Ottoman

[lunker]

Currently playing The Ottomans, and they are probably one of my favourites now. Instant hammers with Tanziamat is the coolest thing in the world and the food is super helpful too. Janisarries are also amazing and can survive on the frontline just like Babylon's Bowmen. Siege Foundries are kinda nice and having innate Volley is terrific. I think Ottomans are perfect the way they are! :>

Also, I can confirm that the shorter the trade route duration, the more often you will get the yields. Trading with close cities is ideal.

 

[CrazyG]

You sure? I think it's like 5 yields per turn, so on par with Portugal/Moors.

It would be 6 for international, 4 for internal. Portugal gets 10 yields, plus great general/admiral points. Morocco gets 8, not including golden age points.



I think the burst production is actually terrible, a hammer today is worth more than a hammer tomorrow. In my current game all trade routes have the same duration. Not sure if I'm missing something, but I thought this was always the case.

 

[Favorius]

If my international trade route lasts 20 turns i get 100 food production and science
If my international trade route lasts 30 turns, do I get the same yields ?

Is trade route duration standart or not? I thought it was standart for each game length.

 

[Galbias]

It would be 6 for international, 4 for internal. Portugal gets 10 yields, plus great general/admiral points. Morocco gets 8, not including golden age points.

That doesn't sound right. Unless I'm missing something, Ottomans get 100 Food/Hammers/Sci, 300 yields total, for a trade route that lasts 30 turns. 300 divided by 30 is 10, so 10 yields per turn for international, 6.67 for internal.

Not sure if the bonuses scale with game speed but I would assume so.

 

[Funak]

It would be 6 for international, 4 for internal. Portugal gets 10 yields, plus great general/admiral points. Morocco gets 8, not including golden age points.



I think the burst production is actually terrible, a hammer today is worth more than a hammer tomorrow. In my current game all trade routes have the same duration. Not sure if I'm missing something, but I thought this was always the case.

This might have been fixed, I just keep having nightmares of the last time I played Ottomans and all my trade-routes were on 58 turn timers (standard speed).

As for the actual power of the UA, I've argued that it was way too weak since before those free caravansaries in all cities were removed. It's not quite Japan's level of meh UA, but considering how easy it is to get completely screwed over by the Ottoman UA(random events spawning barbs, city-state alliances shifting and DoWing you, random units from hostile players scouting around one of your allies territory) on top of it not really being very strong when it actually works, I think this is UA is at least bottom 5.

 

[vuko]

Maybe a simple fix would be to get the yields when starting a trade route.

 

[Owlbebach]

Maybe a simple fix would be to get the yields when starting a trade route.

It will be easy to abuse, especially in the second half of the game (e.g. declare war on City-State -> make trade route to another civ through city state land -> get instant yields -> your trade route is pillaged -> buy new caravan, repeat)

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

Or maybe change the yields to "per turn"?

 

[Owlbebach]

Or maybe change the yields to "per turn"?

Kinda overlapping with Portugal... Might work though

 

[Mad Madigan]

Considering how long it takes to actually complete a trade route in Epic or Marathon games (and all of the things that can happen in a higher-difficulty game to prevent a non-internal trade route from completing), I'd be all for changing Tanzimat to a per-turn yield, and then slightly lowering its current yields to better match Portugal's (or raise Portugal's even, as some still think +5 Gold/Science/Great General PPT is too little). I play Epic speed usually, so Tanzimat is a very unaccountable UA since it takes SO LONG to complete a trade route, and unexpected wars or barbarians can pillage that trade route in that time, making those yields at completion very unreliable. As it stands, I find Council of Elders or Way of Transcendence religious Founder beliefs to be way more consistent ways of boosting Wonder production that trying to time a Wonder with the completion of a trade route. Not to mention that trade routes take 50+ turns to complete on Epic, and most Wonders can be built in ~12-20 turns at Epic speed (assuming you're only building approximately one per Era, which is about all I can get/need at King/Emperor difficulty).

So I would agree that Tanzimat could be changed to "Trade routes yield +4 Science, Production, and Food per turn to the origin city if international, or +4 Gold and Culture per turn if internal. Bonuses scale with Era". The actual X value may need to be boosted to +5 if Portugal goes to +6.

 

[vuko]

Or change it completely to a new UA. Pillaging 4 Tiles, or attacking a city, or something like that conscripts an additional unit. That's how the ottomans operated, kidnapping the children and training them into Janissaries.

 

[Gazebo]

The Ottomans are doing fine. No changes planned.

G

 

[Gazebo]

Or change it completely to a new UA. Pillaging 4 Tiles, or attacking a city, or something like that conscripts an additional unit. That's how the ottomans operated, kidnapping the children and training them into Janissaries.

Let's be clear. It wasn't a violent theft. It was a bureaucratized conscription.

G

 

[vuko]

I dont want to start a history discussion but wikipedia says it was violent kidnapping.

