Why can the Byzantines respawn?

[Locutus_Morti]

Just happened to me. It was 1175, I had vassalized Greece before they collapsed to prevent the Byzantine spawn. Greece had died a while back, and I owned Constantinopolis and Athenae. Then, "Byzantine cities have declared their independence from foreign domination!"

I wasn't unstable, at most I was shaky, and certainly not unstable. So my question: Why can the Byzantines respawn, especially if they never spawned in the first place? Can't civs only respawn if the conqueror has 3 cities in their core and the host is unstable? And if a respawn was unavoidable, why not have Greece spawn instead?

 

[Yudishtira]

Irl Byzantines had a major revival mid-13th century, where they took their capital back from the "empire" started by the Fourth Crusade. This being the case, I don't see anything anhistorical or unreasonable about them reviving - even out of "nowhere" - in an earlier century.

 

[Locutus_Morti]

Historicity is not really what I'm looking for here. I'm looking for a gameplay related reason for why they spawned. IMO, the Byzantines should never be allowed to respawn.

 

[Hippo8085]

Well, a respawn tends to be very strong and prevents the Turks from taking the city, so it is also a historicity issue. One thing to do may be to make it such that the Theodesian walls are unable to take siege damage until bombards/gunpowder, preventing the Byzantines from falling and having gunpowder to easily defend against the Turks.

I think the Byzantine fall and revival is a little too short of a span, so either they should survive or not, and the Turks can take the city from whoever owns it.

 

[Locutus_Morti]

I've also noticed that in some of my games, the Byzantines tend to respawn for no reason, right before the Turks spawn. It doesn't make much sense to me.

 

[DC123456789]

The reconquest of the Latin Empire in 1261, I'm guessing. If I remember correctly, the Turks spawn in 1290, so yeah, they're pretty close.

 

[Locutus_Morti]

But that's just ridiculous.

 

[blizzrd]

Just happened to me. It was 1175, I had vassalized Greece before they collapsed to prevent the Byzantine spawn. Greece had died a while back, and I owned Constantinopolis and Athenae. Then, "Byzantine cities have declared their independence from foreign domination!"

I wasn't unstable, at most I was shaky, and certainly not unstable. So my question: Why can the Byzantines respawn, especially if they never spawned in the first place? Can't civs only respawn if the conqueror has 3 cities in their core and the host is unstable? And if a respawn was unavoidable, why not have Greece spawn instead?

I don't believe that there is a minimum number of cities (you suggest 3) which applies here.

Further, whilst you were Shaky (not Unstable), my guess is that there was another civ which owned at least one city in the Byzantine respawn area and that this civ was Unstable or worse.

In other words, it's not just about your civ but all civs which inhabit the fallen civ's respawn area.

On different difficulty settings, the stability threshold for respawns varies too.

 

[Barbuesque]

To the OP:

Shaky is the treshold for civs respawning. And the number of cities necessary is 2. So what happened is normal.

Unstable is the treshold for cities secession under the independent banner.

 

[Pavel Chichikov]

What more ticks me off is playing Acheamenid Persia and having "Byzantines" ask to flip half my cities when there aren't even any Roman Cities in Turkey, Greece or the Balkans.

 

[Locutus_Morti]

Thanks for the info, Barbuesque.

The whole Byzantine situation should be revised, IMO. If Rome can never respawn, then Byzantium should never be able to as well, and considering other tales of woe involving them, they need to be looked at again.

 

[Barbuesque]

Thanks for the info, Barbuesque.

The whole Byzantine situation should be revised, IMO. If Rome can never respawn, then Byzantium should never be able to as well, and considering other tales of woe involving them, they need to be looked at again.

Well the rome respawn is handled through Italy as a successor state, but I agree about the byzantines being questionable.

Something that's never been brought up I believe - the byzantines spawn before the persian turn check for their wonders UHV. Considering an invasion of Greece might be necessary for that check, I find that a bit funny

And in a way, the byzantines are the greeks assimilating their roman conquerors. In China, in a (imo) similar situation, this is handled by the chinese respawning if conquered by the mongols, should they go shaky. Include Constantinople and Anatolia as their core area, and a greek respawn would be your byzantine empire.

 

[Pavel Chichikov]

Byzantines are a favourite of mine the play and I don't mind them respawning, but their spawning conditions should be considerably more stringent.

 

[brett0007]

How about on top of the other conditions a Byzantine respawn requires:

a) a unstable civ holding Constantinople

b) a Greek? independent city in byzantium's core.

c) a conquers event where the indies have to take Constantinople?????

