Byzantium overpowered?

[Rob of the Julii]

Hi,

I'm playing as HRE in the early era campaign and have noticed that Byzantium are by far and away the most poweful faction in the game atm in every way possible - I've played 18 turns and they already have over 140k in the bank, full stacks rampaging through hungary and are happly pwning the turks too. I think it may have something to do with the number of settlements in Greece. I know the Byzantine Empire was powerful but they should be in decline in this period and it's only a few years after they got battered at Manzikert.

Is there anything I can do about this, or am I gonna have to choose between getting purpled to death or starting a new campaign AGAIN!!

[bɑne]

How many campaigns did you play with the purpled to death outcome?

[Ichon]

The start date is important here... 1100 is prior to Manuel I Komnenos who led a resurrection of Byzantine power until his defeat at Battle of Myriokephalon in 1176. So even then it took until after the 3rd Crusade in 1192 and the failure to secure Jerusalem that the Seljuks from the east and Saladin from the south pretty much limited chances for a great Byzantine revival and the 4th Crusade completely ended those chances.

Personally I think most of the interior of Anatolia should be rebel with Seljuks and Byzantines having equal chances to reclaim it since the Byzantine loss at the battle of Manzikert in 1071 did not lead to total Seljuk takeover but Turks gained control of key parts of Anatolia and the chaos and civil wars of Byzantines allowed Turks to further gain control but it was not a secure control as Komnenos demonstrated.

Byzantines starting with half of Anatolia under their control shouldn't happen... only Trebizond would be under imperial control while the rest was mixed between civil war factions, cities paying tribute to Turks but not ruled directly yet, and Turkish ruled regions still being only in eastern Anatolia.

[hellexpress]

they are very strong at the beginning as early era, but not at the end

[AnthoniusII]

Roman (byzantine) Empire by the early 1080 had under control north coasts of asia minor ,almost all balkans and Cherson (krimaia)penisulla.
It still had some Italian lands too.
Now we must remember that Roman empire had some of the larger urban centers in the europe.
Despite its decline it was a highlt organised state.
Crusaders used roman (byzantine)eginearing force (artilery included) to have some success to their objectives.
In 1080 the empire still controled 70% of the mediteranean sea trade.
If we remember that the guarisson of Constantinople ONLY was about 50000 men (4th crusade) we can imagine the total number of the empire's forces.
What we must not forget is that the empire colapsed from its own emperors and not from outside ennemies.
The emperors were those who dispanded the military forces and reqruited mercenaries to replace them. They were afraid the millitary aristocracy (officers) that could claim the empire's throne ( Romanos IV Diogenis was such an officer).Mercenaries do not fight with the same pasion as those who defend their homelands but they are faithfull to the one that pay's them.
Now...Game recreates history on simple factors as welth ,population and state's technology. All those were in the highest levels but the game can not act like a "traitor" emperor and destroy everything it creates. Only people can do such things.
If the emperors after Basill II (+1025) had half of his value and virtue then Itally would never be "german" and sicily would be part of the empire again.
Venetians would never take control of sea trade thanks to Basill's naval policy and Romans (byzantines)would not loose asia minor and they would claim Jerusaleem by them selvs (Basill II had the cities north of Jerusaleem under his control when he died).
No matter what though the conflict between the empire and west europe would not be avoided because the europe's over population needed some lands for expansion. If they would suceeded its another story.

[delra]

Yup. They are unstoppable even with Byg's best tries to sabotage human player.

[Tomato_Sandwich]

They tend to be powerful to begin with mainly because their troops are so much better than everyone else's but eventually the other factions will become more advanced than them, as byzies don't get advanced later units, and will start beating them. That's what I always find anyway.

[AnthoniusII]

They tend to be powerful to begin with mainly because their troops are so much better than everyone else's but eventually the other factions will become more advanced than them, as byzies don't get advanced later units, and will start beating them. That's what I always find anyway.

But byzantines did have better troops before their own emperors dispanded them.
Can you compare these guys (nottice their three layers of armor) with these guys?

