AHD DD6 – China
- Thread starter Darkrenown
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Excellent system - these substates are something the game's been crying out for.
Might it be suggested that this would suit the Ottoman Empire as well, at least prior to the Tanzimat?
Might it be suggested that this would suit the Ottoman Empire as well, at least prior to the Tanzimat?
I like this idea. I hope it get's ported to at least Persia as well as it seems like it would fit very well there.
Depending on CB systems, Schleswig and Hostein could also be better presented as substates. Though we are moving far away from the problem with China substates have been created to simulate. Perhaps adding some of the same innovations to personal unions, dominions and satellites would be much better..
Before I translate it into Chinese for the little "legal players" community in China. I should ask Paradox face the historical fact.
Indeed, the idea of substate is great and based on facts. However, China should divide to much more substates.
In Qing Dynasty, China was divided to 2 parts: 1 was administrated directly by the Imperial Court. Another is ruled by local hordes. The former part could also divided to 2. 1 ruled by government officers and 1 ruled by military general. Furthermore, there were a Manchu prince stay in Lhasa and played a representative role of the Manchu Emperor in Tibet.
Why we should have more substates? It's because the Imperial Court granted 8 Viceroys (9 after 1906) to rule the 18 provinces of China Proper. They are :
Viceroy of Zhili, ruling Zhili;
Viceroy of Shaan-Gan, ruling Shaanxi and Gansu (Gansu was including Qinghai), plus Xinjiang after 1882;
Viceroy of Liangjiang, ruling Jiangsu, Anhui and Jiangxi;
Viceroy of Huguang, ruling Hunan and Hubei;
Viceroy of Sichuan, ruling Sichuan;
Viceroy of Min-Zhe, ruling Fujian and Zhejiang;
Viceroy of Liangguang, ruling Guangdong and Guangxi;
Viceroy of Yun-Gui, ruling Yunnan and Guizhou;
Viceroy of Three Northeast Provinces, ruling whole Manchuria after 1906.
Viceroys are bosses of prefects of provinces. They were both military leaders and civil officers. So that we should set up 9 substates in China (the 8 Viceroys + Hordes Union of Mongol) but not a strange "Yunnan". ( Beijing should independent from Zhili.)
Moreover, Xinjiang and Manchuria should not divide in substates because these 2 region were under military control. Xinjiang was until 1882 and Manchuria was 1906.
Hope that an advance.
And, should we prepare a development to these substates? The Warlords in ROC were originally provincial military leaders. Historically they changed into warlords after 1913.
Indeed, the idea of substate is great and based on facts. However, China should divide to much more substates.
In Qing Dynasty, China was divided to 2 parts: 1 was administrated directly by the Imperial Court. Another is ruled by local hordes. The former part could also divided to 2. 1 ruled by government officers and 1 ruled by military general. Furthermore, there were a Manchu prince stay in Lhasa and played a representative role of the Manchu Emperor in Tibet.
Why we should have more substates? It's because the Imperial Court granted 8 Viceroys (9 after 1906) to rule the 18 provinces of China Proper. They are :
Viceroy of Zhili, ruling Zhili;
Viceroy of Shaan-Gan, ruling Shaanxi and Gansu (Gansu was including Qinghai), plus Xinjiang after 1882;
Viceroy of Liangjiang, ruling Jiangsu, Anhui and Jiangxi;
Viceroy of Huguang, ruling Hunan and Hubei;
Viceroy of Sichuan, ruling Sichuan;
Viceroy of Min-Zhe, ruling Fujian and Zhejiang;
Viceroy of Liangguang, ruling Guangdong and Guangxi;
Viceroy of Yun-Gui, ruling Yunnan and Guizhou;
Viceroy of Three Northeast Provinces, ruling whole Manchuria after 1906.
Viceroys are bosses of prefects of provinces. They were both military leaders and civil officers. So that we should set up 9 substates in China (the 8 Viceroys + Hordes Union of Mongol) but not a strange "Yunnan". ( Beijing should independent from Zhili.)
Moreover, Xinjiang and Manchuria should not divide in substates because these 2 region were under military control. Xinjiang was until 1882 and Manchuria was 1906.
Hope that an advance.
And, should we prepare a development to these substates? The Warlords in ROC were originally provincial military leaders. Historically they changed into warlords after 1913.
