Where are the Zoroastrians?

[Agenor]

I wanted to do a Tabarestan - Zorostrian Persia game, and read that the province of Yazd was Zoroastrian in 1444. But when I checked (playing patch 1.11) I found it was Muslim. Have they been edited out? Is there any easy way to change the religion back to Zoroastrian?

I appreciate it may have been changed for historical reasons, but it would be fun to have the possibility to form a Zoroastrian empire in EUIV. And anyway, the world that results from playing this game (even hands off) are so far off any historical reality that a bit of historical inaccuracy at the start really isn't a big deal.

 

[Keinwyn]

It was added in patch 1.12 iirc, so you need to get a more recent version.

 

[Hecastomp]

THEY ARE DEAD! THEY ARE ALL DEAD!

Jokes aside, play on patch 1.12 or 1.13 to get that one province Zoroastrian. Its pretty hard to convert to it tho...

 

[Trin Tragula]

(playing patch 1.11)

They haven't been edited out. The patch you are playing predates the addition of the religion to the game.

 

[Agenor]

I don't want to play patch 1.12 - the common sense patch - after what I have read about it, specifically that it weakens the AI. I also have no intention of buying CS at this point (well, maybe for €1.99 on sale - I only paid €9.99 for the game ) ,

It must have been available in earlier versions, because when I googled there were some older threads (2011?) discussing forming Zoroastrian Persia by getting a religious revolt in Yazd. Pity it was later removed.

 

[MacDuffin]

I don't want to play patch 1.12 - the common sense patch - after what I have read about it, specifically that it weakens the AI. I also have no intention of buying CS at this point (well, maybe for €1.99 on sale - I only paid €9.99 for the game ) ,

It must have been available in earlier versions, because when I googled there were some older threads (2011?) discussing forming Zoroastrian Persia by getting a religious revolt in Yazd. Pity it was later removed.

Kinda sounds like you're stuck between a rock and a hard place, I doubt the developers are going to revert to a build before Common Sense, and unless you have the skills yourself to mod the game there are going to be less mods over time that will be available for that build.
I think its possible to certainly add it to the game, but I don't know if the forums could help you with that. :/

 

[SandroTLK]

I don't want to play patch 1.12 - the common sense patch - after what I have read about it, specifically that it weakens the AI. I also have no intention of buying CS at this point (well, maybe for €1.99 on sale - I only paid €9.99 for the game ) ,

It must have been available in earlier versions, because when I googled there were some older threads (2011?) discussing forming Zoroastrian Persia by getting a religious revolt in Yazd. Pity it was later removed.

Play patch 1.13 then. Most of the issues people had with 1.12 are gone in this patch. There will still be issues (as with every Paradox patch), but nothing super extreme.

 

[ParadogsGamer]

I don't want to play patch 1.12 .

Neither do I, which is why I am on 1.13.

 

[yerm]

I don't want to play patch 1.12 - the common sense patch - after what I have read about it, specifically that it weakens the AI. I also have no intention of buying CS at this point (well, maybe for €1.99 on sale - I only paid €9.99 for the game ) ,

It must have been available in earlier versions, because when I googled there were some older threads (2011?) discussing forming Zoroastrian Persia by getting a religious revolt in Yazd. Pity it was later removed.

Actually, I believe that the AI is stronger than I can ever think of. Forts, for all their stupidity about moving around them, are a lifesaver for AI many times especially since they're dumb on retreating and stackwipes and slow to carpet siege and need to focus fire anyway. Common sense itself is easily the biggest buff to AI, as development, while wildly inefficient for a normal human played game until very late when dumping mil, is fundamental for not-expanding AI who can now improve up. They also heavily beefed the base army size. So, big AI are much better shielded from forts, and small AI are far more ferocious in numbers and can expand, very inefficiently, up.

 

[AurochsAway]

I don't want to play patch 1.12 - the common sense patch - after what I have read about it, specifically that it weakens the AI. I also have no intention of buying CS at this point (well, maybe for €1.99 on sale - I only paid €9.99 for the game ) ,

It must have been available in earlier versions, because when I googled there were some older threads (2011?) discussing forming Zoroastrian Persia by getting a religious revolt in Yazd. Pity it was later removed.

Any games pre-1.12 must have been CKII conversions or mods. It was never removed.

