsImmortal]

I don't know what might have changed, but back in 1.11 forming Qing was very doable as Haixi.

Byzantium is doable in 1.13 with a lot of restarts. I did it by getting both Poland and Hungary on my side before the first war with the Ottos. That's fine, though. Not having more cores is also fine. What annoyed me was that after having taken back the balkans, asia minor coast and started on Italy, Constantinople was considerably poorer and weaker than Istanbul would have been after annex and decision. It is a very minor change, and I doubt a lot of people would care, but I would love it if the different "Triumph for X" decisions granted development to Constantinople. If it got 1 BT, BP and BM per decision they would more or less match the move capital decision Ottomans get, befitting a resurrected Empire.

Constantinople was in much better shape after being annexed because Mehmet made it his project to rebuild the city back to its great imperial status.

 

[BrandNewIain]

My understanding is that even after Constantinople was retaken from the Latin Empire it had pretty much been gutted so it was nowhere near as spectacular as it had been before the Fourth Crusade

 

[Maldazar]

But again, why specifically Byzantium? What sets them apart from other nations that have lost land?

Well, i'm in favor of making ALL nations more historicaly correct... But this topic is about byzantium, that is why I responded about Byzantium, if you want to start a discussion about some other nation and which cores he should or should not have, I would for sure vote in favor of historical cores (so basicly the cores the country had in the last +/- 150 years, given that this the core expiration time in the game)

 

[War_lord]

Constantinople was looted and half torched during the 4th Crusade. And it remained seriously underpopulated and half ruined until the Ottomans conquered it and put a great deal of time and resources into restoring it.

 

[JohnKjeken]

Constantinople was in much better shape after being annexed because Mehmet made it his project to rebuild the city back to its great imperial status.

I am not disputing that or suggesting touching that decision. I am saying that a resurrected empire might feasibly be expected to do something similar. It wouldn't impact balance greatly but would amplify the sense of recapturing glory etc. that BYZ players enjoy.