 

[ius_iurandi]

And in a way, the byzantines are the greeks assimilating their roman conquerors. In China, in a (imo) similar situation, this is handled by the chinese respawning if conquered by the mongols, should they go shaky. Include Constantinople and Anatolia as their core area, and a greek respawn would be your byzantine empire.

The Byzantines are almost exactly this. If one considers them a civilization, they're just the Greeks in Roman hats. But before the Ottomans arrive, they should respawn, instead of the Greeks. I won't call myself an expert, but I am fairly confident that Asia Minor and the Bosporus were largely Greek, until Osman, Mehmed, and Suleiman got to them. Additionally, Greek respawns in the ADs suffer from 1.) A terrible UU and 2.) A likely expired UP.

If respawn areas and flip areas don't have to be the same, however, it's worth questioning as to whether only tiles West of Ancrya should be in it. That covers my person favorite Greek capital, Attaleia, but leaves exposed Ancrya, Sinope, Treizbond, and Phasis, which were I think in-and-out of the Empire post-Arab, or at least post-Seljuks, anyway.

P.S.
By the way, as in all posts that I make relating to anywhere ever and Civ, I mean culturally Greek/whatever, not ethnically/rightfully/legally/technically Greek/whatever. You keep your Haplotypes away from me, and I'll never start the "The Turks and Japanese should be one civilization arising in Xiniang/Tocharistan in 6000BC, based on linguistic analysis, migratory patterns, and historical aggregation" thread. Deal, civfanatics community?

 

[Pavel Chichikov]

Large areas of Asia minor and the Bosphorus had majority Greek (and Armenian) demographics until the 20th century, it wasn't until the "ethnic cleansing" prompted by Turkish fears of losing a state altogether that eliminated their presence.
The Greek respawn has to flip those cities to survive, or least be a viably playable Civ that doesn't Jihad'ed on-spawn into Dhimmitude or the Dar-Al Islam on-spawn.

Also, no Civ should be assumed to always win. That takes all the joy and fun out the game.

P.S.
Agreed, culturally (although language is the no. 1 determinate of that) is the only legitimate/logical way of deciding this imo.

 

[Hightower]

Large areas of Asia minor and the Bosphorus had majority Greek (and Armenian) demographics until the 20th century, it wasn't until the "ethnic cleansing" prompted by Turkish fears of losing a state altogether that eliminated their presence.
The Greek respawn has to flip those cities to survive, or least be a viably playable Civ that doesn't Jihad'ed on-spawn into Dhimmitude or the Dar-Al Islam on-spawn.

Also, no Civ should be assumed to always win. That takes all the joy and fun out the game.

P.S.
Agreed, culturally (although language is the no. 1 determinate of that) is the only legitimate/logical way of deciding this imo.

Well, Greece pretty much did lose those areas, and Greece proper was only successful at rebelling against the Ottomans to begin with because the French, British, etc. had a lot of affection for Greece and helped out their rebellion. Otherwise they may well have been crushed. And they never did manage to retake Constantinople, and only took Smyrna while the Ottomans were being beaten up by the Western powers during WWI (and lost it immediately thereafter). There should be some chance for that to happen, but it ought to be pretty unlikely, and Greece should usually be confined to Athens (+other cities founded in Greece proper) on respawn, as was true historically.

I do think the Byzantines' initial spawn should be more limited. They shouldn't spawn unless the Romans or barbarians/independents control Constantinople. They should respawn around 1250 if they spawned earlier, but only if whoever controls Constantinople is Shaky or lower. Then they should never respawn after 1250 (but Greeks can respawn after Nationalism).

 

[Barbuesque]

I don't think timed respawns at very specific dates are a good idea; resurgences happened because of a variety and combinations of factors, not because of some mythical force manifesting itself in 1000 or 1150. We're playing a game that is simulating the dynamics of history; not repeating history itself.

What I mean is we should go back to the old respawn mechanics, i.e.: it could happen anytime if the occupying nation is shaky or unstable - without requiring nationalism though. And I stick to it that the byzantines should be represented by a greek respawn, should it happen (like rome being shaky or greek areas being indeps or barbarians).

I don't think it matters to much if a greek respawn has an obsolete uu or up. As far as the AI is concerned, the impact is generally minor.

 

[Lone Wolf]

There're humans who play Byzantium, though. And if it's available for humans with proper flavour, might as well allow it for the AI. And Byzantium-as-a-proper-civ allows to set proper modifiers for it.

 

[Barbuesque]

There're humans who play Byzantium, though. And if it's available for humans with proper flavour, might as well allow it for the AI. And Byzantium-as-a-proper-civ allows to set proper modifiers for it.

What I meant is that the civ itself is redundant in the first place as it is not a distinct culture from other civs already in the game (greek with roman hats, as someone said).