Positives for Russia & Byzantium?

[Basilakes En Strategoisin]

It makes no sense that they're completely independent of the Pope. The major breach (which was later reversed shortly thereafter) came just years before the game starts, and the Emperor sent emissaries to the Pope constantly.

If we had "zeal" back from MTW, then they should be Catholic but with consistently low zeal ratings. But whatever.

In truth, the 1054 schism was only official recognition granted to the fact that the two churches had long since drifted apart. The pope certainly shouldn't be able to boss the Orthodox around like they were Western Catholics (not even if the game was set to begin before 1054!). It makes perfect sense that the emperor (& the patriarch) and the pope aren't dependent on each other in the simplified world of the game.


pansoiatr: actually, the schism was again officially reversed in the middle of the 15th century, shortly before the Fall of Constantinople, when the emperor John VII negotiated the reconciliation of the churches in return for military aid against the Ottomans. However, the imperial decision was never popular with the Orthodox people, and when Constantinople was captured in spite of a crusade, and the need for the church union ceased to exist, the whole thing was basically forgotten and the two churches went their own way as before.

[Lusted]

russia because they don't have that many cool units

You kidding me? The Russians have some of the best looking units in the game, and a really nice variety of them. Definitely fun to play as.

[Alexander: The hellenic empire]

If you plays as the Byzantines it is hard to find an enemy who can match your armies in field. Sure true slightly difficult to seige castles but one can get over that with some good tactics. So far I have only lost 2 out of 23 battles with the Venicians at DIFFICULT LEVEL. The bizs are a great bunch to play with. Things get bad when a crusade is declared against Constantinople, however your bite and run technic with the Vardariotai and your archers can end off most of your enemies. Quite indefeatable the Byzantines, - well yes one could say so. However infantry is not great. Your economy never fails. Only problem, the muslims and the catholics attacking you at the same time.

I was close to leaving my campaign when the catholics and the muslims simultaneoulsy declared a jihad and crusade againts Constantinople . However they ended up fighting each other outside Nicaea, HAHaha.

Great fun playing as the Byzantines. You can rely on the Russians for help since they are bearly always loyal in their alliances . Convert the Magyars, and there you are: the whole Balcans are togehter with you in the struggle against the other religions. Poland is quite feeble and always got engulfed by the other balcan nations.

I would encourage playing as the Rus:

3 reasons:

- Might not have the best,but certainly efficient and good.looking armies.
- Gain the Byzantines as an ally and have fundeclaring wars at Turks and Venicians while they are struggling with your fellow orthodox.
- Great fun with Mongols, just great.


I hope you are all having as much fun as me , while playing the best game ever!

[Midnight]

So far, Vardariotai have been a very important part of my Byz armies (cutting through Catholic and Muslim armies alike, supported by Byz Cav and Skythikons to make up numbers). I'm just about to bring out some Byz Guard Archers, and the first Byz Inf have just been trained, so the foot troops aren't looking quite as bad as before (Byz spears! Ugh...).

I'm hoping that Vars (in the open) and BGAs\BI (in castles) can bear the brunt of the Mongol forces when they arrive.

[FactionHeir]

How did you manage to get a crusade called on constantinople?
As a catholic nation I can only call crusades on certain towns and only if they are rebel or owned by a muslim faction, but not if they are orthodox. Ie. you can call crusades on rebel towns in russia but once russia takes em you can't crusade there anymore. I couldn't crusade to antioch for example because it was held by byzantines.

[metatron]

In truth, the 1054 schism was only official recognition granted to the fact that the two churches had long since drifted apart. The pope certainly shouldn't be able to boss the Orthodox around like they were Western Catholics (not even if the game was set to begin before 1054!). It makes perfect sense that the emperor (& the patriarch) and the pope aren't dependent on each other in the simplified world of the game.


pansoiatr: actually, the schism was again officially reversed in the middle of the 15th century, shortly before the Fall of Constantinople, when the emperor John VII negotiated the reconciliation of the churches in return for military aid against the Ottomans. However, the imperial decision was never popular with the Orthodox people, and when Constantinople was captured in spite of a crusade, and the need for the church union ceased to exist, the whole thing was basically forgotten and the two churches went their own way as before.

I don't think you understood my point.

At all.

If the game still had zeal, they could be treated as Catholics, but nobody would bat an eye if they were excommunicated. Which is reasonably as it should be, because the Emperor always had a voice in Rome and more often than not, influenced church decisions until the streets ran rampant with Turkish soldiers.

This game is about changing history, it stands to reason that things shouldn't be set in stone. On the same note, I don't understand why the Romans don't get more gunpowder units. They'd have been very quick to adopt them, were they not on the verge of collapse during their introduction and adoption.

[Musashi]

That's actually a good point... Byzantium was always open to new technologies, and their armies were still run largely on the roman model of professional soldiers, so they would have been the perfect environment for firearms to flourish.

[Quillan]

Yes, I agree with that one. I feel the Byzantines are shafted slightly in this game by history in regards to gunpowder weapons. Ships and bombards are all you get. Granted, their archers are very good, but they were a pale shade of their former self by the time gunpowder became widespread, and then get conquered by the Ottomons before the date this game's campaign ends. It's hard to make a case for them having basilisks when they don't exist when basilisks are first developed. However, as stated, this game is about changing history, and I personally feel they should gain access to gunpowder troops. I might mod that in once we get the unpacker. In fact, I'm tempted to mod in most of the gunpowder troops for almost all the factions. Wouldn't other people have adopted the things that work?

