Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Otto's have the same bonus to tolerance of the heathens, +1 accepted culture and huge boni to force limit and manpower recovery.
Mughals/Timmi are great for early blobbing. You have a cb against everyone around you and can simply attack-raze-core-repeat. Once you change to Mughal you loose that CB, but gain a permanent claims on the whole indian subcontinent, which is pretty strong as well. Your economy will probably suck, though and you might consider bankruptcy at a save moment.
Ottos are more versatile, as you can change religion to a christian faith easily during the first years. This enables PUs, probably HRE (catholic) or a very strong deus vult as Coptomans. Also you start as a very rich nation and will probably never face money issue during your campaign.
You can easily do great with both of them. However, you can't do wrong as Ottomans, whereas you can easily screw up as timmi/mughal.