 

[aitaituo]

It must have been available in earlier versions, because when I googled there were some older threads (2011?)

EUIV was released in 2013.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Play patch 1.13 then. Most of the issues people had with 1.12 are gone in this patch. There will still be issues (as with every Paradox patch), but nothing super extreme.

Just a complete gutted region of the world (Meso America) and a lying tooltip that blocks you from taking provinces you could core. Nothing major ^_^.

I wish these new faiths were a bit more viable. Maybe not as obviously good as Sunni/Catholic, but not generic pagan-level low tier with a cap of 2 missionaries (3 with Rome) and pathetic strength lol. It's trivial to out-expand conversion rate even with max piety, 3% from decisions, and religious/DotF. 2 missionaries and 4% less strength per missionary is quite pathetic in comparison .

 

[Fluffy_Fishy]

Zoroastrians are probably too busy having fun, its a fun religion to play, needs a little more development and fleshing though.

 

[ParadogsGamer]

Zorro among friends

 

[Agenor]

Actually, I believe that the AI is stronger than I can ever think of. Forts, for all their stupidity about moving around them, are a lifesaver for AI many times especially since they're dumb on retreating and stackwipes and slow to carpet siege and need to focus fire anyway. Common sense itself is easily the biggest buff to AI, as development, while wildly inefficient for a normal human played game until very late when dumping mil, is fundamental for not-expanding AI who can now improve up. They also heavily beefed the base army size. So, big AI are much better shielded from forts, and small AI are far more ferocious in numbers and can expand, very inefficiently, up.

That's really interesting, yerm. Almost enough to make me want to buy CS. I guess I'll just try the patch first, though I understand you really need th DLC to play properly.

 

[yerm]

You can play multiplayer and see what the DLC offers, without actually buying the DLC yet.

 

[Torugu]

That's really interesting, yerm. Almost enough to make me want to buy CS. I guess I'll just try the patch first, though I understand you really need th DLC to play properly.

You really don't. At least not more then for any other patch.

All the major 1.12 features are in the patch, not the the DLC. People massively overestimate the importance of increasing development. Unless you're intentionally trying to play tall you'll maybe increase development 5 - 10 times over the course of an entire game. The AI will use it more often, especially OPMs, and while that certainly changes your experience, it is very much debatable if that's a change for the better.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

You really don't. At least not more then for any other patch.

All the major 1.12 features are in the patch, not the the DLC. People massively overestimate the importance of increasing development. Unless you're intentionally trying to play tall you'll maybe increase development 5 - 10 times over the course of an entire game. The AI will use it more often, especially OPMs, and while that certainly changes your experience, it is very much debatable if that's a change for the better.

MIL development is pretty common in heavy expansion games. Unlike DIP/ADM you can't put MIL into expansion so that's where it gets sunk if not going into the blobber ideas or tech. DLC hurts Buddhism (a lot), helps Protestant, removes some of the introduced gimping on vassals, and has a few nice QoL things like government levels not being static.

 

[Sian]

IMO the unsong star of the DLC is the improved Subject interaction. It might not be anywhere near as flashy as increasing development, but its extremely handy for forcing your vassals to become your religion (so they can try and convert into the correct religion and is faster to annex), and other abilities

 

[TheMeInTeam]

IMO the unsong star of the DLC is the improved Subject interaction. It might not be anywhere near as flashy as increasing development, but its extremely handy for forcing your vassals to become your religion (so they can try and convert into the correct religion and is faster to annex), and other abilities

I can't agree. I find creating a problem and selling the cure to be (easily) the most distasteful aspect of the actual DLC. Annexing disloyal subjects? Doable in 1.11, but whoops not 1.13...unless you pay.

The difference in viability of high-development vassals between vanilla and DLC under the 1.13 rules is tremendous. A base disloyalty of 50% that is trivially paid down + royal marriaged is not the same thing as a vassal that you now essentially can't annex unless under pristine conditions. It also has a direct impact on starts like the Denmark/Sweden interchange.

There are lots of cool ideas in there, protectorates are more interesting than they've been previously and things like scutage and prestige buy-down would have been fine without removing an aspect of previous play. Same deal with making marches better. Why stain all that by creating a problem and selling the cure? It's shady and unnecessary.