Anatolia and the Balkans:1451AD
- Thread starter Dionysius
- Start date
Kan' Sharuminar
Fluffy
Could you post some pics of the map/general pics etc?
I just like to see before I play. It sounds very interesting, I will probably give it a shot over the weekend.
I just like to see before I play. It sounds very interesting, I will probably give it a shot over the weekend.
KaiserBenjamin
Warlord
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2006
- Messages
- 237
Um. The Ottomans won less than ten turns after the game started with a domination victory. Might want to do something about that...
*edit* Played again as the Byzantines because if anyone had a chance at preventing Ottomans from winning, it was them. Well I held like a brick wall and they never took any of my cities. The other Islamic power actually took an Ottoman city but it didn't matter. Ottomans still won a domination victory. It's an interesting map; I think the non-Ottomans have a chance but not if the enemy wins automatically in the early part of the game.
*edit* Played again as the Byzantines because if anyone had a chance at preventing Ottomans from winning, it was them. Well I held like a brick wall and they never took any of my cities. The other Islamic power actually took an Ottoman city but it didn't matter. Ottomans still won a domination victory. It's an interesting map; I think the non-Ottomans have a chance but not if the enemy wins automatically in the early part of the game.
CIV-fanatic
Chieftain
Great scenario, although it isn't historically correct!
I've played with Serbia and found these misstakes:
1) Battle of Kosovo was in year 1389;
2) Borders of Serbia in that time (1450) were smaller, Serbia spreaded out from Danube to river Ibar;
3) Montenegro coastline was under rule of Venetian Republic;
4) Serbia wasn't kingom (in that period) but "Despotovina";
5) Albania was under Ottoman empire;
I've played with Serbia and found these misstakes:
1) Battle of Kosovo was in year 1389;
2) Borders of Serbia in that time (1450) were smaller, Serbia spreaded out from Danube to river Ibar;
3) Montenegro coastline was under rule of Venetian Republic;
4) Serbia wasn't kingom (in that period) but "Despotovina";
5) Albania was under Ottoman empire;
CIV-fanatic
Chieftain
I think that map shows Balkans 50 years before (about 1400). It shows advancment of Turks torward Serb and Greek provinces that are left after Serbian empire and Kosovo battle - so Albania wasn't a state or a kingdom but part of that region uder rule of some nobleman.
Anyway I think that scenario is real and well made - I even had Kosovo battle while playing with Serbia and won.
I myself tried to make modern day Balkans scenario but didn't have good map to begin with.
Also I was wondering how did you make "open border agreement" - by changing some file or just by playing game?
Anyway I think that scenario is real and well made - I even had Kosovo battle while playing with Serbia and won.
I myself tried to make modern day Balkans scenario but didn't have good map to begin with.
Also I was wondering how did you make "open border agreement" - by changing some file or just by playing game?
Los Tirano
God-King
Superb! Christendom vs the Ottoman empire, im definately playing this map.
Shqype
Shqyptar
No, Albania was NOT under the Ottoman Empire. Albania was under the rule of Albanian feudal lords, land barons, and tribal chieftains. In 1444 Gjergj Kastrioti united them all to fight against the Ottoman Empire and defeated them continually for the next 25 years until his peaceful death, earning himself the title Athleta Christi from the Roman Catholic Popes for his defense of Catholic Western Europe.CIV-fanatic said:
Only 12 years after his death, by the year 1480, was Albania brought in under the Ottoman Empire.
Shqype
Shqyptar
Europe in 1430. The "small states" are Albanian states:
This map of Europe in 1400 actually breaks down the Albanian "states," giving some of their names:
Here's a map of Europe during the 15th century:
So, better not speak when you don't know.
This map of Europe in 1400 actually breaks down the Albanian "states," giving some of their names:
Here's a map of Europe during the 15th century:
So, better not speak when you don't know.
I did not play the scenario yet. But sure will soon.
There may be a problem with the chosen era though. If the scenario starts in 1451, that is precisely 1 year before the Byzantine Empire collapsed altogether. At that point the Ottomans were wastly more powerful than the Byzantines. I wonder if there is a point in having Byzantines as a faction. However if the scenario started 100 or 150 years earlier you would have a pretty ballanced situation in Anatolia and the Byzantine Empire would still have a chance.
There may be a problem with the chosen era though. If the scenario starts in 1451, that is precisely 1 year before the Byzantine Empire collapsed altogether. At that point the Ottomans were wastly more powerful than the Byzantines. I wonder if there is a point in having Byzantines as a faction. However if the scenario started 100 or 150 years earlier you would have a pretty ballanced situation in Anatolia and the Byzantine Empire would still have a chance.
useless
Social Justice Rogue
no, the byzantines "collapsed" in 1453 when thier capital, constantinople (now istanbul) was besieged by the ottoman turks and when thier emperor constantine the 10th (?) was killed in battle.
knigh+
.
Actually the Byzantines collapsed in 1204 when the 4th crusade invaded Constantinople. After 1261 (which is when they recaptured it) till 1460 (when last Byzantine territory fell) they continuously lost territory little by little.
