Turkish Culture Really Needs A Redo (Or: This thread again)

[Reavici]

Grand Historian - if you look at maps of Ottoman Empire at its greatest extent, you could notice similarities with Justinian Byzantine (Italy excluded). as an Empire Byzantine and Ottomans were expanding and spreading their own culture everywhere,
Empires are not based on specific ethnicities, Byzantine was not representing Pan-Hellenic ideas, neither were Ottomans Pan-Turkic just sayin

 

[Gouda_boy]

I personally agree with Kiyant back on the first page that Turkish should become a separate culture from the Levantine Group, and despite the many similarities with Greek, in the end, it shouldn't group with Greek either. Everyone is discussing the similarities between the Ottomans and Byzantium, while they seem to be ignoring the other Turkish nations that had more Arab, Nomadic, Persian influences, or even the few that held more or less to their Central Asian roots. There are many regional differences that aren't clearly divided or separate, but the comparing of all Turkish peoples in Anatolia to Greeks is... less than ok. Please correct me, as I am probably wrong, but Dulkadir, Aq Qoyunlu, Ramazan, Karaman (and Qara Qoyunlu, if their primary culture changed to Turkish) have a much larger disparity than the OE, yet they are also Turkish (for all intents and purposes). Is there as much Greek influence in Eastern Anatolia than the West? Do these countries really hold much tie to the Greeks conquered in the previous centuries? Splitting the Turkish in two or three (to me) seems to make the most sense. Also, if using religion (Orthodox means Greek, Sunni means Turk), uniting a Greco-Turkish group makes even less sense, as then the associated "cultures" are considered to be completely divided, as Sunni converts quickly adopted language, customs and frame of mind to 'fit in'.

Now whether Azerbaijani/Azeri is also considered part of the Turkish group is not as much of a complaint, as they are Heavily influenced by Persian culture. But it could go either way.

 

[Grand Historian]

Splitting the Turkish in two or three (to me) seems to make the most sense.

I seem to recall a proposal to split Turkish into four, actually, in one of the older threads - basically one culture for the west, one in the center around the Karamanids, one on the Black Sea, and one on the east for Dulkadir, Ramazan and the former Eretnid holdings. If you are going to split a culture as big as Turkish up, you might as well get your money's worth.

 

[Kiyant]

I seem to recall a proposal to split Turkish into four, actually, in one of the older threads - basically one culture for the west, one in the center around the Karamanids, one on the Black Sea, and one on the east for Dulkadir, Ramazan and the former Eretnid holdings. If you are going to split a culture as big as Turkish up, you might as well get your money's worth.

There can only be three splits of the Turkish culture because even if there are some differences they are still almost the same.
Only Yörüks,Black Sea Turks and Ahiska Turks (Caucasian Turks) are different then the rest of the Anatolian Turks.
Since the Ahiska are not represented in EU4 (except Samtskhe which is Georgian) its only logical that it should be split in 3.

 

[fksahin]

Now whether Azerbaijani/Azeri is also considered part of the Turkish group is not as much of a complaint, as they are Heavily influenced by Persian culture. But it could go either way.

Czechs heavily influenced by German culture. Let's put them in German culture??

 

[netherlink]

Just want to put some of my thoughts and semi-knowledge into the discussion, which i think have been missed here...

First, culture in EU4 is like every other feature an abstraction of reality (just sayin'), so every argument about historical correctness could be answered with "that's supposed to be simulated with *given feature* or has to less impact on gameplay".

One fact 'bout culture which is not represented in EU4 at all is that the rulers acutally did not have to be of the same culture as the majority of the realm their running.
Ottomans are a good example for that, since the leaders lived by the arabic culture, not turkish, afaik. (Everyone knows about the spanish Habsburg on the throne of Austria, as another example).
But this has so little effect to gameplay (if you don't add whole new features handling exactly that case), that no one complains.

Another fact, which got scratched here and there in this thread, is the cultural mashup which naturally happens when a region with one culture get conquered by another realm with another culture.
Theoretically there'd to be some kind of feature like syncretic culture, where a "greek-turkish" culture, for example, would emerge and maybe shift to another, or replacing the "old pure turkish/greek" cultures.

So while i don't want to say this whole conversation is useless, i think there are so many factors about culture which are not represented in detail, i don't think that we have to look too deeply into such stuff.

Gameplay perspective is at least a little bit more important than historical accuracy, so my main concern about that particular culture group is its sheer size.
I really would like to see and compare the historical population of a "culture group", because i think that, atm, the turks have a waaaayy too big culture group which gets accepted too easily. Which is nothing but another big buff for ottos.

Again, just sayin ^^

 

[fksahin]

(Everyone knows about the spanish Habsburg on the throne of Austria, as another example).

I thought that German/Austrian Habsburgs sat on Spanish throne?

 

[netherlink]

I thought that German/Austrian Habsburgs sat on Spanish throne?

And vice versa.