From the 1380s to 1648, the Janissaries were gathered through the devşirme system, which was abolished in 1638.[9] This was the taking (enslaving) of non-Muslim boys,[10] notably Anatolian and Balkan Christians; Jews were never subject to devşirme, nor were children from Turkic families. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, "in early days, all Christians were enrolled indiscriminately. Later, those from Albania, Bosnia, and Bulgaria were preferred."

Myself coming from Bosnia, the usual folk stories say the same as wikipedia.

 

[Txurce]

I dont want to start a history discussion but wikipedia says it was violent kidnapping.

From the 1380s to 1648, the Janissaries were gathered through the devşirme system, which was abolished in 1638.[9] This was the taking (enslaving) of non-Muslim boys,[10] notably Anatolian and Balkan Christians; Jews were never subject to devşirme, nor were children from Turkic families. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, "in early days, all Christians were enrolled indiscriminately. Later, those from Albania, Bosnia, and Bulgaria were preferred."

Myself coming from Bosnia, the usual folk stories say the same as wikipedia.

I don't find the words "violent kidnapping" anywhere in your Wikipedia quote. Read about devsirme, and you may see why Gazebo's definition is more accurate (and less inflammatory).

 

[Gazebo]

I dont want to start a history discussion but wikipedia says it was violent kidnapping.

From the 1380s to 1648, the Janissaries were gathered through the devşirme system, which was abolished in 1638.[9] This was the taking (enslaving) of non-Muslim boys,[10] notably Anatolian and Balkan Christians; Jews were never subject to devşirme, nor were children from Turkic families. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, "in early days, all Christians were enrolled indiscriminately. Later, those from Albania, Bosnia, and Bulgaria were preferred."

Myself coming from Bosnia, the usual folk stories say the same as wikipedia.

I have no doubt that the forced conscription of children was profoundly difficult for families losing their children and became a rather notorious event in the Ottoman balkans. I do, however, want to distinguish what the Ottomans did from other activities such as slave raiding. It was not the latter. In fact, many of the devsirme children became valued and powerful members of the Ottoman administrative and martial classes. It does not justify the practice, but - put into perspective - it was not all that different from the conscriptive tactics of feudal Europe or Asia.

G

 

[Favorius]

I dont want to start a history discussion but wikipedia says it was violent kidnapping.

From the 1380s to 1648, the Janissaries were gathered through the devşirme system, which was abolished in 1638.[9] This was the taking (enslaving) of non-Muslim boys,[10] notably Anatolian and Balkan Christians; Jews were never subject to devşirme, nor were children from Turkic families. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, "in early days, all Christians were enrolled indiscriminately. Later, those from Albania, Bosnia, and Bulgaria were preferred."

Myself coming from Bosnia, the usual folk stories say the same as wikipedia.

Turks used to form provincial cavalry, Tımariot Sipahi and they were bulk of the army. In 17th century timar (fief) system corrupted which lead to decrease in quantity and quality of sipahis. Then the government decided to compansate with hiring more janissaries mostly from Turks which also corrupted janissary corps. They became a menace to government, claiming several prime minister and finance minister heads and even a sultan (Osman II.) They rejected modern military drills, fought poorly etc. Their reign lasted till 19th century when they were violently massacred in capital with artillery corps and common folk.

 

[doublex55]

I think Ottomans UA could use a buff. I dont think they are underpowered or underperforming per-say, but I think they are one of the few Civs with the best gameplay. It has defined weaknesses, doesnt snowball out of control, has multiple play styles, and doesnt cause any issues across pace, map, or difficulties. I think it is one of the easiest civs to move in line with the A tier civs without worrying about them being broken.

The trade route bonus is very small considering you have to wait for the trade route to finish. I think it is good that you need to wait for it to finish because it adds variety from the other trade civs and adds counterplay by pillaging. Because of this possible counterplay though, and because the yields are delayed, i think it deserves a bigger payoff.

I would like to see the Yields at the end of trade route go up to 150. Assuming a 30 turn trade route this would be 5 of each yield per turn, putting it right in line with portugal for external trade routes while still being weaker for internal trade routes.

Again, this is an extremely low risk buff that can simply be changed to 125 if too strong.

 

[Gazebo]

I think Ottomans UA could use a buff. I dont think they are underpowered or underperforming per-say, but I think they are one of the few Civs with the best gameplay. It has defined weaknesses, doesnt snowball out of control, has multiple play styles, and doesnt cause any issues across pace, map, or difficulties. I think it is one of the easiest civs to move in line with the A tier civs without worrying about them being broken.

The trade route bonus is very small considering you have to wait for the trade route to finish. I think it is good that you need to wait for it to finish because it adds variety from the other trade civs and adds counterplay by pillaging. Because of this possible counterplay though, and because the yields are delayed, i think it deserves a bigger payoff.

I would like to see the Yields at the end of trade route go up to 150. Assuming a 30 turn trade route this would be 5 of each yield per turn, putting it right in line with portugal for external trade routes while still being weaker for internal trade routes.

Again, this is an extremely low risk buff that can simply be changed to 125 if too strong.

Already in testing, actually.

G

 

[doublex55]

Yay! I think we should be looking at these types of medium to small numbers buffs for most middle of the pack Civs that have good gameplay patterns.