[Gorrrrrn]

S6.3 starts in 1100 not 1080.

(between those dates the first crusade had passed though anatolia, helping to restore to Byzantine control some major
population centres if not the surrounding countryside.)

I've seen the Byz do very well initially only to get steam-rollered by the fatimids.
start positions difficult to get right - sometimes in a region a faction would control the main town but not the hinterland.

After manzikert in eastern anatolia some Byzantine commanders went over to the seljuks but kept their commands.

Given the civil wars in Byzantium maybe we should give Byz faction leaders very high chance of OffendsTheNobility trait?

[borya1978]

From my gaming the Byzantine have the same patten they pwn all. I remember only once them being beaten to only having the islands they own. btw this is playing 6.3. dont know if this is bad or good cause I like them and mostly ally with them because I think they are cool.

[hellexpress]

another point, byz got too many initial and surrounding castles
i think if u want to nerf byz abit, u can change some castles to cities, that would be more balanced
i love to fight against the current byz though

[delra]

So... what do you think should be converted into a city?

[Gogolometro]

First scolari are now red, no more that nice blue.
Now, that 3 layer of armor is nothing compared with what western come soon. I love byzantines campaign, but turks in all my games are easy eradicated. They need more faster and at begining good infantry. The lack on infantry destroy them in all campaigns. I never encounter the turks might in game, except when I play them.

[AnthoniusII]

First scolari are now red, no more that nice blue.
Now, that 3 layer of armor is nothing compared with what western come soon. I love byzantines campaign, but turks in all my games are easy eradicated. They need more faster and at begining good infantry. The lack on infantry destroy them in all campaigns. I never encounter the turks might in game, except when I play them.

Scholarii are RED! These guys are Hikanati !
In the komnenean era the remains of the tegmatic units still had the generic name of Scholae and that is why we choosed that name.
Nikephorean Unit roster has 5 diferend Tagmatic units but in SS and in the komnenean era that would be pointless and dificuld.

[Rob of the Julii]

Sorry, forgot to mention I was playing 6.3

[k/t]

So... what do you think should be converted into a city?

I converted Canakkale, Rhodes, Durazzo, the one between Durazzo and Corinth, and, after beating back the Hungarians, Sofia. I try to space out my castles instead of having them all in one place. Adrianople is enough to protect Constantinople from Jihad, especially when it's a Citadel and you've got the top roads built.

[HolyDevil]

Byz needs some balance issues, but for the little sake of historical accuracy, they should be more powerful early than the rest....

Also don't forget, the goal of campaing victory for byz needs targets that are in opposite direction, of wich both will focus on the byz (if a player is playing it), and they are not easily beaten, sicily, venice and hungary, both will attack you, now with the addition of cuman, its one more than has a chance, unless you ally with the kievan russ (trough marriage) or give up caffa, another enemy,

thats one front, and don't forget if u eliminate one of those it gets you in direct contact with another that equally "hates" you (hre, genoa, poland, etc)

in the other front, the seljuks have only you to care about, so its full focus on you, even if you by some miracle take them out before they get really hard to beat. you come in contact with crusader states and fatimids and k-shah (in my current byz camaping crusader states ceased fire with fatimids, as soon as i took adana, and they both attacked me next turn...)

if you take out k-shah, mongols come to bite you, in no way would byz survive if it didn't had a small advantage, and even that one only lasts for a few turns....

[hellexpress]

Also don't forget, the goal of campaing victory for byz needs targets that are in opposite direction, of wich both will focus on the byz (if a player is playing it), and they are not easily beaten, sicily, venice and hungary, both will attack you, now with the addition of cuman, its one more than has a chance, unless you ally with the kievan russ (trough marriage) or give up caffa, another enemy,

....

i thought its sicily, venioce and turks

[HolyDevil]

those are the campaing GOALS, wich alone prove extremely diffcult, but the others i mentioned are 99% sure to attack as well

[delra]

No. I mean what should be converted in the starting scenario so AI doesn't struggle... Not what you consider enough.