Philippe the last or something (I'm really not an expert ^^) was raised and born in Spain, so he spoke spanish only.
AFAIK the German saying "Das kommt mir spanisch vor" ("That looks Spanish to me") derives from that occasion.

 

[Haydar]

I personally agree with Kiyant back on the first page that Turkish should become a separate culture from the Levantine Group, and despite the many similarities with Greek, in the end, it shouldn't group with Greek either. Everyone is discussing the similarities between the Ottomans and Byzantium, while they seem to be ignoring the other Turkish nations that had more Arab, Nomadic, Persian influences, or even the few that held more or less to their Central Asian roots. There are many regional differences that aren't clearly divided or separate, but the comparing of all Turkish peoples in Anatolia to Greeks is... less than ok. Please correct me, as I am probably wrong, but Dulkadir, Aq Qoyunlu, Ramazan, Karaman (and Qara Qoyunlu, if their primary culture changed to Turkish) have a much larger disparity than the OE, yet they are also Turkish (for all intents and purposes). Is there as much Greek influence in Eastern Anatolia than the West? Do these countries really hold much tie to the Greeks conquered in the previous centuries? Splitting the Turkish in two or three (to me) seems to make the most sense. Also, if using religion (Orthodox means Greek, Sunni means Turk), uniting a Greco-Turkish group makes even less sense, as then the associated "cultures" are considered to be completely divided, as Sunni converts quickly adopted language, customs and frame of mind to 'fit in'.

Now whether Azerbaijani/Azeri is also considered part of the Turkish group is not as much of a complaint, as they are Heavily influenced by Persian culture. But it could go either way.

You have some valid arguments based on actual history and culture, but fail on "gameplay reasons". That is why Azerbaijani and Turkish are in different culture groups despite speaking variations of the same language.

The Sheeps' interest is to the east. When you look at the updated culture and politic maps below you will also see that they already sit on Armenian and Kurdish populated lands (btw Karaman also has famous sheep, which reveal its tricks later, but that is not our subject atm )

Spoiler

A Byzantine Culture group from Albania to Armenia would be similar to the Carpathian Group, making a unit sharing the same core for centuries despite the cultural disparity. Turkish culture works as a tool that connects Armenian to Greek by various layers of influence (we have delicious food aside from the "kebabs", combining Greek and Armenian kitchen). As mentioned earlier, nomads generally don't have a heavy culture to impose (but influence some), and rather adapt to the locals when they settle.

The quick and perfect conversion you assume is not very realistic. Even in this global world, if I migrate to England and try to be as English as I can be, I would definitely fail and come up with a "unique" version of Englishman for myself. It would at least take one generation to truely adapt, and that is when there is already a strong, established culture present. All those Greek conversions by the time created a heterodox way of Islam in the region, very much different than the Arabic world and made up a unique culture. Turks themselves were new to the religion, some of them even still carrying on their shamanist ways.

Even if Ottomans hadn't converted them, Ionians were not the same as mainland Greeks anyway. "Beware of the Greeks bearing gifts" is a famous Troyan proverd . So it is OK to have some disparity between the Dulkadiris and the Ottomans despite being in the same culture group I guess.

The pink parts are the Byzantine Empire in 1020:

This is Mehmed II.'s Empire in 1481:

(that heel of Italy -Otronto- was also under control of Ottomans for a while btw. Mehmed assumed himself as the Roman Emperor).

This is the core of the Ottoman Empire, and making Otto the cultural union for Albanians, Greeks, Anatolians and Armenians would make more sense imho. Neither of these cultures fit well into the culture group they are currently in, yet lived in the same empire without major conflicts for around 300 years (approx: 1450-1750). All the southeast stuff for the Ottos come 70 years after the game start. Turks to the East were not kin, they were enemy.

If you combine the above map with the Abbasid Caliphate map...

...you will get almost perfectly matching borders.

 

[Grand Historian]

This is the core of the Ottoman Empire, and making Otto the cultural union for Albanians, Greeks, Anatolians and Armenians would make more sense imho.

Eh...

The Ottos already start off with Greek accepted - making it part of their culture group would be both superfluous and fail to allow for the number of pre-national Greek rebels that resisted Ottoman rule. I can understand it, definitely (and I suppose I'd be fine with it if it came to pass), but I don't really like it.

Armenian, on the other hand, I have to vehemently disagree with: Armenians and Georgians have far more shared history than the Armenians have with the Ottos, especially in 1444 when the Ottomans still are a relatively new state. And much like with the ancient Byzantines, Armenian lands were also constantly fought over with the Persians - it'd be better to keep it in a separate group from both as a result.

Also, saying someone assumed themselves as Roman Emperor doesn't really mean much; every dynasty in Europe aspired to it, from the Hapsburgs to the Romanovs.

 

[makaramus]

althought as bonus it would be cool to make ottomans reformable nation by turkish culture group a bonus

 

[Grand Historian]

althought as bonus it would be cool to make ottomans reformable nation by turkish culture group a bonus

Will Rum be becoming the main nation of Turkish Culture? If not, then the Ottomans will still be the primary culture and their cores should be unremovable.