[Musashi]

I'll definitely be modding hand Gunners, Arquebusier, and Musketeers for Byzantium... That argument is very compelling, I mean, if Byzantium had not suffered the sack of the Fourth Crusade, and had been flourishing in the 15th century, I believe they would have been an early adopter of firearms, and honestly probably would have been a major force in refining the weapons.

The Orthodox church in Byzantium was never quite the intellectually repressive force that the Catholic church was in the west, and Byzantium still respected the philosophical and scientific traditions of Greece and Rome... It really does seem likely to me that progress in the development of firearms would have been notably swifter had Byzantium been in any kind of position to pursue such things.

[lancelot]

Yes, I agree with that one. I feel the Byzantines are shafted slightly in this game by history in regards to gunpowder weapons. Ships and bombards are all you get. Granted, their archers are very good, but they were a pale shade of their former self by the time gunpowder became widespread, and then get conquered by the Ottomons before the date this game's campaign ends. It's hard to make a case for them having basilisks when they don't exist when basilisks are first developed. However, as stated, this game is about changing history, and I personally feel they should gain access to gunpowder troops. I might mod that in once we get the unpacker. In fact, I'm tempted to mod in most of the gunpowder troops for almost all the factions. Wouldn't other people have adopted the things that work?

Completely agree...CA has this historical determinism thing goin on where just because the B.E didnt develop guns in RL, doesnt mean they wouldnt have!

I recall reading somewhere that the guy who developed the guns that broke the walls of constantinople in 1453 were originally offered to the Byzantine Emperor first, but he backed it...although my memory may be playing tricks on me.

[Riadach]

Completely agree...CA has this historical determinism thing goin on where just because the B.E didnt develop guns in RL, doesnt mean they wouldnt have!

I recall reading somewhere that the guy who developed the guns that broke the walls of constantinople in 1453 were originally offered to the Byzantine Emperor first, but he backed it...although my memory may be playing tricks on me.

Yes i remember that too. But if i remember rightly didn't comnenus ask pope urban to call the crusade to retrieve lands he lost in anatolia and the levant? surely then, if the empire is on good terms with the pope, it should be able to aply for a crusade.

[KARTLOS]

byzantines have a good unit roster. they are a good faction if you enjoy horse archer armies but cant stomach playing as a muslim.

russias units are so-so but they are a fun faction to play with because they are a bit more challenging than most.

the towns/cities in their "sphere of influence" are all extremely undeveloped at the beggining, it takes ages to expand becasue of the distances and lack of roads, and of course they miss out on the crusades.

[Kraxis]

Yes i remember that too. But if i remember rightly didn't comnenus ask pope urban to call the crusade to retrieve lands he lost in anatolia and the levant? surely then, if the empire is on good terms with the pope, it should be able to aply for a crusade.

Nope... He asked for help. There is a whole world of difference.

While crusades per se weren't unknown (William was on a crusade to England when he took, mind you crusades before 1095 are often just wars backed by the Pope rather than named crusades), it wasn't until the 1st crusade that it bacame what we think of it.
Also the Popes weren't the power we think of them until after the fights with the HRE Emperors. Before then a lot of bishops, kings etc didn't really care much for some fool in Rome. However the Pope was more than a simple bishop as well, meaning rather important... but just not as powerful and almighty as he is sometimes considered. That was to come in the next couple hundred years.

What the Byzantime emp did was ask the Pope to ask the kings nad princes to help the Byzantines (and fellow christians) to recover the lands. Later such actions by a Pope was considered a crusade. At that time the concept just weren't made up yet, but the Byzantines knew the Pope held a good deal of sway in catholic lands. Hence it was much easier to ask him once, than than all the princes, kings, dukes ect a couple times each. For what did they care about some far-away lands they had never heard of? Brilliant political and military consideration by the Byzantines in my book.

So the orthodox and the catholics should never be combined in a game. They were simply too radically different.

[Basilakes En Strategoisin]

I don't think you understood my point.

At all.

If the game still had zeal, they could be treated as Catholics, but nobody would bat an eye if they were excommunicated. Which is reasonably as it should be, because the Emperor always had a voice in Rome and more often than not, influenced church decisions until the streets ran rampant with Turkish soldiers.

I understand that your point was about somehow tying the byzantines in with the catholic world, which is a good idea. My point was that zeal would be a very cheap solution indeed, as the orthodox were no less zealous than the catholics. The way I understood it, zeal in mtw1 represented the population's enthusiasm for their religion, and therefore their likelihood of joining crusades et cetera. I agree that the emperor "had a voice in Rome" - I never said he didn't - but the Pope certainly had no voice whatsoever in Constantinople. Giving papal missions to the byzantine emperor would be ridiculous, and any papal attempt to excommunicate would just lead to - well, 1054. Instead, there should be a new system that somehow made the orthodox closer to catholics than to muslims - for example, you shouldn't be able to crusade against them.

(The debacle of 1204 was not a question of the pope calling for a crusade against Constantinople, but of the venetians managing to redirect an existing crusader army in there instead of the Holy Land. Still, in game terms this would probably be too difficult to manage (can you bribe crusader armies to join your side???) so I don't object if CA allowed crusading against the orthodox)

Or maybe a new unlockable event in the campaign - in the same way as the Americas - called Church Union. This would make the byzantines and russians catholic, but they would have to face some nasty revolts before the ex-orthodox population calmed down.

About the gunpowder troops, I agree. If the game got far enough, there should be at least a few native gunpowder units (I trust you can still recruit mercenary arquebus/muskets/whatever as the byzantines? I haven't tried it yet).

Think about Varangian Guards carrying arquebuses with big axe blades as bayonets on them