Ottoman Empire loyalty

[way2co0l]

I wonder why hex loyalty seems to be handled differently for the Ottoman Empire here. Austria-Hungary has its territories broken up loyalty wise so that it will effectively be dismantled in the event it loses the war, but that doesn't appear to be the case for the Ottoman Empire as its subject loyalties aren't reflected on the map. Both empires suffered the same fate at the end of this war, but it won't be possible to reflect in any peace deal due to the subject nations loyalties not being reflected. Unless I'm mistaking something? I remember you made it so events could change hex loyalty, so perhaps you added a peace event which effectively changes Ottoman loyal hexes to others after the war? Or is there really no way to see an independent Turkey, Iraq, Isreal, Palestine, Jordan, Syria, or Lebenon? I'm leaving some others off, but you get the basic point. Unless I'm missing something, these countries can never come to exist, and is very much out of line with the way Austria-Hungary was handled.

[Fistalis]

actually noticed and wondered the same thing during my game the other day...the only loyalty i could find that wasn't to ottoman was kurdistan. My guess is the loyalty penalties would completely hamstring the ottoman empire if they were all there...not to mention could be the number of regions limit.

[Balthagor]

This could be adjusted. Which loyalties to you feel should be retained? All of them? What was the level of assimilation into the OE. Austra-Hungary was a mess, hence the current design.

[way2co0l]

Well, simply from a gameplay design consistency perspective, you guys chose to split up AH historically, as well as give Poland loyal hexes designed to give it it's WW2 borders rather than being based on actual loyalty at the time, and I feel the same choice should be used for the OE. Basically, you should give loyalty based on how it was historically split so that it's possible to create all of the real world future countries. I don't think their current nationalistic desires should matter in that sense. But that's my opinion. I think all of the more modern loyalty areas should be implemented rather than Ottoman loyal ones.

[geminif4ucorsair]

This could be adjusted. Which loyalties to you feel should be retained? All of them? What was the level of assimilation into the OE. Austra-Hungary was a mess, hence the current design.

As regards the 1914 Sandbox variant - which probably as historical as BG will get - not sure that I agree with [/i]waytocool[/i].

I would tend to favor more of the route of ethnicitybeing the governing criteria, for any break-up of the Ottoman Empire, if the Player looses control of the situation.

In this regard, it would be more like Arab sectors, Jewish sector (original Israeli borders, 1948), Kurdish (Kurdistan, and that would including grabbing some land out of Iran too - which makes for more interesting Game possibilities, depending on how Iraq reacts), southern (Basra zone) and northern Iraqi's (Tikrit, Baghdad, etc.), and Armenians.

If a Sandbox version, this is more likely, than following the historical creations, which were created in London & Paris anyway.

Off my soap box now.....

[way2co0l]

My problem with that is that it becomes impossible to recreate a modern world scenario. To be fair, that's already the case in some instances, such as it being impossible to recreate Yugoslavia. Obviously there are engine limitations which must be taken into account when it comes to expectations. But that being said, the precedent that BG has already set with their earlier decisions is the same one I think they should continue to follow here. I want it to be possible to recreate the modern world countries as much as possible if I choose to do so. Isreal, Syria, Jordan, Lebenon, Iraq, ect.

That modern world scenario will only be possible if the hex loyalty is setup to allow it, otherwise the only possibility is for more ethnic countries which flies in the face of the actual historical choices made. The powers that be chose to carve up their own spheres for themselves, and it's hard to imagine a scenario where whoever happens to win wouldn't do exactly the same thing. It's just a sad reality that actual ethnic borders at the time were only minimal factors when it came to deciding who should control what territory. Geography played a much bigger role in future borders than ethnic lands did. Not advocating for that saying it's right, only that it's far more historically accurate to the way powers made decisions at the time.

[geminif4ucorsair]

My problem with that is that it becomes impossible to recreate a modern world scenario. To be fair, that's already the case in some instances, such as it being impossible to recreate Yugoslavia. Obviously there are engine limitations which must be taken into account when it comes to expectations. But that being said, the precedent that BG has already set with their earlier decisions is the same one I think they should continue to follow here. I want it to be possible to recreate the modern world countries as much as possible if I choose to do so. Isreal, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, etc.


Reply: I would suggest that is what the Scenario's in SR-36/SRU are for.


That modern world scenario will only be possible if the hex loyalty is setup to allow it, otherwise the only possibility is for more ethnic countries which flies in the face of the actual historical choices made. The powers that be chose to carve up their own spheres for themselves, and it's hard to imagine a scenario where whoever happens to win wouldn't do exactly the same thing. It's just a sad reality that actual ethnic borders at the time were only minimal factors when it came to deciding who should control what territory. Geography played a much bigger role in future borders than ethnic lands did. Not advocating for that saying it's right, only that it's far more historically accurate to the way powers made decisions at the time.

It's just a sad reality that actual ethnic borders at the time were only minimal factors when it came to deciding who should control what territory.

I would wholeheartedly disagree......it was in fact the basis for the post-Versailles deliberations trying to resolve differing ethnic claims to determine final boundaries, for such creations as Iraq, etc.