 

[makaramus]

Will Rum be becoming the main nation of Turkish Culture? If not, then the Ottomans will still be the primary culture and their cores should be unremovable.

ofcourse it should be unremovable you are becoming ottoman ... your cores will become ottoman core instead I mean... whats more epic than forming ottoman with karaman or candar

 

[Grand Historian]

ofcourse it should be unremovable you are becoming ottoman ... your cores will become ottoman core instead I mean... whats more epic than forming ottoman with karaman or candar

Forming Rum with Karaman or Candar

 

[Haydar]

Eh...

The Ottos already start off with Greek accepted - making it part of their culture group would be both superfluous and fail to allow for the number of pre-national Greek rebels that resisted Ottoman rule. I can understand it, definitely (and I suppose I'd be fine with it if it came to pass), but I don't really like it.

You don't have to set Greek an accepted culture when they are put into the same culture group. That simple. I would say pre-national Greek rebels are overemphasized. Pre-national Turkish rebels were much more of a headache for the Ottoman Emipre.

Armenian, on the other hand, I have to vehemently disagree with: Armenians and Georgians have far more shared history than the Armenians have with the Ottos, especially in 1444 when the Ottomans still are a relatively new state. And much like with the ancient Byzantines, Armenian lands were also constantly fought over with the Persians - it'd be better to keep it in a separate group from both as a result.

Fair enough. I will just use this moment to remind that Anatolian Turks are currently in a culture group with people that they didn't share a history together yet in 1444. But this is what we are basicly complaining about so you are right.

Also, saying someone assumed themselves as Roman Emperor doesn't really mean much; every dynasty in Europe aspired to it, from the Hapsburgs to the Romanovs.

That sentence is meant to be part of an argument against the validation of Levantine culture group as a direction tool to the AI. If anything, OE 's general direction was to the West, and generally about reclaiming the former Byzantine lands. The proposed Otto-Byzantine culture group would have fit better on that aspect.

 

[Kalderus]

ofcourse it should be unremovable you are becoming ottoman ... your cores will become ottoman core instead I mean... whats more epic than forming ottoman with karaman or candar

Or even how about packing up everything, leaving Anatolia for good and heading straight back to the Aral Sea/Central Asia to form the Western Gokturk Khaganate.

 

[Grand Historian]

You don't have to set Greek an accepted culture when they are put into the same culture group. That simple. I would say pre-national Greek rebels are overemphasized. Pre-national Turkish rebels were much more of a headache for the Ottoman Emipre.

A fair point - though I do have to beg to differ on pre-national Greek rebels being overemphasized. I'm often the first and one of the only people to mention them in these threads.

That sentence is meant to be part of an argument against the validation of Levantine culture group as a direction tool to the AI. If anything, OE 's general direction was to the West, and generally about reclaiming the former Byzantine lands. The proposed Otto-Byzantine culture group would have fit better on that aspect.

Perhaps. But the official position of the Ottos was that theirs was a borderless state - there might have been the idea of continuation with Rome, but I think the idea of expanding in every direction they could played more of a hand in expanding in every direction they could.

 

[TheDungen]

I would keep Turkish United but add it to the same culture groups as Greek.
Perhaps add Armenian there too.
The Turkish borrowed a lot of their culture from the Byzantine empire. Pretty much everything aside from language and religion.

 

[MiniaAr]

The biggest cultures in Levantine, besides Turkish, are Syrian and Egyptian.

Both are in territories which the Ottomans get claims on from missions (Conquer Egypt, Conquer Levant).

The others are Hejazi (in lands they didn't control directly IIRC but let's say they did), Yemeni (they had to deal with Rassids pestering them until they gave up in this time period), Mahri (didn't even go there), Omani (nope), Mashriqi (okay I guess) and Khaleeji (come on now).

So, should we take Turkish out of Levantine and make those missions turn both cultures into accepted for free upon completion, only Mashriqi would be left out.

And guess what? They do have an NI that gives an extra accepted culture! So yeah, I'd guess we are on to something here.

Actually, there is a "Conquer Mesopotamia" mission as well. The mission once completed could give Mashreki as an accepted culture, just like the "Conquer the Levant" and "Conquer Egypt" missions could.

That's also the solution I favour. When those missions are completed, they give a free accepted culture to the Ottomans. To make this work, maybe the AI could be encouraged further to pick Humanism (like Portugal's AI is encouraged to pick Exploration), as well as increasing the number of accepted cultures from the Ottomans NI's from 1 to 2.

Then, either an Aegan-Anatolian group is created, which would remove the accepted culture slots for Greek and Bulgarian that the Ottomans need right now (and also accept Albanian in the process), or we can also get two groups: Byzantine and Ohguz.

In any case, I think the Turkish culture should be split, just like the Russian culture was. There are already some ideas in this topic about that.

 

[sbytheway]

Imo the Turkish culture should be made into its own culture group a la French, there are enough provinces and enough development in the anatolia region to support it