Last edited:
Will it be possible to create a sub-state?
For example, if as Great Britain I find that Australia is getting hard to manage - high militancy, say - yet am unwilling to let it go as a puppet and lose that much control, could I choose to release it as a sub-state to appease them & let them deal with their own internal problems?
For example, if as Great Britain I find that Australia is getting hard to manage - high militancy, say - yet am unwilling to let it go as a puppet and lose that much control, could I choose to release it as a sub-state to appease them & let them deal with their own internal problems?
Gameplay>historical fact. Or you really belive that only Chinese regional and administrative system makes no historical sence?
What about say Krimea being part of "Ukrainian mainland" state and not separate province as it was and is untill today?
What about the eastern europe and Russian administrative system?
What about another dosens if not houndreds of incorectneses because PI has to fit history in a game model.
I`m not saying thay you`re saying samething wrong or incorect, but think about a whole world. The system has to treat every place same :happy:
I've never really wanted to play China in the past, but you may have given me a reason to when the expansion comes out. Nice to hear that colonization won't be so dull in the future!
I think substates is an excellent addition, and I think modders will have some fun with it.
Um, I have an inquiry regarding sub-states and rebels: what happens if rebels successfully change the government in a sub-state or the central government in Beijing? Will the sub-state with the successful rebellion break away? Or in the case of Beijing, will all of the sub-states break away?
Also, will we be able to create puppets through war since it's not as constricting in AHD?
Also, will we be able to create puppets through war since it's not as constricting in AHD?
I like the substate system, it works more or less like a viceroyalty. You could add the possibility of not being able to sphere it if part of civilised country. This way you could extend the system to many countries, like it has been said before.
I see potential in this places:
Ottoman Empire
-Irak
Egypt
-Lebanon
-Syria
-Sudan
United Kingdom
-Canda
-India
-Australia-New Zealand
-South Africa
Persia
-North
-South-East
United States
-Puerto Rico
Russia
-Alaska
And maybe add the possibility of forming them in other colonies, this way helping with micromanagement and reducing the possibility of industrialisation as well as culture change of the native population. Also, it would be interesting to make land transfers possible, so if say, the UK invades some indian states, the Viceroyalty of India would get them, instead of the metropolis.
I see potential in this places:
Ottoman Empire
-Irak
Egypt
-Lebanon
-Syria
-Sudan
United Kingdom
-Canda
-India
-Australia-New Zealand
-South Africa
Persia
-North
-South-East
United States
-Puerto Rico
Russia
-Alaska
And maybe add the possibility of forming them in other colonies, this way helping with micromanagement and reducing the possibility of industrialisation as well as culture change of the native population. Also, it would be interesting to make land transfers possible, so if say, the UK invades some indian states, the Viceroyalty of India would get them, instead of the metropolis.
Is it possible for the substates fight amongst themselves?
Also I very much support the use of substates in British India, though just there, I wouldn't like to see the Ottomans or the USA divided in substates.
Also I very much support the use of substates in British India, though just there, I wouldn't like to see the Ottomans or the USA divided in substates.
Yes there are a few new wargoals. One is to fight for freedom (also breaks spheres) the other is to put puppet countries
System is excellent however it would be desirable, that on a political mapmode, China has been represented one-colour.
As I wrote earlier
I have a suggestion. It's about borders. When I look at the map in the screen shot I think it would be nice if National borders were more prominant, say a thick black line. But if the border is between substates then it could be as it is in the screen shot so at a glance a player could tell which is a nation and which is a substate. I imagine it would certainly make things easyer for a player if China has fragmented and a substate has become independant.
Or to make so: by near viewing a political map the SUB-states are visible, while by distant viewing the states are visible.
Who controls the armies, factories (if civilized), etc. of the substates? Are they controlled separately, like with puppets, or centrally? In other words, will someone playing as China get to control the substate armies, or will this be handled by the AI?
Also, what happens if you declare war on China itself, not a substate? Will you be able to invade the substates and have to fight the combined armies of all the substates, or will you only be at war with "China proper"?
Also, what happens if you declare war on China itself, not a substate? Will you be able to invade the substates and have to fight the combined armies of all the substates, or will you only be at war with "China proper"?
Yay, I'm glad Paradox and I are on the same page with this. I like the idea of India as a substate, I'm less sure about the Ottomans as a potential candidate. How would you guys break it down?