The 2nd Battle of Kosovo was in 1448.
I think an earlier date (my pick would be 1413) would be more playable. In a few decades after your start date, in actual history Ottomans conquered your entire map except the islands. Starting from an earlier date would give the other civs a fighting chance.
useless
Social Justice Rogue
i mean their empire finally collapsed and ceased to exist
This is excellent! I've been looking for a traditional wargame for this period for some time now.
FWIW, Constantinople did fall in 1453, but the Empire limped on in one form or another until 1471.
To get really technical, one could argue that it survived until 1503 with the death of the last heir... or until the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 and the fall of Czarist Russia (who claimed the mantle of Emperor for Eastern Orthodoxy)... or if you're really a dreamer, 1922 when Ataturk beat back the Greeks in the aftermath of World War I and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire...
The long and short of this is that Constantinople came very close to *not* falling in 1453. There are a tremendous amounts of "what ifs" involved: what if the Italians had not peeled away, what if Mehmed II withdrew his attack, what if a successor could rebuild Byzantium as a New Venice, what if a Crusader army made it to Constantinople? Byzantium historically had been in worse straits before!
For background, I would highly recommend Norwich's "History of Byzantium" and the new book 1453. Both are amazingly interesting if you enjoy the period or are interested in modern approaches to Islam.
FWIW, Constantinople did fall in 1453, but the Empire limped on in one form or another until 1471.
To get really technical, one could argue that it survived until 1503 with the death of the last heir... or until the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 and the fall of Czarist Russia (who claimed the mantle of Emperor for Eastern Orthodoxy)... or if you're really a dreamer, 1922 when Ataturk beat back the Greeks in the aftermath of World War I and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire...
The long and short of this is that Constantinople came very close to *not* falling in 1453. There are a tremendous amounts of "what ifs" involved: what if the Italians had not peeled away, what if Mehmed II withdrew his attack, what if a successor could rebuild Byzantium as a New Venice, what if a Crusader army made it to Constantinople? Byzantium historically had been in worse straits before!
For background, I would highly recommend Norwich's "History of Byzantium" and the new book 1453. Both are amazingly interesting if you enjoy the period or are interested in modern approaches to Islam.
Kolio
Chieftain
Dionysius, why dont you make the scenario starting in the 1340s when the Turks have just captured their first european outposts?
Now it is set just before they conquered the last remnants of their adversaries. Doesnt make much sense.
A hundred years earlier the region was a mosaic of little late-feudal countries and "empires" in constant intrigue and shifting wars and alliances. A ripe and intriguing terrain for a scenario of conquest for the Ottomans! Byzantium had two emperors fighting each other, Bulgaria has split in two tsardoms and several despotates, Serbia was for a short while united and strong but there were various independent despots in Macedonia, Thrace or Epirus who paid homage to nobody despite their greek or slavic ethnicity.
Often a christian country had to admit Ottoman suzerainty to save its skin for a few more decades, and to volunteer to join the turkish armies in battles against its christian brothers.
Would be also challenging to play as one of the christian states and attempt to organise a union^ to stop the invaders - in reality there very few such attempts and all of them were defeated.
What do you think?
^although politically the region was very divided, culturally it was more shared than ever before, with free flow across the borders. XIVth century was the cultural boom for us (named Palaiologian pre-renaissance). For example, many slavic clerics would graduate in greek academias, often greek monks would know slavic language, books were constantly translated both ways, etc.
As for maps and historical information - there is plenty on internet! Use wikipedia - for that period it is fairly unbiased. More maps you can find with google.
The political situation was very complex at that time, if you get confused you can always ask here for help. Apparently there is plenty of locals who have studied their history.
In any case, thanks for the hard work! Greetings to Ireland!
Now it is set just before they conquered the last remnants of their adversaries. Doesnt make much sense.
A hundred years earlier the region was a mosaic of little late-feudal countries and "empires" in constant intrigue and shifting wars and alliances. A ripe and intriguing terrain for a scenario of conquest for the Ottomans! Byzantium had two emperors fighting each other, Bulgaria has split in two tsardoms and several despotates, Serbia was for a short while united and strong but there were various independent despots in Macedonia, Thrace or Epirus who paid homage to nobody despite their greek or slavic ethnicity.
Often a christian country had to admit Ottoman suzerainty to save its skin for a few more decades, and to volunteer to join the turkish armies in battles against its christian brothers.
Would be also challenging to play as one of the christian states and attempt to organise a union^ to stop the invaders - in reality there very few such attempts and all of them were defeated.
What do you think?
^although politically the region was very divided, culturally it was more shared than ever before, with free flow across the borders. XIVth century was the cultural boom for us (named Palaiologian pre-renaissance). For example, many slavic clerics would graduate in greek academias, often greek monks would know slavic language, books were constantly translated both ways, etc.
As for maps and historical information - there is plenty on internet! Use wikipedia - for that period it is fairly unbiased. More maps you can find with google.
The political situation was very complex at that time, if you get confused you can always ask here for help. Apparently there is plenty of locals who have studied their history.
In any case, thanks for the hard work! Greetings to Ireland!
Similar threads
